'Responsible exotic animal owner' oxymoron

Responsible people do not endanger their communities while forcing wild animals to suffer lives of deprivation and boredom for their own amusement. There have been 584 incidents in the U.S. involving captive exotic cats since 1990. These incidents have resulted in the deaths of 21 humans, 16 adults and 5 children, the additional mauling of 193 more adults and children, 170 escapes, the killing of 93 big cats, and 122 confiscations.

These figures only represent the headlines that Big Cat Rescue has been able to track. Because there is no reporting agency that keeps such records, the actual numbers are certainly much higher.

The Journal of Internal Medicine in 2006 estimated that 50 million people worldwide have been infected with zoonotic diseases since 2000 and as many as 78,000 have died. Zoonotic diseases are those that jump from animals to humans.

By the early 1990s science was beginning to discover the extent to which animals exhibited intelligence and emotion. Anyone who has ever had a pet cat or dog could tell you they are intelligent and feel loneliness, anger, resentment, embarrassment, joy and a host of emotions, but it took science hundreds of years to catch up. Keeping wild animals captive began to be considered cruel and self-serving as people became aware of the fact that the tiger in the cage could experience the pain of being held against his will.

It became fashionable then for exotic pet owners to call themselves "educators," but if you are standing there petting a tiger or with a cougar on a leash, no one is hearing the message. They are just thinking how cool it would be if they could pet a tiger or have a cougar on a leash.

The exotic animal "rescuers" are often the most vocal in opposition to ending the exotic pet trade. They rant incessantly about how greater restrictions on wildlife trafficking will mean that they have to euthanize all of their animals when that has never been true. Where laws have passed in the US banning the trade in wild animals, there have always been grandfather clauses that allow the private owners to keep their animals until they die, and there have always been exceptions made to organizations, such as accredited zoos and sanctuaries, but the ones screaming the loudest have no interest in meeting a higher standard.

They use the opportunity as a platform for disseminating false information and blaming people who truly care about animals for all of their woes.

We are a generation raised with zoos and circuses. When we see that cute baby animal being cuddled on some talk show we choose to not think about where the animal's mother is, or how it came to be that he was taken from her to be used this way. When we pay to see a film about tiger brothers, even when we know that more than 30 tigers were used in the film, we choose to not think about where those animal will be a year from now.

If we acknowledge great suffering and choose to look the other way, how can we reconcile our conscience? When the answers are so easy and cost us little more than a few letters and phone calls to our legislators, and yet we are unwilling to do even that small thing to alleviate the suffering of tens of thousands of wild animals languishing in cages, possessed by a class of people who would be criminals if they treated people the way they treat their "beloved pets," how can we feel good about ourselves?

Sometimes the truth hurts, but no one suffers more than the exotic animals when the only thing they have, their desire to live free, is taken from them.

I believe that we are all on a path to our higher self and that even the worst of the abusers will one day look inside and redirect their actions. Until that time comes, the words of Martin Luther King Jr. still ring true, "Legislation cannot change the heart, but it can restrain the heartless."

CAROLE BASKIN

CEO, Big Cat Rescue Tampa, Fla.

Is it in the water?

After listening for over an hour to speakers against Pahrump Town Ordinance No. 43 for an audience of 200 plus Pahrump citizens, the town board went ahead and approved it without any discussion or changes made.

Unbelievable, the town board members (except Mike Darby who voted against) must have the BoCC sickness (the Dictator Syndrome).

They think they were elected to do what they believe is right for the people, or themselves, not what the people want.

Why? Do they think the people are stupid and don't know what's good for themselves, or what?

But wait, town board member Vicky Parker, town manager and garbage disposal representatives all say, we can still haul our own solid waste to the dump for free.

Why do they think they can take that right away? We the people of Nye County own the dump and pay $30 a year for its operation. We the people of the state of Nevada and Nye County own the roads leading to the dump.

What they didn't say is, even if we haul our solid waste to the dump we will still be subscribed to a solid waste collection service and have to pay the charges set forth in the solid waste franchise agreement or a lien can be filed against our property.

Town board, why?

What is the reason for making it mandatory for property owners to pay for a solid waste collection service? What is the real reason? What happened to Nye County ordinances to protect our public health by preventing unlawful dumping and disposal of solid waste and requiring all loads to be covered during transportation?

Were they deleted along with the 9.5 mile ordinance (separation between prisons and residential districts) or are they just not enforced?

Town board members, what's wrong with this picture?

Let the people make their own decision to contract for garbage service if they need it. If they cannot afford it or are disabled or otherwise unable to haul their own solid waste, let a neighbor, friend or relative take their solid waste to the dump without making it illegal. Don't make a property owner pay for a service they do not use. This is the way it was before our Pahrump Town Board changed it. We the people of Pahrump object to this ordinance because we want to keep our right of choice.

We would like to thank the PVT editor for putting our "Pahrump, Nevada, the prison town" letter in last week's newspaper and also for the excellent article, "Board vs. residents -- board wins" by Gina B. Good.

Thanks for keeping Pahrump citizens informed.

ROBERT AND CHARLENE RYLIE

Dumbstruck by commissioners

I am still in disbelief as to what happened this morning (March 18) in the county commission meeting here in Pahrump.

I am a busy family physician who gave up time to serve the public to exercise my right under the Constitution of these United States of America of free speech. I wanted to comment on the unfair subsidy of the Pahrump Medical Center by our county government and the use of my tax dollars to support a for-profit business that competes against the other full-paying business in this community.

I was unaware that now we, as the citizens of this community, the people who pay the salaries of our elected officials, now have to fill out a form to exercise our right to free speech at the county commissioners' meeting.

The actual first public comment speaker on March 17 made an objection to the yellow form stating she believed it violated some part of her right to free speech. At first I did not understand what she was talking about. Now I do, first hand.

Commissioner Joni Eastley and Mr. Ron Kent defended this policy by saying this is legal and it is supposed to allow for a more organized meeting.

I then scrambled to fill out a yellow form to speak, but that was not good enough because it has to be submitted at some time before the meeting begins. Whatever reason the commissioners come up with, you can bet it only serves the commission and not the public. The only reason I can think of asking for this kind of form to be filled out is to limit public comment and to know in advance who will be speaking and on what issue.

I went up to the podium to speak, stating my name, and told Commissioner Eastley I gave up my busy practice to come down to the meeting to speak and I did not know that we had to fill out forms to speak to our commissioners. I asked Commissioner Eastley that I not be shut out, and she did exactly that -- she did not allow me to speak.

The downright audacity of that action told me something is wrong, very wrong with the priorities of our elected county commissioners.

She mentioned something about being late for agenda items. We the public had to listen to some of the commissioners babble about themselves and their personal accomplishments for the first 30 minutes of the meeting. That is just not right.

My opinion is this: The commissioners have forgotten they serve the public and not themselves.

Their agenda, whatever it is, should come second to our concerns. We elect them, we pay them, and we the people can vote them out of office. If they do not want to listen to us, then get the hell out of the office you were elected to.

Public comment is just that: public comment. There should not have to be any forms to fill out and the only requirement to address the commissioners should be the desire to do so.

I will try to make sure our commissioners never forget who they serve. You have pissed off the wrong person, Commissioner Eastley. We the people of this county have the power. You do not.

I challenge you to explain your actions and apologize in public to me and the rest of the citizens of Nye County. You were out of line as an elected public servant.

MICHAEL REINER, M.D.