Carter_Exotic_Banner-02.png

Originally written January 2020, edited and published March 2021.

BY ALICIA CARTER

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. – COVID-19 has delayed or terminated legislative bills forcing sponsoring legislators to restart lengthy processes and delay the progress of longstanding fights, such as the conflict over exotic animal ownership in North Carolina. Today, North Carolina is one of four states with zero exotic animal ownership regulation meaning any North Carolina resident can legally keep a tiger in their backyard.

With fewer tigers in the wild than in captivity in the U.S., in 2020 millions of Americans tuned into Netflix's hit docuseries 'Joe Exotic: Tiger King,' which discusses exotic animal ownership through the lens of a dramatic, murder mystery, but fails to ask pertinent questions on conserving endangered species like who is allowed to own exotic animals, and what laws regulate the sale, breeding, and activities associated with these animals.

Understanding North Carolina’s is a dizzying patchwork of public safety incidents, some fatal, and failed legislation. The most recent failure was House Bill 577. HB577 was first proposed in 2019 after a lion killed 22-year-old intern Alexandra Black at the Conservator’s Center in Burlington, N.C. It has now expired in the rules committee and will need to be resubmitted.

In 1969, North Carolina’s General Assembly created statute 19A “Protection of Animals,” regulating the treatment of certain domesticated animals, such as dogs and cats, as well as the protection of black bears. The General Assembly has made eight failed attempts since 1987 to include regulations on the ownership of exotic animals.

Federal regulation of private exotic animal ownership includes commercial activities such as the trade or severe public health outbreaks where the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) is involved. According to the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) website, the Animal Welfare Act, Endangered Species Act, and the Lacey Act regulate the transportation, breeding for sale, exhibition, and biomedical research on all animals and endangered species.

 “While it may seem like federal laws impose significant limitations upon owning exotic animals, they only regulate activity involving these animals, not ownership,” said UNC associate professor in public law and government and former attorney, Aimee Wall.

Therefore regulation is left to the states, or in North Carolina’s unregulated case, the counties, which have the option to add ordinances or bans. At the county level, 12 have banned private ownership. Others took regulatory approaches like reporting, permitting, and bonding requirements.

WHEN A Bill IS at Standstill UNTIL IT DIES

The most recent severe incident on Born Free USA’s exotic animal incident database, the only federal database of its kind, occurred on December 30th, 2018, when Alexandra Black was killed by a lion during a routine cleaning.

After the incident, national media attention covered the police report, medical records, and public response, including scrutiny on exotic animal ownership laws in North Carolina and how the center is regulated, pushing for a further investigation.

Investigations began in February 2019 by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). And in April 2019, House Representative, Rena Turner, filed the bill HB577 “Limit Ownership of Certain Animals.” The bill bans private “backyard” pet ownership of “big cats, bears, hyenas and great apes.” North Carolina is one of only four U.S. states that has no regulations on exotic animal ownership. The bill, however, does not affect USDA licensed facilities like the Conservators Center.

According to her family, Black had only worked at the center for ten days when she was killed and was preparing for a long career working with animals. She graduated from Indiana University in May 2018 with a Bachelor of Science in Animal Behavior. This was her fourth unpaid internship. “Working with animals truly came from her heart,” her aunt Virginia Black said.

Virginia Black believes that while it is easier to suggest that these public safety incidents with exotic animals are crazy accidents, it is an injustice to Alex’s memory. Although the Black family has not pursued legal action against the center, Virginia Black is on a mission of her own, researching and investigating the gaps in the sheriff and medical reports, private witness testimonies, and legislative bill HB577. “We’re not going to bring Alex back, but it would be a shame if something didn’t change for the better,” she said.

In April 2019, she wrote a letter to all 120 house representatives in North Carolina urging them to pass HB577, but also strengthen it to hold the centers more accountable, requiring liability insurance and emergency plans. Confirming her concerns, the June 27 release of the OSHA investigation uncovered the center’s regulatory and operating gaps.

The report found the center exposed safety hazards to the employees who worked there, including ineffective procedures to secure dangerous animals, inadequate emergency response plans in the event of an animal escape, and did not conduct adequate inspections and maintenance on animal enclosures. The North Carolina Department of Labor issued them three citations, totaling a penalty of $3,000. The Conservators Center has repealed the findings but has declined to comment to the media on why.

Fighting for legislative change feels like the last thing she can do for Alex, she said. She received two responses to her letter. One thanked her for her correspondence and the other, from Representative Pricey Harrison, worked with her to amend HB577 to include a study of “exempt” facilities. In another amendment, Representative Turner removed class 1 felony consequences for owners who cause serious bodily injury to any member of the public, making the Conservator’s Center and other facilities not liable.

Virginia Black said the first amendment wasn’t strong enough and the second eliminated accountability. Now, she realizes this is a bigger, more complicated political fight than she had ever imagined. And, that it wasn’t the first time this cycle of events had happened.

history always repeats itself

The first occurred in a backyard in Apex, NC on November 2, 1995 when Mark Forsythe’s pet tiger mauled his 3-year-old son, Tyler. According to Wake County police reports, Forsythe shot the tiger, but Tyler’s head was partially crushed and required 18 hours of surgery. Today, Tyler is permanently blind.

Court Judge Donald Overby convicted Mark Forsythe of misdemeanor child abuse pleading guilty to a 5 year probation, a $100 fine and 100 hours of community service. Also, he was ordered never to own another exotic animal. Today, the Wake County Animal Ordinance prohibits individuals from keeping animals considered “inherently dangerous mammals,” such as big cats or bears.

The first two recorded fatalities occurred only one month apart when in December 2003 a 10-year-old boy was killed by his aunt’s pet tiger in Wilkes County and in January 2004, a 14-year-old girl was killed by her father’s tiger in Surry County. In these cases, both incidents led to county bans, but it was three years before the General Assembly responded.

In 2007, a “Joint Select Committee on Inherently Dangerous Animals,” was created made up of zoo staff, USDA licensed facilities, veterinarians, and rehabilitation and rescue centers. The study quickly became divided splitting “animal lovers” down the middle with USDA facilities, like the Conservators Center, and exotic pet owners on one side and AZA accredited zoos, the Carolina Tiger Rescue and the Humane Society on the other.

“Animal issues bring out a tremendous amount of voice. It's stressful to shepherd bills to a successful outcome,” Wall said.

Later, two identical bills were put forward in the house and senate, each failing.

All of these regulations, Joe Exotic, Doc Antle and other ownership advocates spoke out against in the show, stating that it is their ‘freedom’ to own any animal they want.  Both of their facilities are considered USDA licensed zoos and often labeled as ‘roadside zoos.’

The most recent debate occurred in 2015 on bill HB554 “Protect Public from Dangerous Wild Animals,” sponsored by Representative Chuck McGrady, which banned private ownership, but also took away exemptions of USDA facilities.

McGrady teamed up with the Humane Society and the Carolina Tiger Rescue to draft the bill, but later blamed the Humane Society on his website  for “their over-the-top rhetoric” that led to the demise of HB554. McGrady, is now trying to move past the exotic animal conversation, and was not involved in HB577, his assistant Kimberley Neptune said.

The house debate occurred at 1:31 a.m. on April 30,  passing the bill 77-33, proceeding to the Senate Rules Committee, headed by Senator Chairman Tim Apodaca, where it expired.

Of the senators and representatives contacted who voted against any of these bills, zero responded for this article.

OBTAINING ACCREDITATIONS AND LICENSING REQUIREMENTS

The biggest debates ensued when groups discussed who is exempt from exotic animal ownership regulations and accreditations are hard to understand.

A Class C license from the USDA is the only federal requirement for someone who trades or exhibits exotic animals, and is surprisingly easy to obtain. The USDA form explains that licensees pay a $10 application fee and an annual license fee that ranges from $30 to $300, depending on the number of animals being registered. To meet the requirements, they must show that they have a facility with enclosures, an animal record, and follow the animal welfare act.

Separately, such business can apply for various accreditations to strengthen their stature, such as the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA), Zoological Association of America (ZAA) and the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries (GFAS) which evaluate their standards of care, conservation efforts, animal housing, safety procedures, organizational structure, and more.

The Carolina Tiger Rescue, a GFAS accredited facility, believes exotic animal facilities should make safety their number one priority. “It’s not required to have an electric fence, practice safety procedures, or prohibit animal contact, but we should still implement these on our own because it’s in the interest of both the people and the animals,” said education director Katie Cannon.

The Carolina Tiger Rescue safety routine and equipment includes: three fences with two enclosure fences and a 12-foot electric perimeter fence, a radio for every staff member, shiftable enclosures for cleaning routines, half the staff are weapons trained, routine emergency and safety drills, and an emergency plan with the county sheriff.

Rescue and rehabilitation centers, like the Conservators Center or the Carolina Tiger Rescue, end up with abandoned “pets,” or animals rescued from poorly operated facilities demonstrating how private pet ownership and rescues are interconnected.

 
Timeline-12.png
 

WITHOUT SUPPORT, will HB577 be resubmitted?

Representative Turner retired in August 2019, leaving HB577 without a primary sponsor.  Her desire to file the bill is still unclear since the Conservators Center is not in her district. Turner represents Iredell County where Zootastic, a USDA-regulated facility, operates and who did not support the 2007, 2008, and 2015 bills. But HB577 does not target facilities like Zootastic.

“The bill could be a lot stronger, but it’s likely a response to drafting something that will pass and not repeating what happened in 2015,” North Carolina State Director for the Humane Society of the United States Gail Thomssen said who has remained uninvolved in this bill.

Without sponsoring legislators and activists behind the bill, HB577’s fate is uncertain. Since the bill spent significant time on the Senate Rules and Operations Committee it may only be resubmitted to find its way there again. These committees are commonly referred to by legislators as ‘graveyards.’

But, Gail Thomssen has hope. If HB577 is resubmitted, it could be voted through, however, the impact of COVID-19 leaves this uncertain.

“Passing this bill would be a big win for public safety and animal rights in North Carolina,” Thomssen said, “because it’s been a long time coming.”

Virginia Black is less impressed with HB577 and believes a better bill could be written. She described it as “toothless” in response to what happened to her niece. With the Conservators Center repealing the OSHA investigation, Black worries about the lack of transparency on what changes they have and haven’t made to improve the safety of their employees, the public, and their animals.

“They’ve convinced themselves that there is nothing they could have done, and I don’t think that’s true. Advocating for change feels like the last thing I can do for Alex and the animals” she said.