Mexico’s Harbinger of Stewardship, LIBERO Santuario Silvestre

On July 16, 2016July 19, 2016 By projecticarus2015In true facts1 Comment

In my last article, I discussed the disturbing trend within Mexico of “self styled” foundations which utilize social media, flashy photos, and carefully structured facades of scientific importance in order to create a false presence in circles of conservation. These groups, when one looks deeper than their social media personas and self-serving rhetoric, often have little real life experience in the fields in which they claim to be leading authorities. This is something that is usually, and to the detriment of the animals in their care, overlooked or misunderstood by devoted followers and by the public in general. It’s also a driving factor behind the actuality that these well known foundations are simply new age versions of the same old exploitation that’s existed in Mexico (as well as other places throughout the world) for thousands of years.

Part of what the I.C.A.R.U.S. Foundation does is to develop a global network of conservation organizations working together to protect and care for animals, through the creation of new international laws, as well as the enforcement of existing laws. A functioning network of institutes and sanctuaries who can rely on each other for support and the spread of awareness is vital in order to have a beneficial impact on animals and the environment worldwide. Thus, institutions which by design focus entirely on what they do, and the animals they possess and/or take in, and how popular they are, and which imply that they know more, and are better at handling situations than any other organization in existence, (some of which have been around for decades) do not, in fact, benefit animals or the environment beyond the limited scope of their own walls.

Only by working together, toward the same collective goals, rather than toward personal gain and popularity, can sanctuaries and foundations worldwide succeed in giving back at least a small portion of the planet to the animals which are being systematically eradicated from its surface. So what a foundation or sanctuary does outside the gaze of the public eye is just as important as what they do when people are watching. If you are willing to cut corners, endanger both humans and animals, threaten other groups, verbally abuse other humans, lie, and so on and so forth when everyone can witness it, then what are you willing to do to the voiceless animals behind the scenes when no one is watching?

One of my favorite quotes, which is extremely relevant to the current trends of shady foundations and exploitation of captive wild animals in Mexico, comes from Thomas Babington Macaulay.

“The measure of a man’s real character is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out.”

In this case, the character in question happens to be a woman.

Her name is Maria Garcia Dominguez, and she is the founder of LIBERO Santuario Silvestre.

Truly the first of its kind, LIBERO is a foundation that, when distilled down to its most fundamental constructs, is a sanctuary in every sense of the term. LIBERO is a an institute that will always do what’s right for the animals, even if no other human is there to witness their actions.

Numerous social media-based groups–like Black Jaguar White Tiger–gratuitously tout the word “sanctuary” without understanding the profoundly hallowed etymology behind it, and without grasping the restraint and sacrifices required to embody that which it represents. In contrast to ubiquitous “social-media foundations”, you will not see LIBERO posting a plethora of vapid updates on their website, Instagram, Twitter, or Facebook page multiple times a day, every day of the week. You will not see LIBERO showcasing photographs of cubs being cuddled and played with or celebrity guests bottle feeding them incorrectly, or of foundation workers running around being chased by captive big cats. In fact, you might not have even heard of LIBERO until reading about them in this article.

This is because LIBERO is focused on saving animals, caring for animals, protecting animals, studying them, and rehabilitating them.

They are dedicated to the animals not to social media attention and public popularity.

LIBERO does not participate in conservation in order to gain any sort of recognition. They’re not in it for any sort of admiration. They’re not even in it with a presumption of ever receiving simple gratitude.

LIBERO acts solely in the best interests of and on behalf of the animals they aid.

They have done so, in an individual manner, through the prior works of those who now comprise the human skeleton of the sanctuary since before they ever came together under the guidance of Maria and subsequently formed LIBERO. And they continue to work for, care for, protect, defend, heal, nurture, and exist entirely for the animals with whom they come into contact.

For LIBERO, social media is a tool for education and outreach, not a platform on which to build a celebrity status or cult following.

And that is exactly how a sanctuary should function.

I first discovered LIBERO through my research into sanctuaries within Mexico, or, more accurately, my research into the lack of sanctuaries and the lack of legal outlines and standards for sanctuaries within Mexico. After suffering more than one disappointment and false lead, I feared the worst when I first clicked on the link leading to the LIBERO website. You can check it out here. Maria has even made sure there’s an English option for those of us who aren’t fluent in Spanish. A margin of my wariness faded at just the mere sight of LIBERO’s homepage. Understated and elegant, lacking any pretension or declarations of being the best thing since sliced bread, or other ridiculous claims of intelligence so superior to anyone else that people who don’t agree with them are just too stupid to “get them” and their ideologies.

LIBERO’s site is easy to navigate (not every page is translated, but Google Chrome can do it for you) informative and detailed, captivating for those who already have an in-depth understanding of conservational issues, but also extremely accessible and educational for those who are just learning about conservation. That accessibility and assemblage of information is intentional. Education is something which Maria and her team believe is vital to changing the way in which residents of Mexico (and the world) perceive captive wild animals, and the environmental and conservational issues relating to them.

LIBERO subscribes to the principles of “One Health” which is a concept that dates from the mid 1800s and was far ahead of its time when it was first outlined and described by its creator, Rudolf Virchow. Of his own beliefs Virchow said:

“Between animal and human medicine there is no dividing line–nor should there be. The object is different but the experience obtained constitutes the basis of all medicine.”

I want to stress that the principle of One Health is not the belief that animals should be treated as if they were humans wearing fur, much like Eduardo Serio of Black Jaguar White Tiger treats his big cats, or, as he calls them, his “kids”. Followers of the One Health principles believe that animals are equal to humans in importance, emotional depth, and intelligence, but they do not support the anthropomorphizing of animals. Rather, One Health is the concept that the health of animals, the health of humans, and the viability of ecosystems are inextricably linked. This means keeping animals in their wild habitats, as active participants within the ecosystem, rather than living in peoples’ homes as pets.

Along with a sound system of principles, LIBERO has a dedicated team of professionals and specialists including doctors, engineers, lawyers, and more. You can read their individuate biographies here. Unlike the unseen, or vaguely referenced “experts” of other foundations, LIBERO’s team is forthright with their names, credentials and backgrounds. Likewise, LIBERO is dedicated honesty and transparency in all matters. You can research their financial information on their transparency page, here.

Maria herself has a career within conservation that spans more than a decade. She has worked with groups like The Humane Society International (HSI) World Animal Protection (WAP) and has collaborated on specific cases with Animal Defenders International (ADI) and In Defense of Animals (IDA), among other things. Up until 2013, Maria was a representative in Mexico for The Wild Animal Sanctuary, and was the national coordinators of rescues.

LIBERO is poised to be the harbinger of conservation stewardship in a country where captive wild or exotic animals can be more easily attained than clean drinking water. But unlike fallacious, media-driven institutes such as BJWT and the newly formed JITW, LIBERO does not yet have a fan base of millions to support them. Their refusal to exploit animals via attention grabbing videos, or for heartrending pleas for monetary support means that LIBERO cannot simply start slapping up “cutesy” incentives for people to give them money. They do not have the funds to offer “rewards” for donating to them, or, to start their own clothing line, or to offer, as with some of the foundations I’ve mentioned, “visitation rights” to those who donate larger sums of money. And as LIBERO embodies the very opposite of the exploitation so readily embraced by these well-known foundations, they cannot rely on any support from those institutes. Rather, they face competition from them, for if LIBERO is successful in changing the face of conservation, as they plan to, LIBERO will, in effect, make such exploitive foundations entirely obsolete.

I have been in contact with Maria, and will be doing an interview article with her at a later date, and I look forward to writing other articles about LIBERO in the future.

As of the writing of this article, Maria was exploring the possibilities of seeking a stipend or other funding from the Mexican government. Supporting LIBERO would be an immense opportunity for current government factions like SEMARNAT and PROFEPA to both acknowledge the deep-seated problems occurring within their country, and to take a step toward the reform so desperately needed in order to begin assuaging the plight of captive wild animals all across Mexico. As I’ve mentioned in previous articles, one of the greatest difficulties in seizing and/or rescuing captive wild animals from abuse, neglect, or exploitation in Mexico is the lack of appropriate institutes in which PROFEPA or SEMARNAT can then place animals that were removed from dysfunctional situations. LIBERO can, with monetary aid from government, expand and become the depository for confiscated animals, assuring that they will not be placed in yet another situation of exploitation, like the animals given over to BJWT.

To rescue an animal from one situation of exploitation, and place it directly into another situation of exploitation does not actually address the fact that the animal is being exploited, nor does it do anything to change the public mindset that having cubs run around a private home is somehow beneficial to the cubs and supportive of conservation. Maria and her staff understand that you cannot teach people that exploitation is damaging is by using exploitation as the basis for the lesson.

To this end, LIBERO intends to develop a facility where rescued animals will be housed within the freedom of individual habitats, liberated from human influence, and studied unobtrusively in order to better understand the complications for captive animal husbandry. Any animals which are deemed viable for rehabilitation and release will be appropriately cared for with the most minimal human involvement as possible, and their release will subsequently be orchestrated. Knowledge gained from such rehabilitations and releases will be funneled directly back into LIBERO and used within their educational outreach, furthering the cause of changing minds and perspectives.

Government funding could go a long way in getting LIBERO completely off the ground and flying. Now, more than ever before, Mexico needs a genuine sanctuary. Mexico’s animals need a genuine sanctuary. The question is, do SEMARNAT and PROFEPA–the very agencies charged with overseeing the welfare of wild, and captive wild animals within the country of Mexico–understand just how desperately those animals need a sanctuary like LIBERO? And even more importantly, will SEMARNAT and PROFEPA admit, by helping LIBERO to secure government aid, that it’s finally time for a change in how captive wild animals are perceived and treated in Mexico?

Only time will tell. But for now, I implore you. Follow the links within this article, or posted below, and discover Maria’s LIBERO Santuario Silvestre for yourself. Then share the information and encourage others to share and follow them. Mexico needs a true wild animal sanctuary, and LIBERO needs you to support them so that they can be the wild animal sanctuary that the animals of Mexico need.

LIBERO Santuario Silvestre

LIBERO Instagram

LIBERO Facebook

LIBERO Twitter

Author: Artemis Grey

The Troubling Trend In Paradise

On July 15, 2016June 7, 2018 By projecticarus2015In animal welfare, Black Jaguar White Tiger, conservation, Conservation Journalism, egotourism, Facts, Global Environmental Issues, Hands Off Conservation, Hands-on Interaction, Jaguars Into The Wild, mexico, true facts1 Comment

Countless Americans see Mexico as the place to vacation and capture a few weeks of paradise. Even with the current political unrest, I’ve had multiple friends and family travel down to all inclusive resorts, and all of them have posted dozens of photos of white sand beaches and beautiful oceans. It seems perfect.

But looks can be deceiving. There’s a very troubling trend in paradise. Just as those all inclusive resorts are usually bordered by razor wire and tall fences in order to guarantee protection to the well-to-do tourists, who know nothing of the troubles which the majority of Mexico is faced with, the rest of the world only sees and understands a glimpse of the genuine problems with captive wild animals in Mexico.

Yes, most everyone has heard how the drug cartels own private collections of exotic animals, and if you’ve read my articles here on the I.C.A.R.U.S. Foundation’s blog, you know that Black Jaguar White Tiger is a foundation that has become a social media icon solely by showcasing captive animals being treated as pets (despite Serio’s incessant use of #notpets as a hashtag). But what virtually no one in America, and most others throughout the world seem to realize is that the cartels with their private zoos and menageries are nothing special in Mexico, just as BJWT is nothing new to the country. As we’ve pointed out before, there are no regulations on breeding big cats in Mexico. And owning one is as simple as filling out a form. Anyone who wants to, can collect animals into private collections. And they do. Some of them even “rent” cubs for as long as they’re small and then turn those cubs in to the breeders only to “rent” new, small cubs back out again.

The world in general sees BJWT as something “special” or “different” but the truth is that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of people in Mexico doing the exact same thing Serio does. Here are a few shots taken from public Instagram accounts involving private zoos or collections, “ranches” as they’re often called. Because these photos came from a civilian Instagramer and at least one contains a child, I’ve hidden the user’s information and the child’s face. It should be noted, however, that this is the person whom Eduardo Serio has tagged on Instagram under photos of the giraffes that he’s gone to visit on numerous occasions.

Somehow, the hashtag #saverhinos is supposed to indicate that riding one like a horse is beneficial to preserving the species.

Most often the people involved with these accounts state that they’re “preserving” the species, when, in fact, they’re just breeding them for their own private pleasure, and/or participating in the black market actively making money. A thriving market repeatedly overlooked and ignored by SEMARNAT and PROFEPA.

Unfortunately the trend of private ownership is not something new in Mexico. But here’s something that is. Since the rise of Black Jaguar White Tiger (and for anyone who is confused, or doesn’t realize it, BJWT has only existed for 3 years, and their current popularity is one that’s been bought and paid for by the exploitation of what began as three pets Eddie got for himself, and what’s turned into a rotating circus of babies) other established zoos have noticed how successful Serio has been with social media popularity. And many of them want in on the party.

Case in point: Jaguars Into The Wild.

JITW appeared on our Instagram radar roughly a couple of months ago. They describe themselves as a foundation devoted to rescue, research, rehabilitation and release. Emphasis on RELEASE, in all caps. The photos of their animals (jaguars predominantly) are gorgeous. We followed them with great excitement. Here, it seemed, was finally a group who was truly different.

Then, one of the I.C.A.R.U.S. team, while scrolling through the JITW Instagram feed, discovered a troubling photo of one of the founders out for a walk with two small jaguar cubs.

It was supposedly an “old” photo of two now-adult cats. Nevertheless, it was concerning that a group who claimed to focus on rehabilitation was actively participating in hands-on interactions with cubs. Especially because they clearly listed the “mom didn’t feed them” excuse that literally everyone claims in regard to why cubs are being hand reared. So we started researching JITW, how they’d been founded, who the founders were, etc.

What we discovered was equal parts confusing and distressing. Instagram is a social media site, and like most social media sites, it intends to ephemeral. It’s not designed to plow through and is often difficult to backtrack as it wants to freeze. However, we soon discovered that JITW really doesn’t go back farther than a year, at best. The foundation literally appeared overnight. And diligent effort started producing more results. Most of them involving both the founders of JITW playing with big cats, training them to interact with humans, and to perform for a public audience. We also uncovered some clashing information about the foundation’s “star” jaguar, Andromeda, the “first to be raised without human intervention” whom they tout as the best hope for a wild release.

It seems that Andromeda is owned by a zoo. The Oaxaca Yaguar Xoo, to be exact. Here’s her birth announcement.

But, here’s the same announcement, posted on the JITW Instagram feed, claiming that THEY own Andromeda.

Awkward.

You would think that either one or the other would own the jaguar. But it gets more confusing. Having discovered that a zoo was claiming to own the same cat that JITW claimed to own, I started looking into the Yaguar zoo. It turns out that Yaguar loves to breed babies, and then take them from their mothers. Here’s a video (in Spanish) talking about how great they are, and how many experts they have. Experts with incredibly sticky fingers, it seems, as you’ll notice that every single one of them is holding with and playing with tiny cubs much too young to be away from their mothers in natural circumstances. I warn you, toward the end of the video, one cub is dangled in front of its mother, separated by iron bars, and the mother becomes quite desperate, injuring herself to the point of limping away from her attempts to reach her baby.

Yaguar Xoo also apparently also does a booming business with “interns” and “volunteers” who are allowed to handle and play with their animals.

The translation for these photos is roughly “Do you like animals? Come volunteer at Yaguar Xoo!

In my research on JITW, I’d checked out the Instagram accounts of both founders, one, Víctor Rosas Cossío, literally just turned his private account into the JITW account. But his co-founder, Andrea, still has a separate account. And when I scrolled through, I found these photos.

I was, understandably, confused. The co-founder of JITW started out as a volunteer playing with big cats at the Yaguar Xoo? It gets even more questionable. Before volunteering at the zoo and playing with lions and other big cats, it seems that Andrea had no visible association with any conservation or animal group at all. Rather, she was a fashion model. While modeling is a completely legitimate career, most successful models don’t just wake up one day and start founding wildlife organizations dedicated to research, rehabilitation and RELEASE, because, well, you have to know about those things in order to do them.

I turned to the other co-founder, Víctor, and that’s where I found the big cat expertise I’d been expecting. Only, I didn’t find it in the format I would have hoped to find it. (name) apparently worked for the Yaguar Xoo for a number of years, training their big cats to perform for the public.

A running comparison of the social media accounts of JITW and the Oaxaca Xoo revealed what amounts to a shared presence. Pictures of the same animals on both accounts with both groups claiming to own the cats, the same photos show up in both locations, and most troubling of all, the same “enrichment area” where the Oaxaca animals are forced to perform for the public, are the same areas where JITW’s animals are shown getting “enrichment”. In addition, there is a public pool on the zoo grounds which seems to be the same pool that baby big cats are shown swimming in in JITW photos.

What JITW is carefully NOT saying on their social media accounts is that the reason they appeared overnight is because they’re really just a new face and branch off of an existing zoo.

JITW presents itself as an entirely new foundation with an entirely new objective, but the truth is that they’re just a perfect example of how to use social media and sleight of hand to make yourself seem legitimate. By following the format created by BJWT (social media presence which is designed to lure in supporters by saying all the right things, and showing carefully orchestrated “awesome stuff” using professional photographers, and references to the future of Mexico’s wildlife) the Yaguar Xoo has, in essence, reinvented itself by creating a supposedly entirely separate entity. The problem is, the zoo shares animals with JITW, the zoo is still breeding those animals, and despite that an inside source told us that one animal had, they thought, been released, that supposed release was well over a decade ago, which would place both of JITW’s founders in their teenage years. Thus, that supposed release had nothing at all to do with JITW as it exists now.

By now, the parallels between JITW and BJWT were truly frightening:

Both foundations appeared overnight, established with hundreds of thousands to millions of followers in less time than it takes most foundations to get a roof over their head.

Both foundations have, and maintain, merchandise lines and/or retailers who are eager to host merchandise the proceeds from sales of which goes directly to the foundations, contacts and luxuries unheard of for most foundations.

Both foundations have private photographers on board, constantly promoting the foundations through art, and the animals, and helping to create merchandise.

Both foundations have already been guests at various exhibitions as “experts” in the field of conservation (despite that neither have actually had any impact at all on wild populations or conservation efforts) and despite that the founders of both foundations are, in fact, not experts on big cats, or are so young they simply can’t have the experience required to truly be an established expert.

Both foundations have been invited to participate in events where their animals and stories were highlighted, despite, again, the fact that they have not yet done anything to help wild populations and have, instead, participated in breeding captive populations.

Both foundations have stated that they are part of a “DNA bank” and mapping endeavor.

But the most damning evidence so far in regard to JITW being an imitation of BJWT, is the fact that, well, both groups are friends on social media. They tag each other on Instagram, the call each other brother, and they openly and publicly support each other.

Now, JITW doesn’t have to aggressively denounce BJWT and their cub-petting extravaganzas. It’s a small world in Mexico, and professionalism is something I could accept. Formal responses and shows of gratitude would be completely expected. However, calling each other “brother” and thanking BJWT for sending “blue energy” over to heal Andromeda from the tragic and unforeseen Africanized bee attack (truly horrific) denotes a tad more affection than a strictly professional relationship. Never mind that there’s a huge overlap of BJWT Instagram followers and JITW followers, largely due to the link fostered by the two foundations.

Add the fact that JITW is run out of a zoo which participates in cubs petting, and for which one founder worked for years, and it’s too much for me not to form an opinion on the matter. Clearly, Mexico has a problem. Namely one which involves foundations cropping up out of the blue because they’re nothing more than existing groups renamed and revised, or owned by well connected people.

Creating conservation foundations in Mexico is the new “clothing line” of the rich and famous, and just as celebrities tout each others’ newest sweatshirt designs, it helps to be chummy with the other biggest foundation in the country. In JITW’s case, that’s BJWT. So while we’ve been told that at least one of the JITW founders doesn’t particularly like Eduardo Serio or what he does, they apparently like his connections enough to buddy up with him in order to get ahead.

Now, just in the last few days, JITW has announced that they’re working with Discovery Channel and Animal Planet on some kind of project. Frankly, Animal Planet has been dead to me for years. When you host shows like “Call of the Wildman” and “Redneck Zoo” any reputation you had pertaining to actual conservation and animal husbandry is out the window and run over by a semi. But I was sort of holding out hope that Discovery Channel might retain some standards. Alas, they obviously have no more devotion to research and actual conservation than their sister station. Really pieces of work, both stations are. Pieces of fecal matter, but whoppers of the kind, I’ll give them that. Leading the world in misinformation and pseudo-conservation, one fake show at a time.

But back to JITW. It’s unclear what sort of project is being filmed. Nothing has been said about a release date for Andromeda, and as she’s literally the only big cat at JITW that wasn’t hand reared and played with for her entire life, there’s no one else to release. But then, JITW has turned baiting cats for public entertainment into an art form they refer to as “enrichment”. Accredited sanctuaries offer their animals hidden food, or treats, special edible toys (like pumpkins in the fall) or Christmas trees to play with for enrichment. JITW brings their animals from small enclosures into one large one, and then proceed to dangle a piñata full of yummy stuff over a pool of water. If kitty wants the yum yums, kitty’s got to jump and hot dog through the air like an Olympic freestyle skier in order to get them. In front of a crowd of paying guests, of course. So perhaps Discover Channel and Animal Planet are working on a show about flying big cats? Who knows.

There’s no denying that the cats of JITW are beautiful to look at, just as it’s impossible to deny that the cubs, of BJWT are utterly adorable. The problem is, that while the animals of both foundations generate an onslaught of social media, and other media attention, the wild animals continue to suffer without notice. And while private ownership of exotic animals in Mexico is on par with that of the United Arab Emirates, and zoos which allow petting and handling abound, there remains no genuine sanctuary for animals who need to be rescued and then left alone in peace, rather than being exploited for the sake of money.

Or is there a sanctuary out there in Mexico which actually does care about the animal, first, foremost and always?

Find the answer in my next article, where I explore the only sanctuary in the country of Mexico which fits the true definition of the word.

F.A.R.T.S. Aren’t the Only Thing That Stink…

On July 6, 2016July 6, 2016 By projecticarus2015In animal welfare, Big Cat Public Safety Act, Black Jaguar White Tiger, conservation, Conservation Journalism, education, extinction, Facts, Global Environmental Issues, Hands Off Conservation, Hands-on Interaction, International Summit, mexico, stewardship, true facts8 Comments

Sorry for the click-bait title, but it needed to be done.

After our recent article, and the usual accompanying “hysterism” by BJWT in response to it, we noticed a peculiar reaction by all the Eddieites. They went to another organization’s page and proceeded to scream and fuss, name call and make asshats of themselves in general. Don’t get me wrong, it’s nice to avoid all the trolls, but really? Having an I.C.A.R.U.S. article raise the dust, and then watch another conservation group get all the hate mongering was, well, awkward.

Then folks started contacting us and asking if we had any comment on our “relationship” with BCR. They attached links to their questions, and when we saw where those links went, it all suddenly started to make sense.

Big Cat Rescue Watch is a website run by Juan Garcia* who is devoted single-mindedly to doing anything and everything to destroy Big Cat Rescue’s reputation. Apparently Juan posted an article months ago “rebutting” one of our articles. And when I say “rebutting” I’m being generous. Basically, Juan spends the entire article trash talking BCR, while defending BJWT (no surprise, the website is designed solely to defend BJWT while trashing BCR) and lying about the photos. But it’s the bottom of the article where he really shows that he’s willing to do anything to defend BJWT.

In a screenshot of an unknown page, involving an unknown person (no names or proof that those involved have anything to do with BCR) Juan shows someone–who states that they don’t even work at BCR–saying that “the crew supports them” in response to several questions wherein Juan claims that Big Cat Rescue is somehow responsible for the I.C.A.R.U.S. article.

Aside from the fact that Juan doesn’t just objectively ask a question, but rather goes into the discussion with his mind made up and directly asserts from the beginning that BCR is in charge of the article, and despite that the person clearly says “No, BCR wouldn’t have anything to do with it” Juan continues to assert that BCR is in charge of the articles produced by I.C.A.R.U.S. stating that “Maybe Big Cat Rescue has someone writing for them”. It’s not clear why he even included his “questions” in his article when he simply ignored the answer of “NO” and reiterated that BCR does, in fact, have someone writing articles for them under the name of I.C.A.R.U.S.

Despite Juan Garcia’s adorable “disclosure” at the bottom of his blog, his accusations that I.C.A.R.U.S.’s staff writer is “working for BCR” qualifies as libel, because our staff writer has absolutely no associating with BCR, and has never had any association with BCR. By attempting to damage her reputation by connecting her with another unrelated organization, Juan is libeling her.

But here’s the thing, BCRWatch website is nothing more than an illegitimate “shell” site, baseless and without merit. Basically, it’s nothing but a hub for those who support cub petting and places who promote it, where they can attempt to discredit legitimate, accredited sanctuaries and those who are striving to stop the practice of captive exotic animal exploitation.

Juan Garcia calls anyone who takes a stand against cub petting and exploitation a F.A.R.T. and has this, among other similar images, on his site.

It’s the sort of “clever” humor that Serio of BJWT likes to think he possesses. Not that BCRWatch is paid for by BJWT, or anything. At least, not that we know of. Though, it is sort of curious that BCRWatch reposted his “rebuttal” article, and pinned it to the top of his page at the exact same time that “Papa Bear” was pitching his own tantrum on his live feed about destroying us. I mean, interesting coincidence, you know? Or maybe not a coincidence at all.

* We have no idea if Juan Garcia is this guy’s actual name, but it’s what he goes by on social media.

I thought that I’d copy and paste Juan’s disclaimer here. He’s super careful to post it under his rhetoric, I mean, articles, since his site is full of lies, I suppose, in hopes to avoid trouble from lying.

I hold no claims of ownership to the referenced articles, screenshots, or photos that are public information online. All photo references and commentary articles have been carefully researched, reported, and solely intended for criticism, comment, and nonprofit educational purpose to inform the public. Subjects not referenced with facts should be considered opinion. Testimonies from sources/interviews, comments, criticism, and articles are released without malice (i.e., without intent to harm) to any parties and intended solely for educational purposes. If any content herein can be proven to be untrue, incorrect, or illegal it will be corrected or deleted immediately, The opinions and beliefs of the contributors to this website and those of it’s administration are the result of many hours of intensive research and are protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Opinions stated here are my own. The information is true to the best of my research and knowledge.

Cubs Cubs Everywhere, And With Them Oh The Funds We’ll Snare

On July 1, 2016July 4, 2016 By projecticarus2015In animal welfare, Big Cat Public Safety Act, Black Jaguar White Tiger, conservation, Conservation Journalism, education, Facts, Hands Off Conservation, Hands-on Interaction, mexico, stewardship, true facts, wildlife crime37 Comments

There have been some exciting things going on over at Black Jaguar White Tiger. Exciting, that is, if you’re a BJWT fan/follower, or, as I’ve come to refer to them, an “Eddieite”.

Eddieite
Ed-ee-ite
One utterly devoted to the preachings of Eduardo Serio; incapable of seeing the fact that BJWT has contributed nothing to the conservation of big cats but motherless cubs, a plethora of hand reared animals, and numerous videos of its founder and his “special guests” playing with his own big cats. Eddieites react violently to any question posed against their adored leader, even in the face of scientific facts, and will often degenerate into sputtering curses and antiquated invocations of plagues, and poxes on naysayers of the “Blue Energy” religion of the BJWT Nation: They’re an Eddieite, they’ll believe anything Eddie says, unfailingly and without question. Synonyms: BJWT follower, celebrity conservationist, pseudo-conservationist, willfully ignorant lover of exploitive animal videos and pictures.
Origin: 2013-2016; Observations of an active animal cult.

But enough of the modern slang dictionary. We have more important things to discuss.

It’s Cub Season at Black Jaguar White Tiger!

Thus far we’re up to five “mystery boxes” the first four of which have contained one or more big cat cubs. In a June 25th “Pillow Talk” Serio stated that box 5 contained “monkey and a (unintelligible)” but we did not actually see these animals so I have no idea if those were the species, or names, or what. Then in another “Pillow Talk” on June 29th, we got this 2-frame glimpse into an otherwise ignored box in the “cub room”.

All the other cubs were present and accounted for, but that’s no monkey lying there. The Eddieites following the feed certainly seemed to think it wasn’t a monkey, and offered up comments like:

“I saw box #5… its something black”
“Ohhhhhh I saw the black jag”
“There’s something black in box #5”
“What was black in the box?!?!”
“Saw something black, what did we see?”
“#isawnothingblack”
“Baby black jag????”
“A baby black jaguar (heart emogis)”

Excitement excitement! But we’ll just have to live off the thrill of not knowing, until Serio offers an official reveal.

There has been a small setback in the annual unveiling of Cubtopia, as one cub is already dead. (pesky inbreeding!) But it’s okay. Serio made up for the one cub dying by dubbing the surviving cubs the “Shakira Pride” after another jaguar who recently died (in a tragic Africanized bee attack) at Jaguars Into The Wild. So we’re good. Blue Energy all around, and no one’s getting dragged down emotionally over that little dead guy. Onward and upward!

For anyone who’s “sarcasm deaf” I’m dripping sarcasm at this point. It’s hard not to with daily videos of tiny, screeching big cat cubs trapped in cardboard boxes.

If you’re a regular reader of I.C.A.R.U.S. articles, you’ll recall that in other articles I’ve mentioned the fact that BJWT has a cycle as predictable as the tides of the ocean. A group of cubs arrive at BJWT with variations of the same three or four stories: Mom rejected them. The Mexican government confiscated them. Serio “saved” them from a “bad home”. Or they were taken from a zoo or circus. Recently, Serio has also started saying he’s “rescuing” cubs from canned hunting, something very peculiar, as there are an extremely low number of “trophies” exported from Mexico every year. But we’ll come back to that canned hunting thing later.

For now, the important thing to remember, is that every time a “pride” gets too big, they sort of just fade into the background, and new babies arrive, most of them so young that umbilical stumps are still raw. They are subsequently divided and put together in new “prides” and plastered all over social media for several months. Just in this year, we’ve had the Steve Jobs Pride, the Starving Union, Gustavo’s Pride, Tommy’s Pride, and most recently Shakira’s Pride.

In the three years since BJWT was founded, there have been three distinct sets of prides, some of which are now full blown adults, like The Big Pride, others which are 3/4 grown, like Cheyenne and the Super Pride, others which are half grown, like Lewis and Nicole, and then we’ve got the new babies. In all, tens of animals which all started out has bottle babies or young animals which were specifically hand reared.

Full disclosure, I might have left out some prides, and I might have accidentally named one pride by two names. It’s impossible to track each group when names are sometimes changed and there are no firm records.

Should any outsider ask where these cubs come from, Eddieites will immediately leap to the defense, insisting that Serio “rescues” the cubs and brings them to his “sanctuary” from places where they aren’t wanted like zoos and circuses, often while telling them to do “a little research” before asking stupid questions or saying stupid things. Those of us with questions find this instruction particularly amusing when there is no documentation to research, and those who ask questions are systematically blocked and called haters, something for which Serio is inordinately proud:

The “rescue” proclamations of Eddieites are followed by avid claims that the cubs can never be released into the wild “because they were born in captivity” so Serio’s giving them the best life possible at his “sanctuary”. Or, in some cases, supporters claim that eventually BJWT will “repopulate the world” with their cats (despite that they supposedly don’t breed them).

As usual there are potholes in these claims that are large enough to blow the tires on a tractor trailer rig.

Zoos, in particular, value cubs more than they do adults, it’s laughable to think that the dozens of cubs that have appeared at BJWT over the last three years were all cast out by their entertainment owners, when those same groups might well have made tens of thousands of dollars off of the cubs, had they retained them. The only way they’d let go of the cubs is if the government seized them.
Felid wild reintroduction is in its infancy. There have been a very few genuine success stories. However, for there to be any hope of pursuing reintroduction, the cubs must be raised with as little human contact as possible and raised in an environment that properly mimics their natural habitat. If you keep them in cardboard boxes in your closet, handle them constantly, and consistently reinforce a personal and intimate relationship with humans, then you guarantee that they can never be reintroduced into the wild.
According to I.C.A.R.U.S. contacts who are familiar with laws south of the border, there is no registry for big cat sanctuaries in Mexico. There aren’t even any outlines for sanctuaries in that country. The only two ways in which you can register the ownership of exotic big cats, is as either a zoo, or a private collection.

What does all of this mean?

It means that while Serio claims to be a sanctuary and obsessively refers to BJWT as a sanctuary (though this is a recent development that has occurred in the past months, after articles criticizing BJWT began to appear. Before that, he called BJWT a “foundation”) it’s only a word in the name of his registered zoo. Serio stomps around threatening to sue people who suggest BJWT is not an accredited sanctuary, and he uses the term “sanctuary” gratuitously in an effort to garner sympathy and legitimize the foundation.

But the title listed on zoo registration papers does not actually make BJWT an accredited sanctuary. It just means that BJWT is a zoo registered with the word “sanctuary” in its name. This is where commercialism comes in. You can name a company anything you want, but you can’t register it as an institute which is not recognized by the government with which you’re registering it.

BJWT literally cannot be a registered sanctuary under Mexican law, because there are no outlines, bylaws, or terminology to define and regulate sanctuaries within the existing Mexican environmental laws. There is, according to the Mexican government itself, no existing sanctuaries for exotic animals in the country. There are only PIMVS institutes or privately owned collections.

This is one reason that Mexico desperately needs to update, refurbish, and create laws that will clearly define the difference between a zoo, a private collection, and a sanctuary. Serio adamantly (as evidenced by recent legal attacks) defends BJWT as a “sanctuary” insisting that he’s met all the requirements outlined in order for it to be so. The problem is, he’s leaving out the fact that Mexico doesn’t actually have guidelines for sanctuaries for him to meet. They only have guidelines for zoos and private collections. And we don’t doubt that BJWT meets all the standards required of it by Mexican law in order to retain it’s operating permit as a PIMVS. That doesn’t mean it qualifies as a sanctuary as defined by GFAS.

On BJWT’s own FAQ page:

Nowhere does it say “YES we are are registered sanctuary” because they ARE NOT a registered sanctuary, they are a registered zoo.

But back to the cubs and to the trillion dollar question: Where do all of these babies come from?

We know that at least several in “Shakira’s Pride” actually came from a zoo bought and owned by one of Serio’s friends, because Serio himself has said it on social media sites. That’s after he spun a tale about how he “didn’t have space to save the moms from the zoo, so he took the cubs to save them” leading the public to believe that it was a case of saving the animals from imminent death. Then he later admitted that his friend had bought the zoo, and all of its animals, which means that there was no need to remove those cubs from their mothers.

But moving on. That only accounts for a few of the new cubs, and the others remain a mystery, just like most of the cubs BJWT hosts. He says that the Mexican government confiscates them and gives them to BJWT, so it’s likely that some come from the government. We know that Mexico’s current system is grossly overburdened with animals, and there’s nowhere to put ones that are seized, so BJWT being the biggest name around, it’s perfectly likely they get the majority of cubs that are seized. And do at least some of them come from situations of abuse? More than likely, considering how many have arrived. But we also have videos wherein Serio admits that some of the cubs come from “private zoos” and “important people” who apparently own scads of big cats. It also bears pointing out that in the early days Serio referred to the cubs as “being adopted” but slowly began saying “rescued” later on.

The fact that Serio recently began claiming that he was saving cubs from the canned hunting industry struck those of us who keep tabs on such things as very odd, considering the low numbers of trophies exported from Mexico, so I decided to dig a little. What I discovered was an underbelly of the exotic animal trade unlike anything I’ve experienced so far. As we know from articles like this one that owning big cats is considered a grand pastime for drug lords and wealthy individuals with too much time on their hands. And the very government groups like PROFEPA whom Serio proudly posts photos of himself buddying up to

regularly turn a blind eye to all of this trafficking, so it makes one wonder how “valid” their regulation of groups like BJWT can be. But we know about this corruption, it’s documented regularly.

What I didn’t know, until very recently, is that the breeders who supply these sellers and private owners with animals often also run what amounts to Rent-A-Cub programs. For a one time fee, someone can “adopt” a cub, and take it home. Once the cub gets too big to handle, or starts causing problems, they can then bring the cubs back to the breeder, and return them in exchange for much younger and smaller cubs, and start all over again. Really, it’s the perfect scheme. You get all the cuteness, and none of the issues.

Now, Eddieites will vehemently defend BJWT and Serio, insisting that all of his “Angels” are still at BJWT, but we have very little proof of that, at least by way of social media. The cats might all be there in cages, or maybe they’re not. We see cubs, and then we don’t see them until they’ve grown considerably, so it’s often impossible to recognize them even if they’re shown again later. We just don’t know. We do know, however, that to start with, Serio always referred to cubs as having “been adopted” from people, often people his own cousin had contact with.

The same cousin who seemed to be the one selling the first cat Serio ever “adopted”.

Of course, the story of Cielo has changed numerous times, each evolution making Serio’s procurement of her more and more heroic. This is one of the many issues with the lack of transparency associated with BJWT. In addition to the fact that the origins of the cubs is never properly and objectively documented, we have their use by Serio as a constant draw for support. Despite his own haughty (and often childishly tantrum-like) attacks on those who claim that he exploits his animals for the purpose of making money, he continues to put the animals front and center and use their likeness to sell BJWT merchandise.

Eddieites angrily defend Serio’s use of his cats for “advertising” claiming that BJWT needs funds in order to survive. Some even point out the need to fundraise so that “Stage 3” can be built. Never mind that Serio has been claiming that “Stage 3” is going to be completed “in a year” for the last three years.

Apparently, no Eddieites have ever been taught how to use a calculator, and think independently.

Here’s a little breakdown of things that BJWT followers clearly haven’t considered. Everything is in USD, as that’s how prices are listed on Boycott Circus.

Two weeks ago, BJWT posted new ball caps on their Instagram page (they were pretty fly, we admit) There are seven styles. Within two hours, at least one style was completely sold out. Now, we don’t know precisely how many hats BJWT had in stock, but let’s presume they started with 1,000. After all, they’ve got over 5 million followers on Instagram, it’s safe to think they’d stock new products in increments of at least 1,000 for something that only comes in one size like a hat.

The hats sell for $33.00-$36.00. So going with the less expensive hat, and presuming they had at least 1k to start, BJWT made $33,000 dollars free and clear in just two hours.

But paying for all of the “Angels” is expensive! Supporters say.

Okay, that’s true.

If just 50,000 supporters (out of 5.4 million) donate $100 dollars over the course of 1 year, BJWT makes $5,000,000.00

If just 10,000 (out of 5.4 million) supporters buy 1 $68.00 sweatshirt, BJWT makes $680,000.00

If just 100,000 out of 5.4 million) buy 1 $25.00 T-shirt, BJWT makes $2,500,000.00

If every Instagram follower buys just 1 T-shirt over the course of 1 year, BJWT makes $135,000,000.00

Ignoring that last number, and just going off the others, we’re up to $8,213,000.00 in one year.

Basic food, medical, maintenance costs for one big cat averages about $8,000 a year. Multiply that by 220, and you’re looking at $1,760,000.00 (and that’s paying for the food, while Serio has posted on Instagram boasting about how he gets the best deals from the biggest meat processors in Mexico) which is, admittedly, a lot of money.

But out of our theoretical merchandise money we’ve still got $6,453,000.00 leftover.

Then there’s staff and expenditures, etc. The fact that they’re building Stage 2B, 3B, etc. or what have you. But if, donations are coming in, it shouldn’t be a problem. Again, we don’t know because there’s no running tab posted anywhere.

Remember, I’m just throwing numbers around. I’m saying that it’s possible to make this much on merchandise and donations. I mean, come on, with 5.4 million followers, you just need them to donate $1.00 a year in order to make $5.4 million dollars. What I’ve listed here is just one possible donation, and just THREE products out of the available 69 products on BJWT’s swag site, which is devoted solely to selling products for them. And 100% of the proceeds rendered from sales on Boycott Circus go to BJWT.

And none of this includes any funding BJWT might receive from the government for taking animals if he has, as he’s said he has. It doesn’t include any donations, aside from the one reference.

And those donations do occur far more often that Eddieites seem to think. For example, last year, Hublot held a benefit brunch for BJWT that cost people between $500.00 and $1000.000 just to walk in the door.

BJWT made $200,000.00 during the event.

Then Ronda Rousey, whom Serio still talks about, made $23,000.00 for them by auctioning off items online.

With Eddie just posing with a new $4,000.00 “gift” from Hublot founder a few weeks ago, it’s safe to assume that the majority of the companies who donate to BJWT do so more than once. You can’t post photos of all of these supporters, and not have people expect them to be, well, supporting you. But without any financial transparency, the public has no way of knowing where any of that money goes. Eddieites presume–and insist–that it goes to the cats, and a portion of it surely does. But where does the rest go?

We don’t know. Not entirely.

But at least some of the funds raised by BJWT’s considerable efforts at selling merchandise and kickbacks from all the social media advertising (remember, people get paid for social media, too) seem to go to some pretty strange places. Like animal cloning companies who work with Korean firms to clone dead pets.

PerPETuate’s founder, Ron Gillespie says that cloning will be the future of “building” the perfect animal, and that instead of accepting the death of an animal as part of the cycle of life, he can “offer hope” to people by using science to “bring these animals back”. It does put Serio’s mantra of “Karmis Forever” into a whole new light. Never mind the fact that in this blurb, Karma is described as a pure African lion, and this version of Cielo’s story has Serio saving her from certain death after her mother perished in childbirth, none of which has ever been mentioned elsewhere.

But back to the mind boggling issue of BJWT having stored Karma’s DNA for cloning. The cloning process is not cheap. Cloning averages around $100,000.00. And that’s after the preliminary costs of having the DNA stored and cultured, and the annual costs of keeping it banked. It should also be noted that on the website, it says that the best time to harvest cells for banking is while the animal is alive and healthy, as harvesting after death would allow for cell deterioration. So that suggests that at least a little planning went into this.

Now, we have no way of knowing how any of this cockamamie stuff was paid for, because Serio has never mentioned the fact that he ever did it at all. For a guy who takes his Facebook live feeds to the bathroom with him when he has to pee, it seems a little shocking that he’d choose not to let his adoring fans know that “Hey, Karmis Forever is legit literal, we can bring her back whenever we want to.”

But in complete and utter fairness, maybe Serio paid for all of this out of pocket just because he loved Karma. I mean, he is pretty fast to say that he’s got “unlimited money” with which to sue people, and he claims to pay for most of the foundation himself, despite all of those merch sales and donations from supporters. It’s totally possible. Stranger things have happened, I mean. Okay, saving DNA to clone an inbred lion you “rescued” from a crappy breeder is pretty strange. But Serio could have paid for it without using BJWT donations, is all I’m saying.

And frankly, here’s something incredibly important to note, which I’m sure will go entirely unregistered by Eddieites, in favor of hating us for the article in general, but which I’m going to say anyhow.

WE DON’T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH BJWT MAKING MILLIONS A YEAR.

What we have a problem with, is a nonprofit 501(c)3 bringing in large amounts of undocumented donations and income, when by United States 501(c)3 regulations, nonprofits must document and make public EVERY donation they receive, as well as where that money is spent (not just photos of something with the word “fiscal” in it, but no breakdown of money coming in and going out) Now, BJWT’s 501(c)3 document (so angrily posted by Serio on social media) is dated January 18th of 2016, so a full year hasn’t passed yet, and I’m not clear on precisely when they need to post their financials. Different companies end and begin their fiscal year at different times. It’s possible that BJWT is not required to post their financials until the end of this year. Which is fine, as long as they’re complying with the law.

However, Serio very publicly attacked and led a campaign against a conservation writer (whose name I will not post here because she has no personal stake in this article) who stated in a January 2nd 2016 article that BJWT was not a registered 501(c)3 company. Serio called this writer a liar, stated that he would sue her, and through various threats eventually forced her to remove the article in question.

But here’s the thing, the article stating that BJWT was not a 501(c)3 company predates the officiation of BJWT as a 501(c)3 by more than two months.

So the writer was correct, and BJWT was not a 501k company at the time of the article’s publication. The 501(c)3 document posted after the fact by Serio is dated as having been received for consideration on January 18, 2016, two weeks after the article was published. And it took another two months for BJWT to officially receive 501(c)3 status. On their website, BJWT claims to be a 501(c)3 since January 11th, 2016, which doesn’t coincide with stamp clearly visible on the documents posted on Instagram. However, even being lenient, and going with the 11th as the official recognition of their status, it still means that at the time that the article in question was published, BJWT was not yet a recognized 501(c)3 company. And furthermore, the author couldn’t have possible known that BJWT was even in the process of attaining a 501(c)3 status.

Companies change and evolve. That’s fine. What’s true about a foundation one month, might not be true the next month. But the fact that BJWT is now a 501(c)3 company does not make it acceptable for Serio to have threatened and publicly attacked someone who correctly stated that BJWT was not yet a 501(c)3 company at the time that she wrote an article about them.

Serio’s hyper aggressive actions toward anyone who questions him raise serious questions about his honesty in regard to the running of the foundation. He uses his followers as an army of rage, unleashing them on anyone who questions BJWT, and often using violent outbursts and threats as a distraction to allow him leeway and time in which to alter either BJWT’s website (so he can later claim people are lying about BJWT, as was the case when BJWT had personal visits listed in exchange for monetary donations) or change the way in which something is referred to. He also has a history of lying about what’s been said about BJWT, misquoting whomever it was that said, or suggested, something he didn’t approve of, and instead of gathering information independently, Eddieites simply repeat whatever Serio says, and then proceed with attacking whomever has questioned him. It’s all a carefully orchestrated system of misinformation.

Which leaves all of us wondering where the cubs come from, where the money goes, and if we’ll ever get an answer that’s not shrouded in hateful vitriol, rageful threats and condemnation for having asked questions in the first place.

* Addendum. 5 hours after this article was published, Serio has revealed “Box 6” which holds yet another tiny lion cub.

“Not To Hurt Our Humble Brethren Is Our First Duty To Them;” Pope Francis Should Have Brushed Up On the Teachings of His Namesake

On June 17, 2016June 17, 2016 By projecticarus2015In animal welfare, Big Cat Public Safety Act, Black Jaguar White Tiger, Circus, conservation, culture, egotourism, extinction, Facts, Global Environmental Issues, Hands Off Conservation, Hands-on Interaction, stewardship, T.I.G.E.R.S, true facts, unethical tourism, wildlife crimeLeave a comment

I was Christened Catholic. It doesn’t come up much, but I was. And I grew up around devout Catholics. Mass several times a week, Catholics. They were my Great Aunts. I still have crucifixes that belonged to them, and various icons. They instilled in me, a love for the Saints, if not for the Church. The Church can be twisted into all sorts of things, to suit the ideals of whomever is in charge. But the Saints? Well, they were just people who lived life as thoughtfully as they could, and became so renowned for their own lives that they were later canonized. Some of them might seem silly, but to my great aunts they were all important in their own ways.

St. Francis was always my saint. He was the one I’d mutter prayers to while trying to climb a tree and return a wayward baby bird to its nest. St. Francis was the one I invoked when I was silently begging for an opossum or turtle to make it across the road, back when I was too young to do anything else about it. St. Francis was my go-to guy whenever shit hit the fan and an animal was in danger, or when a lot of thankless work needed to be done for nothing in order for an animal to be properly taken care of. It was St. Francis I beseeched to look over animals that were beyond my aid, animals who were suffering and dying, or had already died. All too often because of human abuse, or ignorance. Suffice to say, I rely on St. Francis a lot. Daily, and sometimes, multiple times a day, if it’s a particularly shitty day for animals.

St. Francis saw animals as his brothers and sisters, he saw them as equals, and he believed it was our responsibility as humans to respect them and treat them as we would other humans.

“If you have men who will exclude any of God’s creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have men who deal likewise with their fellow men.
All creatures have the same source as we have. Like us, they derive the life of thought, love, and will from the Creator. Not to hurt our humble brethren is our first duty to them; but to stop there is a complete misapprehension of the intentions of Providence. We have a higher mission. God wishes that we should succour them whenever they require it.”
–St Francis

Since I consider St. Francis to be my personal patron saint, I was keen, in an abstract and outsider sort of way, when the latest Pope chose his name after, and in honor of, St. Francis. And as far as leaders of the Church goes, the Pope has been a pretty open and understanding Pope, straddling that awkward and constantly wavering line between the Church and everything that doesn’t fall under the Church’s “acceptance” or “ideals”.

That all changed for me this afternoon when ICARUS founder, Jessica James left me a voicemail telling me to check out Youtube and what happened at the Vatican today. I dubiously did as suggested and I couldn’t have been more shocked and disappointed at what I found.

Pop Francis–who named himself in honor of St. Francis who saw himself as the caretaker of all God’s creations, no matter how lowly–was smiling and laughing as he watched a captive tiger paraded around on a chain choke collar and leash. He even engaged in petting the captive tiger, an action which leads to the suffering and death of thousands of captive big cats all over the world every year. There was photo of Pope Francis also petting a very small black jaguar cub. A cub that looked too young to have properly developed its immune system.

The visit, described as a “jubilee for traveling circuses” was intended to celebrate the treatment of “the most needy, the poor and the homeless, prisoners and disadvantaged kids.” to whom the traveling performers often open their shows. While the treatment of their fellow humans is commendable, the treatment of their animals is another matter.

Has the Pope read none of the teachings of his own namesake? That he seemingly condones the use of captive animals within circuses, the continued breeding of them for the sake of providing cubs to be constantly exploited, the violence used to force them to perform, is heart wrenching. That he would actually partake in glorifying such abuse and exploitation while bearing the name of a Saint who would have–and did, during his lifetime–condemn such transgressions, is utterly unconscionable.

“This too, is mercy–to sow beauty and joy in a world sometimes gloomy and sad.” The Pope was quoted as saying, in regard to the kindness of the circus performers.

But the circus is a world that is always gloomy and sad for the animals trapped and abused within it.

Contrastingly to the Pope’s happy embracement of animal exploitation, his namesake, St. Francis said,

“We are not God…. we must forcefully reject the notion that our being created in God’s image and given dominion over the heart justifies absolute domination of other creatures.”

And,

“Every act of cruelty towards any creature is contrary to human dignity.”

St. Francis went so far as to say, in the face of the Church, that,

“An inadequate presentation of Christian anthropology gave rise to a wrong understanding of the relationship between human beings and the world. Often, what was handed on was a Promethean vision of mastery over the world, which gave the impression that the protection of nature was something that only the faint-hearted cared about. Instead, our “domination” over the universe should be understood more properly in the sense of responsible stewardship.”

The word Stewardship is defined as: the responsible overseeing and protection of something considered worth caring for and preserving.

“Responsible overseeing and protection of” doesn’t quite jive with “beating into submission, forcing to perform, denying medical care, abusing, exploiting, and breeding for profit” yet that’s precisely what circuses do with their animals. It’s what’s been happening to animals since animals were first captured and used in the arenas of the Gladiators.

It’s what’s been happening to animals for thousands of years, and what’s still happening to animals today.

But it’s not how St. Francis believed animals should be treated, and it’s not what he taught, or how he lived. Pope Francis clearly needs to brush up on his studies of his own namesake, because I doubt that St. Francis would be honored by how the Pope has acted today.

The captive breeding and exploitation of big cats is a phenomenon that is actually increasing, despite the best efforts of groups like ICARUS. Despite that many circuses have announced that they will phase out elephants in the use of their shows, most still use big cats in their performances. Despite that questions are being raised about such pseudo-sanctuaries as Black Jaguar White Tiger, T.I.G.E.R.S., Dade City Wild Things, and others who promote pay to play cub-petting schemes, and who perpetually produce captive bred big cat cubs to be used in those schemes, the social media presence of these exploiters continue to grow in popularity.

In my last post, I covered the recent worldwide celebration of a staged video showing Eduardo Serio playing with one of his jaguars, pointing out that while he and his followers considered it a triumph for them, it really did nothing but peddle the idea that big cats make cute pets.

Now, the Pope, whom millions admire and look to for examples of how life should be lived, has, knowingly or not, publicly condoned the exploitation, abuse, and suffering of captive exotic animals everywhere.

Pope Francis has, by example, condoned the belief that animals exist solely to provide us with entertainment, something his namesake, St. Francis, spent a lifetime trying to counter. A lifetime that was so revered after the fact that he was canonized, his name forever linked to the ideals he worked to foster while alive.

I might not be a practicing Catholic, and I’m sure that Pope Francis could care less about my opinion of him, but St. Francis is my patron saint, and I’ve done everything I can to fashion my own life after his.

Today, Pope Francis disregarded the very deepest beliefs that his namesake, St. Francis held most dear, what he prayed to God daily for, that he would have the “grace to see all animals as gifts from You and to treat them with respect for they are Your creation.”

For shame, Pope Francis, how could you so willingly embrace and participate in the exploitation and abuse of God’s creatures for the profit and amusement of the human race?

“The Lord bless thee and keep thee. May he show his face to thee and have pity on thee. May he turn his countenance toward thee and give thee peace. The Lord bless thee.”

–Blessing of St. Francis

Artemis Grey

Why Let The Truth Get In The Way Of A Good Story? What Happens When News Outlets Only Report Half The Facts

On June 9, 2016June 21, 2016 By projecticarus2015In animal welfare, Big Cat Public Safety Act, Black Jaguar White Tiger, conservation, Conservation Journalism, education, egotourism, extinction, Facts, Global Environmental Issues, Hands Off Conservation, Hands-on Interaction, unethical tourism, wildlife crime9 Comments

I had an unexpected day off, yesterday, and I fully intended to use it to get much needed writing on novels done. However, I made the mistake of checking the I.C.A.R.U.S. email account first, and that’s when things ground to a halt. There, across the Yahoo news page, was yet one more headliner with a video of Eduardo Serio of Black Jaguar White Tiger standing casually against a stone wall while a black jaguar stalks him. The headliner, like so many of the videos from BJWT which are shared on the internet, made a joke of the fact that Serio was being stalked by a jaguar.

A little research into this latest “media splash” revealed posts on Snapchat, made by Serio excitedly boasting “Yahoo Front Page :)”

and “Look who made it into Snapchat’s daily mail :)”

There’s also an Instagram post referring to the Snapchat email.

“About time that (tags snapchat staff using Instagram handles) cut a flower from their garden hahahahaha Love you guys. But really, about time :)”

Yes, it’s about time that Snapchat recognized how important Eduardo Serio is, how much he does for them by posting hundreds of videos of his “rescued” big cats to their site. Nothing says narcissism like multiple posts on multiple social media accounts boasting about how you’re featured on multiple social media and news sites. Not for anything virtuous, but because you have a pet jaguar–who you insist isn’t your pet–stalking you like a house cat chasing rolled up socks.

You see, this, is what Serio cares about more than conservation, more than animals, more than humans, more than anything on the entire planet: Himself. And his own media greatness.

While I was stewing and trying to convince myself to just move on and ignore the flippant and ignorant news blip, my sister sent me a text with a link to another news article by CNN, one which showed the very same video.

I followed it, of course, and then followed other links and came up with numerous stories, all branching from the same video utilized in the Snapchat daily mail that Serio was so appreciative of (though he made it clear that the honor was quite overdue, thank you very much) and unsurprisingly, most of the videos and news blurbs said nothing of the ongoing issues with the foundation. Nor did they mention Serio’s recent and very public threats against any group speaking out in opposition to his foundation.

Only two stories I found, Chloe Bryan’s Mashable blurb, and Jeanne Moos’s CNN “backstory” clip, address the fact that handling big cats like they’re pets might not actually be the best thing to do in the name of conservation.

While Ms. Bryan’s blurb does cite at least two articles relating to problems that have been raised in regard to BJWT, and Ms. Moos’s clip features a brief statement from Kelli Heckman of the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries (which have set the standards the I.C.A.R.U.S. team uses when referring to sanctuaries as genuine, or pseudo) and does link to one, older article questioning BJWT, neither the blurb or backstory address the deeper issues of someone utilizing hundreds of animals in order to make themselves famous. Nor do they mention the fact that Serio’s “fierce critics” as Ms. Moos refers to them, are the focus of daily death threats, and threats of legal attack, or physical abuse–by not only Serio himself, but also the millions of followers he wields like a club in defense of his own actions. Neither article, while they question Serio’s practices, point out that he’s also a bully, who regularly threatens American citizens, along with citizens of other countries, when they disagree with him. Chloe’s article has already been inundated with BJWT followers criticizing her, threatening her, informing her of how wrong she is about BJWT, and defending both Serio, and BJWT.

Other stories, like this one put out today by Fox News offer nothing at all, even suggesting that keeping big cats as pets is a bad idea, aside from a one-liner at then end saying that they can’t endorse kissing a jaguar, but they do think you should check out the video.

Yes, by all means, check out that video of someone exploiting an animal, and share it.

Give the guy in the video more attention, and more reason to keep hoarding animals and calling it conservation. You’ve just secured the fate of countless more animals to captivity.

Animals like the most recent batch of cubs, most of whom were intentionally removed from their mothers for no reason–as Serio has admitted that the some of the mothers are owned by a friend and in no danger. Animals like “Arizona” the tiny tiger cub seen aspirating and nearly drowning in milk while being improperly fed in this video, which has since been deleted. Weeks after that video surfaced, and was subsequently deleted, Serio announced that Arizona is now having health issues, including “seizures” which he blames on “inbreeding”.

We’ll never know precisely what’s wrong with Arizona. However, aspiration pneumonia due to improper feeding techniques is considered one of the highest risks associated with hand raising captive big cat cubs, and it can cause seizure or tremors as well as dehydration.

According to Ron Hines, DMV PhD:

“The most serious problem that can occurs for an inexperienced caregivers (or a distracted or rushed experienced caregivers) is allowing the milk formula to enter the cub’s lungs rather than its stomach – the formula “goes down the wrong way”.
The most common cause of this is feeding infant cubs in the wrong position. Never cradle and feed these exotic cats on their back as you would a human infant. These animals must have their stomach side down (belly down) when they suckle. Later, when the cub is more developed and able to walk, it can sit back on its haunches or stand and take the bottle in its front paws like the one in the photograph at the top of this article.

The younger a cub is, the more likely this problem is to occur. That is why inexperienced caregivers are much safer if they take over the chore when cubs are already 4-6 weeks old. Let an experienced person get you started right.

Here are some other tips to help you prevent this problem:

Feed the baby in the proper position

Use nipples that are the right size and that do not leak or flow too easily. (Pull on the nipple to be sure it is well seated. Enthusiastic cubs will pull nipples right off the bottle and can swallow them.)

Never squeeze the bottle when the cub is nursing

Be sure you stop feeding the cub as soon as it no longer sucks vigorously and greedily. Do not punch too many holes or too large a hole in the rubber nipple. Milk should not drip or accumulate on the bottle when it is held nipple-down.

Milk should never come out a cub’s nose.

Once a cub has aspirated, there is very little a veterinarian like me can do to improve its chances of surviving.

Symptoms of aspiration pneumonia are labored breathing, irregular breathing, gasping, pale or bluish gums. Later, tremors and listlessness and death.”

From the AZA website relating to the hand rearing of cubs (which it counsels against doing, unless the cub’s life is at stake):

“When feeding young felids, they should be placed on their stomach on a flat surface (e.g., table). Cubs held in an upright or head back position during feeding are more prone to aspiration and death.”

And a recent article on Tublr by Big Cat Awareness which cites AZA standards for the hand feeding of big cat cubs and showcases the GFAS standards such as:

“Humans do not enter enclosures with felids. Direct physical interaction is limited to protected forms of contact, by experienced personnel, to minimize the risk of injury.
No direct contact between the public and felids occurs.”

After seeing Arizona aspirate enough milk that she regurgitated it through her nose, none of us who have even the most remote experience with hand rearing felids (domestic, or captive wild) are surprised to hear that she is now having health problems. But BJWT fans seem incapable of linking the fact that Arizona was improperly fed, choked on milk, and subsequently aspirated it, with the fact that she’s now having seizures, which could well be directly caused by the aspiration of the milk. And with Serio blaming “inbreeding” for practically every health care issue he admits an animal has, no scientific information on the risks of his continued hand rearing is being offered to the public who adores him.

It does not help, that media outlets so often just merely brush against the larger topics within their stories, without ever *actually* taking a stand on the matter.

The “backstory” Ms. Moos did for CNN can be broken down to a few sentences:

Eduardo Serio has hundreds of cats who love to kiss him. He has supporters and critics. Lots of celebrities love him because they get to pet big cats. Kelli Heckman says it’s a bad idea, and GFAS says it’s the wrong message. He says he rescues them from circuses and breeders. We couldn’t speak to Serio for the story.

Where, in that article is an actual position on the matter? There isn’t one.

Now, before anyone can say that it’s not the news media’s place to say something is right or wrong, I understand that in this modern era, the “shell game” of responsibility is stronger than ever. But it wasn’t always that way. It used to be that when a news agency reported on something, it was with an intent on ferreting out the truth behind that story, be it a good truth, or a bad truth. And then they stood with the researched truth. Now, that’s not the case. The internet is comprised of “fluff” pieces that either circumnavigate connotations of “good” and “bad” entirely, or arrange a few partial facts and leave the public to sort them out.

Ms. Moos included footage of celebrity “supporters” of BJWT, and she including an “expert” from the GFAS stating that what Serio does is not real conservation. However, she either didn’t research enough to find, or chose to omit facts such as celebrities lashing out at those who try to inform them that they’re participating in bad pseudo-conservation

or the fact that Serio has publicly attacked and threatened to destroy groups, “fierce critics” in Ms. Moos’ words, who speak out against him:

And while Ms. Moos raised questions about where those animals came from, she did not mention the fact that Serio has admitted to buying directly from breeders, and private zoos, or that buying from breeders directly supports the captive breeding of big cats.

This leaves the news media in the very safe position of, well, not actually having a position.

I am grateful to Ms. Moos for having contacted the GFAS and gotten a comment from them. I’m grateful that she brought into question the fact that BJWT is not accredited by the GFAS, and the fact that no one knows where all of those cubs are coming from. I’m grateful that she brought into question the practice of handling big cats as if they’re pets, and allowing celebrities to pet them. If Ms. Moos has interest in seeing firsthand how BJWT followers react to anyone asking even the most minimal questions (something we deal with on a daily basis) here are some of the responses to her own CNN backstory:

I particularly love the last one pictured wherein the commenter say Serio “doesn’t appreciate zoos”. Except for zoos bought by his friends, and from which he then takes more babies to hand raise so he can post more videos of himself playing with them. This is–in Serio’s own words–how some of the cubs he’s currently raising were secured. The first story he gave involved rescuing them from a zoo, and being unable to house the mothers of the cub. Later, however, Serio has admitted that one of his personal friends bought the zoo in question, which would indicate no great risk for the animals, and thus no real reason to remove them from their mothers.

Yes, Ms. Moos’s backstory is a start.

It is not, however, enough to even dent the ego and social media presence of someone who thrives off of being the center of attention on social media sites and in “fluff” pieces of news which only serve to promote him and his status. As of the writing of this article, the “cutesy, this is awesome” versions of the jaguar stalking video have spread around the world, being featured on news sites in Norway, Australia, Germany, Sweden, the UK, Serbia, Chile, Canada, Argentina, Brazil and nearly every state in the US. The video has been shared hundreds of thousands of times, if not millions. BJWT followers are hailing this as evidence of the spread of the “BJWT Nation” and a triumph for them.

A triumph for them.

Not the thousands of wild big cats slaughtered every year. Not the tens of thousands of big cats that languish in captivity. This media frenzy is not a “triumph” for any animal.

All of this attention goes strictly to one group. Eduardo Serio and his millions of worshipers. Which is exactly what Serio wants, and has always wanted. All of the attention on himself and his empire.

For those of us who actually care about animals, the fight against such horrendous misinformation as promoted in this article in the Irish Examiner, continues.

It bares saying that in this post:

Serio threatens those speaking out in opposition of him, saying that he has “unlimited amounts of money” with which to sue us–from another country–until we’ve been destroyed, and that he’ll use those unlimited funds to get rid of us. Yet in the Irish Examiner article it clearly states that he’s “trying to raise money to expand the size of the sanctuary”.

Now, either he has “unlimited amounts of money” or he doesn’t. Either he’s lying about how much money he has that he intends to use to sue those of us who publicly disagree with him, or he’s lying about needing the money to expand the foundation, but you can’t have it both ways.

What sort to “daily abuse” that those like the I.C.A.R.U.S. Foundation deal with am I talking about?

Here’s an example of the rants we deal with, in which Serio rails against “Project Imbecile” for “trashing him” while blatantly lying about the “two women” who comprise “Project Imbecile” (check our articles yourself, we never said what he’s accusing us of saying) and erroneously associates “Project Imbecile” with big cat groups in Tampa. He goes on to say that he’s been accused of using the tiger, Achilles, seen in this video, for publicity, which he claims isn’t true. Despite that he’s making a video about Achilles on social media while talking about how he isn’t using Achilles for publicity. Right after this section, Serio proclaims that the only real reason “Project Imbecile” hates him, is because he’s got 12k videos and photos posted on social media, and millions of followers, and we’re jealous.

Apparently, Serio bases expertise, and conservation on how many friends one has on social media, not what you actually do to aid conservation efforts. In Serio’s world, adding the hashtag #savetigers, or #savelions, or my favorite #notpets to videos of himself rolling around in his own bed with the aforementioned animals apparently somehow saves them, and shows people that they should never be treated as pets. I would link to the full length video, but I can’t find it. It’s either been deleted (something that happens often after a video has been posted) or it’s lost among the hundreds of videos posted since.

This is a vital point that Serio himself makes again and again, though.

He’s successful on social media and has millions of followers, and that is why he has “haters” who question his practices.

To Serio, it’s not about conservation of animals, about proper handling techniques, about captive big cats or about how they aren’t pets. It’s about the fact that he has millions of followers.

It’s about the fact that because he has millions of followers on social media sites, companies are willing to donate products, or services, to him, not because they care about the animals, but because they know that Serio’s followers will eagerly buy and support products that Serio uses and associates with, which will bring them a boost in sales, and money. It’s about the fact that for every one article that raises questions about BJWT, hundreds of ignorant articles are shared celebrating them, and erroneously likening the exploitation they use to a “special bond” never realizing that the animals featured have been hand reared and specifically selected just to be used in those videos. Articles like this one from Today, actually categorize the video and article under “pets” not conservation, something that is actually truthful.

Nothing BJWT does, aside from the ubiquitous hash tagging, has anything to do with conservation. It has to do with pets, and animal exploitation.

This is capitalism at its finest. We’re right back to kids buying Wheaties for no reason besides the fact that there is a celebrity they love on the box. Only in this case, the advertisement isn’t to become a star athlete. The message in this case, is to pet, coddle, play with and fawn over dangerous big cats as if they were pets. It’s to overlook the fact that by buying cubs from breeders, you’re supporting the breeding of captive big cats. It’s to be one of the “cool crowd” and play with big cats like celebrities do. It’s to exploit animals which do not belong in captivity, and would not be there except for people like Eduardo Serio who keeps them like pets, and promote the act of doing so.

The Greatest Griefs Are Those We Cause Ourselves

On May 31, 2016June 21, 2016 By projecticarus2015In animal welfare, Big Cat Public Safety Act, Black Jaguar White Tiger, Bowmanville Zoo, conservation, Conservation Journalism, education, extinction, Facts, Global Environmental Issues, Hands Off Conservation, Hands-on Interaction, stewardship, T.I.G.E.R.S, Tiger Safari, unethical tourism, wildlife crime7 Comments

The titles of today’s post is taken from Sophocles, a common translation of a passage within Oedipus Rex. It is a passage that I can still remember being forced to dissect and expound upon in an entire essay back in high school.

In the days since the horrendous execution of Harambe the above quote has rung in my head repeatedly. Experts are taking sides. The public is divided, and divided again. The zookeepers should have used tranquilizer, the parent should have been watching the child, the zoo should have had higher fencing, a better protocol, the parents should be held accountable and sued. Some radicals (whose comments have been removed from the I.C.A.R.U.S. Facebook page, but I’ve seen the same suggestions elsewhere) suggest that the child should have been shot, rather than Harambe.

But the zoo isn’t responsible for Harambre’s death. Neither are the zookeepers, the parents, or the people who built the enclosure.

I am responsible for Harambre’s death.

So is my sister.

So are my parents.

So is anyone reading this who has ever paid to gain entry into a zoo wherein animals are put on display.

The fact that we as a species believe it is our right to enslave other creatures purely for our amusement is responsible for Harambre’s death.

The concept of zoos didn’t even begin with animals. The very first zoos were often private collections belonging to emperors, kings, tzars, sultanas and the like, and they were often comprised of human slaves captured in far off lands, and then brought to live in cages for the amusement of the wealthy.

These “human zoos” have long been documented, and photographic evidence remains since photography was first invented. Different cultures, races, and those with deformities or strange medical conditions were all fair game for first human zoos, and later sideshows. Many times, the inhabitants of these zoos and sideshows were kidnapped and forced to perform, such as in the case of the Muse Brothers of Roanoke Virginia, a case in which Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey actively participated in the exploitation of the kidnapped and imprisoned brothers.

Eventually, we moved on from exploiting other humans, to exclusively exploiting animals. Decades later, zoos remain extremely popular, even more so due to their own huge public relation campaigns which portray zoos to be the only way in which we can maintain animal species.

Zoos have systematically conditioned the pubic to believe that the only way in which wild animals can exist is under our care, safely protected inside the walls of zoos, and that the only way in which we can teach the public about them is through display of them, and “outreach” wherein the public is allowed to get “up close and personal” with them.

In short, they’ve created the myth that wild animals need us, and cannot be trusted to survive without our direct intervention in their lives.

It is this very reasoning that pseudo-sanctuaries like Black Jaguar White Tiger use in order to justify their actions. They are “rescuing” (though that sometimes means needlessly removing cubs from their mothers) the animals, thus giving them a “better” life than they would have had else wise, and they are “educating the public” (about what, is never very clear, nor does it seem to matter) by handling, playing with, taking photos with, and generally treating the animals as pets, so doing these things are deemed acceptable.

And tragically, despite articles and studies showing that zoos do not, in fact help wild animals, despite situations like the recent killing of two lions in Chile, despite situations like the ongoing disaster at the Yumka Zoo, despite the brutal killing of Harambe at the Cincinnati Zoo, the public keeps paying to go “visit” the animals.

Until the whole of the world embraces the idea that wild animals do not belong in captivity nothing is going to change, and there will eventually be more Harambes.

We are the ones causing all of these deaths. But all we need do in order to assure that there is never another Harambe, is to deny the belief that wild animals are better off “safe” in a captive setting. Any captive setting. This is why the I.C.A.R.U.S. team is so set against any direct interaction. Simply moving animals from a “zoo” setting into a “sanctuary” setting is not necessarily better, either. Not when there is so little oversight, and so few GFAS accredited sanctuaries out there. It is still a form of captivity.

Our goal is to create a future wherein there are no captive wild animals of any kind.

The fact is, that it is only by removing the human factor that we can truly protect wild animals. By keeping them wild, and protecting their habitat, we can save them. Not by breeding and inbreeding them within the walls of zoos or organizations which directly profit from hosting them, and exploiting them.

Harambe’s death was devastating to his species, which is critically endangered. But it wouldn’t have happened if he was not living in a zoo for the amusement of humans. That single factor is what killed him. If Harambe was not in a zoo, he would not be dead, as simple as that. If everyone who is now demanding justice for his death, or accusing those involved of mishandling the situation, simply chose to forever boycott zoos, they could effectively stop future tragedies from ever occurring.

No, animals currently living in zoos can’t just be “set free” into the wild, and yes, research is invaluable to conservation and the preservation of certain species. That does not mean, however, that zoos–as they currently exist–need to remain exactly as they currently exist. Breeding for the sake of pulling in tourists, does not help research, and does create a surplus of animals, many of which quietly disappear, sold into canned hunting, or private ownership. And losing animals due to incidents like the Harambe case does nothing to help sustain critically endangered wild populations.

The public must make a conscientious choice to support accredited sanctuaries, and research groups which do not exploit animals during their endeavors, in order to change the way the process works. It’s all up to the public which is currently so enraged over Harambe’s recent death.

The killing of Cecil the lion launched a huge movement of awareness about the canned hunting industry, and trophy hunting. The killing of Harambe can do the same thing for the travesty of zoos, roadside animal attractions, and pseudo-sanctuaries which condone cub-petting and direct human/animal interactions.

But only if the public decides to do something with their anger and desire for justice.

Your Logic Is Illogical: Why There Will Never Be A Valid Excuse For Cub-Petting

On May 26, 2016June 21, 2016 By projecticarus2015In America's Sloth Sanctuary, animal welfare, Big Cat Public Safety Act, Black Jaguar White Tiger, Bowmanville Zoo, conservation, Conservation Journalism, education, egotourism, Facts, Global Environmental Issues, Hands Off Conservation, Hands-on Interaction, Sloth Sanctuary of Costa Rica, T.I.G.E.R.S, Tiger Safari, tourism, true facts, unethical tourism, wildlife crimeLeave a comment

Bonus points if you get the Spock reference in that title. If not, you can check out Start Trek on Netflix later. Right now keep reading because I want to further discuss something that the I.C.A.R.U.S. team has taken a position on right from the off.

If you’ve been following us for a while, or have read through older blog posts, you’ll know that we are firmly hands-off conservation. Unless a wild animal is receiving medical attention or rehab, we believe that they should not be handled by humans. Ever. Part of the reason we take this stance is that wild animals belong in the wild. But the biggest part of why we take this stance is because:

Conservationists must set an example for the public to follow.

Let’s say you’re a geologist, and your life’s work is protecting places like Monument National Park. You abhor careless tourists, and those who deface the stones of the monuments either by marking on them, moving them, or climbing and damaging them. You’ve joined groups who have petitioned to ban climbers from scaling the stone monuments because having people climb the stone structures damages them, and creates a draw for others to climb them, too.

Then a guy videos himself climbing Delicate Arch. He uploads that video onto social media and in his caption he uses hashtags like #protectourparks #notaplayground #stayoffthestones #saverocks #conservation. He starts making more videos of himself climbing every major stone monument in every park across the country–many of which are banned to climbers–and posts the videos on social media sites for his growing fan base. He starts getting donations to fund his climbing exploits. All the while, he claims to be climbing these fragile stone monuments in order to conserve the stone monuments, and to show people that you should never climb them.

All of his followers agree that no one should ever climb protected stone monuments. Except for Mr. Climber, because he’s an “expert” and “doing it to conserve the monuments, so it’s okay”. And if he takes guests climbing on the monuments with him, that’s okay, too. His followers would all like to climb them, but they know they can’t, unless they’re with Mr. Climber, because he’s doing for a good cause, so if they do it while they’re with him, then they’re doing it for a good cause, too. I mean, he’s got to garner support for his cause, right? And besides, he’s hash tagging everything #notaplayground and #stayoffthestones, so everyone watching knows that “normal” people shouldn’t climb the monuments like he does.

Anyone who speaks out against Mr. Climber, or who questions why he’s damaging stone monuments by climbing them, and then claiming that he’s doing it to protect them, is given death threats, publicly threatened with lawsuits for defamation, and called jealous haters.

Never mind that they’ve been working to protect stone monuments from people climbing them for years before Mr. Climber showed up and started climbing them and damaging them “in the name of conservation”.

If this sounds completely irrational, congratulations, it is completely irrational, and you have a modicum of commonsense. However, if you supplant “climbing stone monuments” with “handling and playing with big cats” you have the precise situation in which groups like I.C.A.R.U.S. and PACH have now found themselves.

Playing with captive wildlife has become the new thing to be seen doing. Every celebrity who is any celebrity, it seems, has joined in on the game. Photos of supposed animals rights defenders cooing over tiger cubs no larger than a deli sub, or lounging on blankets while older cubs use them for warm-blooded furniture is becoming the new normal. In some cases, the celebrities revisit these pseudo-sanctuaries (establishments not GFAS accredited) repeatedly, following the growth of cubs specifically named after them. They tout these “sanctuaries” as being the best there is in conservation. And the actors and actresses often say that they are devoted to animals conservation, which is why they’re playing with cubs at these pseudo-sanctuaries.

The problem is, these pseudo sanctuaries–even ones who manage to legally bear the status of “sanctuary” via shoddy laws and enforcement–are not impacting genuine conservation positively. They’re impacting it negatively.

The rock climber climbing rocks to spread awareness of how people shouldn’t climb rocks is just one analogy of what’s currently going on in conservation circles, but the logic can be applied to literally anything. People don’t rob stores in order to teach others that robbing stores is bad. Men don’t rape women to teach their sons that raping women is bad. No one binge drinks to show the dangers of alcohol, or drives drunk in order to show that drunk driving is bad. People don’t marry child brides in oder to publicize the damaging affects of being a child bride.

There is no facet of society that I could find in researching this article wherein it is acceptable to commit the very acts against which one is speaking. No one takes a child from a situation of abuse, and then abuses them in order to spread awareness about child abuse. No reputable animal rescue takes an animal from a situation of abuse or exploitation, and then abuses or exploits them in order to raise awareness about animals abuse and exploitation.

Yet some of the highest profile pseudo-sanctuaries who are beloved by social media anti-intellectuals do just that.

Any self-proclaimed sanctuary (or foundation which gained non-GFAS accredited sanctuary status under lenient or unenforced laws) who directly handles their animals, allows the public to handle their animals, and/or posts pictures and videos of themselves, or others handling and playing with those animals is not, in fact, helping conservation efforts. They are, instead, actively participating in the exploitation of those animals.

Recently one of these pseudo-sanctuaries publicly admitted on social media that it had removed cubs from mothers–which were being good mothers–because they “did not also have room to house the mothers”. But at the same time, that pseudo-sanctuary also openly admitted that the zoo housing all the animals had been purchased by a friend, and the animals were “safe”. Followers of this pseudo-sanctuary cheered it on as another situation in which the owner was a “hero for saving those poor animals”.

Those of us who think on a more intellectual, rather than “Aaaaaw, good feelings!” level are left with a slew of unanswered questions, the most basic of which is: If the entire zoo was purchased by a rescuer, and the animals therein were safe and secure, why were cubs forcibly removed from their mothers in order to be hand raised by an institute which built its empire on allowing people to play with cubs?

Of course, questions like that go unanswered. The only responses received by anyone inquiring about such things are threats, and hate-speech.

The fact remains, however, that the very logic of publicly doing what you’re supposedly against in order to raise awareness about how no one should do it, is illogical. Aside from the fact that it’s actually completely laughable, it’s also incredibly insulting to people who are trying to stop such widespread behavior, and help animals from being put into those situations.

Which brings to mind another important question: Why are millions of people still supporting these pseudo-sanctuaries? At least part of the answer is the fact that the public–even those who don’t agree with the way the animals are being treated–turn a blind eye on the behavior and simply do nothing. Many do not have the fortitude to raise questions and speak out when they know that it will illicit threats of lawsuits, or actual lawsuits, or character assassination online. Some speak up or ask questions only to be blocked, savagely attacked and cursed and are so shocked by the outrageous response to simple questions that they just move on, making a mental note never to mention the topic again. As for why the supporters of these numerous pseudo-sanctuaries, and non-GFAS establishments continue to defend them, even in the face of rational facts and scientific argument, we just couldn’t tell you.

What I.C.A.R.U.S. can tell you, is that for the sake of the animals, both those remaining in the wild, and those in captivity, we are going to continue doing our jobs and speaking out for them. We’re going to continue battling the illogical with the logical, and eventually reason will win out. That’s how evolution functions.

Unicorns Do Exist, And Other Unpopular Truths

On May 7, 2016May 8, 2016 By projecticarus2015In animal welfare, collaboration, conservation, Conservation Journalism, education, Facts, Global Environmental Issues, Hands Off Conservation, International Summit, stewardship, wildlife crime1 Comment

Unicorns exist, and I’ve done the research needed to say it’s true. The very name Monodon monoceros is derived from the Greek “one-tooth, one-horn”. Many ancient sea charts depict narwhals and some even refer to them as “sea-unicornes”. The narwhal’s horn was historically cherished and highly valued, often considered magical. Narwhal horns supposedly had the power to cure any disease, as well as neutralize poisons and bestow wisdom upon any who drank from vessels created from them. These facts, when viewed objectively clearly show that the unicorn many people think of today, is really just a bastardization of the narwhal itself. There are even historical references to the fact that the species might have evolved to exist both on land and in the sea. So, the truth is, narwhals are living unicorns.

Now, you don’t have to agree with me on the matter of unicorns existing. You don’t have to subscribe to that truth. We are still, predominantly, living in a free world, so you can choose not to agree or believe that unicorns exist.

However, choosing not to subscribe to someone else’s position on a matter does not mean that the truths they’ve presented are somehow untrue. You don’t get to decide someone is lying simply because you don’t like the idea which their facts support. Belief is up for grabs, but facts that have been presented don’t suddenly become not-facts. You can dispute them, if you really want to, but you can’t change the fact that they are facts.

For example:

Fact 1) Narwhals (Monodon monoceros) are currently swimming in the oceans.

Fact 2) The scientific name, Monodon monoceros is derived from the Greek “one-tooth one-horn”.

Fact 3) Many medieval manuscripts and medieval sea charts refer to, or illustrate the narwhal as being an animal of the ocean, sometimes referred to as a “sea-unicorne” and narwhal horns were considered to be magical and often sold to be used in the prevention of poisons, to heal, etc.

You can laugh and say that narwhals are not unicorns or you can agree with my position that narwhals are unicorns.

What you cannot do, is say that the facts I’ve presented are not scientifically accepted facts, and that I’m lying and not telling the truth.

You don’t get to just dismiss a truth because you don’t agree with it. You can extrapolate your own truth as derived from presented facts, but you don’t have the power to negate reality just because you don’t like how it’s being presented. That’s not how the world works. If it was, then simply naming your kid John Mark Millionaire Smith would somehow actually make him a millionaire. Don’t get me wrong, it’d be nice, but that’s not how it works.

The ICARUS team is, and always has been, concerned with facts. With gathering those facts and then presenting them, and the way they tangibly affect conservation, along with the wild animals of the world, and the captive wild animals of the world. In the matter of captive wild animals, we adhere to a strict set of guidelines as outlined by the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries, in dictating our definition of a sanctuary. We’ve made this position explicitly clear in even our early posts, and we’ve consistently backed up that position with facts and research.

Obviously not everyone will agree with our position and our truths. That’s fine. However, our position and truths have been built on facts, and as such, they can’t be obliterated simply by hating our position and our members because we publicly present that position.

Similarly, in the cases where confirmable facts could not be secured even through dedicated research, we have made the absence of those important facts a focal point. Sometimes the absence of securable facts is as evidentiary as facts which can be cross-referenced multiple times. In cases where more questions than answers were found in our research, we have left the interpretation of the truth up to our readers, stating that for whatever reason, we could not find reliable facts, and thus we could never know the truth about whatever subject was being discussed.

Again, the fact that we sometimes present questions we cannot answer–and clearly state that we cannot answer them due to lack of attainable and confirmable facts–is not a lie. You literally cannot be lying about something if you simply present questions you have and then state that you can’t answer those questions because you are lacking–for whatever reason–verifiable facts. All you are doing at that point is raising questions, something that occurs in journalism all the time. Engaging the public and encouraging them to think on their own and ask questions is what conservation journalism is all about.

The ICARUS team began as an idea, and it has grown into an establishment. We’ve held our first International Summit, and we are gaining members across the globe every day. We hope that our readers will continue with us on our journey into a world where eventually there will be no captive wild animals, but instead only wild animals in the wild, where they belong, permanently protected from human interference and encroachment.

The ICARUS Team

Addicted To The Limelight

On May 3, 2016May 25, 2016 By projecticarus2015In America's Sloth Sanctuary, animal welfare, Big Cat Public Safety Act, Black Jaguar White Tiger, Bowmanville Zoo, conservation, Hands Off Conservation, Hands-on Interaction, sloths, stewardship, T.I.G.E.R.S, Tiger Safari, tourism, unethical tourismLeave a comment

Justin Bieber made headlines again this weekend after photographs of him posing with an adult tiger on a leash hit the internet. Though the tiger photo caused the biggest stir, there were other exotic animals “rented” for the birthday bash hosted by Bieber’s father. Many people ostracized Bieber not only for supporting the exploitation of captive exotic animals, but also for supporting the Bowmanville zoo, from whence the animals for the party were rented.

Here’s the thing, though. Bieber doesn’t care if people are angry with him, what he cares about is that people are talking about him.

Getting attention from the public is not just something celebrities monopolize, either. It has also become the sole endeavor of those who exploit captive exotic animals on social media. This is one reason that people or groups who post to multiple sites, multiple times a day, end up with tens of thousands, or millions of followers who fawn over them and support everything they do without question. This addiction to the limelight has nothing whatsoever to do with conservation, it has to do with being the center of attention.

Anyone who keeps abreast of the use of social media sites by pseudo-sanctuaries is aware that Black Jaguar White Tiger has cornered the market on both “cute” videos, and “defensive attack” videos. Founder Eduardo Serio’s obsession with posting videos and pictures which promote his own interactions with his animals, and his own “amazingness” as well has his petty and often shamefully immature threats to “destroy” or otherwise discredit anyone who speaks out against him has been documented ad nauseam. When Serio isn’t talking about how awesome he is, he’s badmouthing anyone who dares suggest that he, nor his “work” is quite as awesome as he thinks.

But Serio isn’t the only pseudo–not GFAS accredited–sanctuary owner who uses social media to further their own interests, he’s just arguably the most obnoxious.

The Bowmanville Zoo, where Bieber’s father rented the exotic animals for his birthday party this weekend has an Instagram account, which like many other pseudo-sanctuaries, hosts an array of photos most of which involve humans holding or interacting with captive exotic animals. Now, as far as “successful” social media accounts go, Bowmanville’s is lacking, possibly due to the recent animal cruelty charges levied against its owner. Chances are, the Bowmanville Zoo won’t be making any kind of comeback on social media anytime soon. That does not, however, negate the fact that they unabashedly exploited their animals in order to gain attention while their accounts were active.

Another zoo that is still very active in the use of social media for the exploitation of captive exotic animals, is Tiger Safari: Oklahoma’s Interactive Zoological Park. Read: Big Petting Zoo. Tiger Safari seems to favor Facebook, over Instagram, for its animal exploitation needs. Both accounts have been untended recently, but their Facebook page, in particular, is chock full of photos of guests holding baby big cats, riding tortoises, and cradling kangaroos. The only focus, is the interaction between the public and the animals.

Unlike Tiger Safari, the Zoological Wildlife Conservation Center (you might remember them from this article) is right on top of updating their Facebook page with, you guessed it, people holding and interacting with captive exotic animals!

You might also remember that two Carpathian lynxes were listed for sale by the one of the three entities that share a location with ZWCC.

Despite that they’ve supposedly stopped allowing the public to directly interact with certain animals, the ZWCC obviously has no problem with directly handling animals themselves, or with posting videos of such interactions on social media.

Safari’s Sanctuary Zoo also has a Facebook page filled with questionable human/animal interactions, most of which are available to the public, for a fee. Animals are carted around to various locations and subsequently used as props for photographs and to gain public support for a pseudo-sanctuary which has, like all the others, a slew of violations, accusation and fines in its background.

All four of these “zoological parks” share the fact that they claim to be dedicated to conservation, while they focus on allowing direct interactions between visitors and captive exotic animals. In all four cases, if you removed the direct interaction factor, you would have little if any remaining platform. The zoos simply don’t function as anything except as a vector for human/animal interactions. Well, aside from the continued breeding of captive exotic animals, and the sale of them, and any other possible form of exploitation.

Basically, they exist through the means of exploitation, not for the purpose of conservation.

While Facebook serves as the social media platform for some, there is no social media site that lends itself to captive exotic animal exploitation quite like Instagram. Allowing users to upload both videos and photographs, while collecting followers, and comments, Instagram is nearly limitless in its uses for putting oneself “out there”. The most exploitive accounts run the gamut from those hosted by pseudo-sanctuaries, to private citizens. But they all share a common thread: using captive exotic animals to get attention.

T.I.G.E.R.S. has some 42,000 followers (paltry in comparison to BJWT’s 5 million mindless worshipers) but T.I.G.E.R.S. is steadily gaining a wider, and wider base. With an endless supply of “cutesy” videos like wolf puppies playing with big cat cubs, and mountain lion cubs playing with baby chimpanzees, Doc Antle continues to tap into his formula of “unlikely animal friends” while ignorant followers oooh and awww over the uploads. Then there is the ever popular “babe with a wild cat” angle, something else for which Antle is well known. Just like other pseudo-sanctuaries, these videos are carefully hash-tagged with things like #savejaguars #notpets and #wildlivesmatter. Never mind that the cats in the videos and photos have often been bred just to be exploited, they’re being treated exactly like pets, and they have no impact whatsoever on wild animals of the same species, nor does the pseudo-sanctuary posting the photo or video have any actual impact on the plight of wild animals of the highlight species. Other than possibly damaging them.

Above and beyond the use of Instagram by pseudo-sanctuaries in their constant hunt for limelight, it has become a go-to outlet for captive exotic animal breeders and sellers. Accounts like Luxurypetss NjExoticpets and Fabelpetgallery actually use Instagram to sell live animals, with seemingly little regard for state regulations. In the case of Luxurypetss, captive bred big cats feature prominently, including servals, caracals, savannahs, and bengals. Unsurprisingly, a huge percent of comments go something like “I want one!!!” without any sense that the person commenting has a grasp of either how difficult it is to care for such cat, or how the continued breeding of captive big cats can adversely affect wild populations. Or, in the case of breeds like savannahs, which are created by crossing wild and domestic breeds, how inherited defects and diseases can shorten lifespans, and complicate the lives of the cats.

This detached sort of emulation is one reason that the ICARUS team is steadfast in our hands-off conservation policies. Even those who do not allow public interaction with the animals in their care, but do use social media to show themselves interacting with their animals attract not public interest in wild conservation, but rather, interest specifically in also being allowed to interact with captive wild animals. Photos like this one put the focus on interacting with captive exotic animals, not protecting wild animals. And tragically, the comments reveal the actual impact they have on the impressionable public. Instead of asking how to protect existing wild lions, the commenters say things like: “best work experience ever” “I want one too” “dream job””they say thank you!” (in regard to the lion “hugging” the man in the photograph) “I want to be you””Goals” and so on and so forth. All comments associated with the intention and goal of also hugging a lion. It’s a situation of monkey see, monkey do. And of hero-worship.

In preparation for this article, I sat down and sorted through the comments of Instagram photos and videos depicting direct interaction between the posters and their animals on accounts maintained by T.I.G.E.R.S., Kevin Richardson, and BJWT. Aside from the various hashtags like #savelions #savejaguars #savetigers, on the photos I examined (and at the time I examined them, because comments continually evolve) precisely 0% of the comments pertained to conservation in any format. Roughly 45%-67% of the comments were nothing but flattering compliments to the owners of the account. Anywhere from 12% up to 25% of the comments conveyed a desire to do exactly what was portrayed in the photo or video.

Clearly, seeing “experts” directly interact with captive exotic animals in no way encourages the public to avoid interacting with captive exotic animals themselves. It only increases interest in it. To make matters worse, there are virtual Instagram “celebrities” who don’t even pretend to have interest in conservation. People like humaidalbuqaish and swakll use Instagram as a way to showcase their own private zoos of captive exotic animals. And aside from the occasional naysayer (who often receives brutal abuse for questioning what’s going on) by and large, the responses to photos and videos of privately owned captive exotic animals are more along the lines of “can I visit your house?” “living the dream” “can I visit and play with your lions?” and “OMG I WANT ONE TOO”.

And so the cycle of limelight addiction continues. Pseudo-conservationists (whose “sanctuaries are not GFAS accredited) continue to post photos and videos of themselves playing with their animals, right alongside private owners posting videos and photos of themselves playing with their animals, and somehow the public is supposed to get the message that owning and playing with captive exotic animals is actually a bad idea. Which, of course, doesn’t happen.

What does happen, is a lot of limelight shined on those posting the photos and videos.

Which is exactly what they wanted all along.

	projecticarus2015 on Money Over Morals: Colombia’s…
	Wendy Turner on Money Over Morals: Colombia’s…
	Wendy Turner on Money Over Morals: Colombia’s…
	projecticarus2015 on Money Over Morals: Colombia’s…
	Wendy Turner on Money Over Morals: Colombia’s…

	projecticarus2015 on Money Over Morals: Colombia’s…
	Wendy Turner on Money Over Morals: Colombia’s…
	Wendy Turner on Money Over Morals: Colombia’s…
	projecticarus2015 on Money Over Morals: Colombia’s…
	Wendy Turner on Money Over Morals: Colombia’s…

I.C.A.R.U.S Inc.

Tag: Big Cats