Marineland continues to fight back following allegations of animal cruelty.
On Friday, the OSPCA announced that they had laid five animal cruelty charges against the Niagara Falls park, which is home to Canada's only killer whale living in captivity.
The charges relate to the treatment of peacocks, guinea hens and black bears.
One count is for failing to provide adequate and appropriate food and water for approximately 35 American Black Bears.
The OSPCA said further charges are pending.
Marineland issued a statement Saturday denying the charges, saying only one bird out of thousands living at the park suffered from an eye issue and it had received treatment.
They said the only issue found regarding the bears was that a sticker was left on a piece of fruit.
Today, another statement issued from the park questions whether to the OSPCA was pressured by activists.
Marineland officials say instead of representing the interests of animal welfare, it appears the OSPCA is bowing to pressure from radical California-based animal rights activists
who have been shown to falsify evidence in their effort to shut down companies like Marineland.
Marineland also questioning a journalist's actions and reports.
The entire statement is below.
Is the OSPCA Bowing to Activist Pressure?: Marineland
NIAGARA FALLS – ON – Tuesday, November 29, 2016 - Instead of
representing the interests of animal welfare, it appears the OSPCA is
bowing to pressure from radical California-based animal rights activists
who have been shown to falsify evidence in their effort to shut down
companies like Marineland.
Marineland has learned that a recent inspection of Marineland’s
facilities was prompted by pressure from Last Chance for Animals, a Los
Angeles organization working with a fired former Marineland employee
that is believed to be seeking revenge for his dismissal.
This group has made grossly false allegations in the past including
alleging the death of a baby beluga who is currently happy, healthy, and
alive. It also appears they distorted and/or photoshopped images to
create false images to allege abuse. This prior complaint was
investigated by the OSPCA and dismissed as false.
Rather than accept the findings of the OSPCA’s extensive and repeated
investigations, animal rights groups have brought pressure against OSPCA
by calling in an investigator to review that organization’s efforts.
They suggest the OSPCA is somehow overlooking violations and is
operating contrary to its stated principles merely because it has
determined Marineland is properly managing the animals within its care.
It is simply inconceivable to these radical activists that a company
that relies upon the health and safety of its animals would actually be
interested in maintaining their welfare.
Less than a month following the animal activists announcement of their
efforts to pressure OSPCA into action against Marineland, as reported by
CP Reporter Liam Casey, Last Chance for Animals brought new allegations
to the OSPCA, also reported by CP Reporter Liam Casey, without
disclosing the source of his information or their past discredited
claims against Marineland, along with Marineland's open libel suit
against Casey. They concealed their efforts by making this complaint
without notice to Marineland or providing the alleged images or video
for review. They did, however, disclose their complaint to allies in the
press in an effort to get maximum publicity for the attack on Marineland.
As we have been unable to review the purported evidence that prompted
this latest attack, and while the Canadian Press has these materials and
appears prepared to report on them without giving Marineland an
opportunity to review and respond, it is impossible for us to comment on
the allegations directly. However, knowing the tactics and past practice
of this group, whose efforts to date have produced no results,
Marineland believes such images are almost certainly photoshopped, false
entirely, or deliberately manipulated and distorted.
The OSPCA sent a team of three investigators and a veterinarian to
Marineland for one day, November 10, 2016. They noted minor issues and
ordered action to be put in place within two weeks. None of the issues
were considered serious enough to require the removal of any animals,
and all the orders were complied with and completed within the
prescribed time. It should be noted also that none of the orders related
to any marine mammals.
Despite having all the requirements of the orders satisfied, and without
a return or follow-up visit, the OSPCA decided to press forward with
charges alleging abuse against black bears, guinea fowl, and a peacock,
and issued a media release on a Friday afternoon, providing the public
with more information about the charges against Marineland than to the
park itself. There have also been suggestions made to the media, but not
to Marineland, that further charges are pending, but there is no
suggestion as to a possible basis for these further charges as
Marineland has complied with all orders it has received.
We have previously outlined the basis of the allegations of abuse – that
some edible produce stickers have accidentally been left on the fresh
fruit and vegetables provided to our bears, that our guinea fowl pens
were too small, and there was a benign growth over the eye of the
peacock – and all of these issues have been corrected and the animals
continue to thrive. None of these issues justifies a claim of abuse,
which the OSPCA could easily verify if it chose to return to the park.
The suggestion that further charges are forthcoming is especially
upsetting, as it indicates the OSPCA believes there are animals in
distress at Marineland now but they are content to remain silent. By
telling the media there might be more charges but not informing
Marineland, we are left wondering if there is some unknown distress
being placed on our animals that we could easily relieve. Who does it
benefit to suggest there are animals in distress but not tell the one
entity in a position to relieve that distress?
The OSPCA’s actions in this matter, in bowing to pressure from activists
and agenda-driven reporters, amounts to a scared regulator, with a track
record of bowing to pressure and its own problems relating animal care
practices the public deemed to be 'cruel', currying favour with a
discredited group and actively working against the welfare of the
animals it is mandated to protect.