-0...9-
Bambi Update
Many of you know a Wisconsin woman in a hunting family rescued a fawn when its' mother and sister were killed by a car. She has it in a DNR approved pen on her farm, it comes to her when it hears its' name. "Bambi" eats from their hands and generally has become the family pet.
The DNR says no one in this state is allowed to relate to wild animals in any way except to kill them. The DNR is spending our tax dollars in a Court action so they can take the fawn and kill it. They found it impossible to find any exception in their rules to allow these taxpayers to befriend a wild animal.
These are a small group of people who did everything the DNR told them to do and still are being persecuted as are the wildlife rehabilitators with the 5 fawns upnorth:
Ilene Smith in Columbus, and her Attorney, Gary Schmaus,
Dale Schneider the VET,
Scott Fitzgerald 1-888-291-3489 representative
Steve Fotti 1 608 266 2401 representative
Mary Bell, a wildlife rehabilitator.
Here is the actual sequence of events to date:
The Smith's sued for an Injunction preventing the DNR from taking Bambi when the DNR refused to allow them to keep the deer despite their DNR approved pen and application for a game farm permit.
The matter is before Judge Albert in a Dane County Court.
The DNR filed a Motion to Dismiss the Request for an Injunction with a brief in opposition.
The Smiths filed a reply brief in support of their Request for an injunction.
Then there was a Hearing on the matter of whether the request for an injunction should be dismissed.
At that hearing, Judge Albert asked both parties to submit additional briefs on the question of whether the doctrine of equitable estoppel applied to the question of whether the request for an injunction should be dismissed.
Equitable Estoppel is the doctrine by which a person may be precluded by act, silence, or conduct from asserting a right which he otherwise may have had.
The Smiths have submitted their brief on the question of equitable estoppel and the DNR must submit their reply brief by April 22, 2005. Then the first decision the Court makes is whether the Smiths even have a right to be heard.
January 19, 2005, was the last time Mike Miller covered the story for "The Capital Times" . I wrote him and asked what happened and when was he going to write another story?
Here is his answer:
Virginia,
No, I have not written anything recently but I do continue to check on the status of the case.
Dane County Circuit Court Judge John Albert turned down the DNR's request to dismiss the Smith's injunction and both sides have submitted motions for summary judgment to be granted in their favor.
Summary judgment is granted in cases where the facts are not in dispute and the judge decides the issues of law.
It could very well happen in this case. When it does, we will have a story. Mike Miller
The DNR says no one in this state is allowed to relate to wild animals in any way except to kill them. The DNR is spending our tax dollars in a Court action so they can take the fawn and kill it. They found it impossible to find any exception in their rules to allow these taxpayers to befriend a wild animal.
These are a small group of people who did everything the DNR told them to do and still are being persecuted as are the wildlife rehabilitators with the 5 fawns upnorth:
Ilene Smith in Columbus, and her Attorney, Gary Schmaus,
Dale Schneider the VET,
Scott Fitzgerald 1-888-291-3489 representative
Steve Fotti 1 608 266 2401 representative
Mary Bell, a wildlife rehabilitator.
Here is the actual sequence of events to date:
The Smith's sued for an Injunction preventing the DNR from taking Bambi when the DNR refused to allow them to keep the deer despite their DNR approved pen and application for a game farm permit.
The matter is before Judge Albert in a Dane County Court.
The DNR filed a Motion to Dismiss the Request for an Injunction with a brief in opposition.
The Smiths filed a reply brief in support of their Request for an injunction.
Then there was a Hearing on the matter of whether the request for an injunction should be dismissed.
At that hearing, Judge Albert asked both parties to submit additional briefs on the question of whether the doctrine of equitable estoppel applied to the question of whether the request for an injunction should be dismissed.
Equitable Estoppel is the doctrine by which a person may be precluded by act, silence, or conduct from asserting a right which he otherwise may have had.
The Smiths have submitted their brief on the question of equitable estoppel and the DNR must submit their reply brief by April 22, 2005. Then the first decision the Court makes is whether the Smiths even have a right to be heard.
January 19, 2005, was the last time Mike Miller covered the story for "The Capital Times" . I wrote him and asked what happened and when was he going to write another story?
Here is his answer:
Virginia,
No, I have not written anything recently but I do continue to check on the status of the case.
Dane County Circuit Court Judge John Albert turned down the DNR's request to dismiss the Smith's injunction and both sides have submitted motions for summary judgment to be granted in their favor.
Summary judgment is granted in cases where the facts are not in dispute and the judge decides the issues of law.
It could very well happen in this case. When it does, we will have a story. Mike Miller
posted by Greenconsciousness
at 7:39 PM - Link
1 Comments:
deer farms kill deer and that is OK because the DNR is all about killing for fun and profit - if they let people love animals maybe it would reduce the public tolerance for killing.
Humane Societies don't take wild animals they would have to find a private sanctuary but they love it and want to make sure it lives a good life with them - (there is hunting and trapping allowed in the govt. sanctuaries)
Post a Comment