Animals

Subterms

    Latest story

    125 Shares140 Views

    Florida Wildlife Officers Kill 3 Black Bears After Deadly Attack

    by

    The state’s wildlife agency will test the bears’ DNA to determine if any of them had attacked and killed an 89-year-old man.Wildlife officers in Florida have killed three black bears in the southwestern part of the state, less than 24 hours after a man was killed by a bear in the same area, officials said on Tuesday.It was not immediately clear whether any of the three bears were involved in the attack on Monday morning, in which Robert Markel, 89, was killed in a wooded, unincorporated part of Collier County.The bears’ remains were being sent to Gainesville, Fla., for DNA testing, according to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, to determine if there was a connection to what the agency described as an extremely rare attack.The attack on Mr. Markel was the first time a bear had killed a human in Florida’s history, Mike Orlando, the bear management program coordinator for the commission, said during a news conference on Tuesday.The commission is overseeing the investigation into the deadly encounter, which drew a heavy presence of wildlife officers to Jerome, Fla., just north of Everglades City, Fla. Mr. Markel’s dog was also killed the same morning by a bear, though it was not clear whether they were attacked by the same one.Mr. Markel’s daughter called 911 after she saw the attack on his dog and could not find her father, the local television station WPLG reported.Wildlife officers set up traps and cameras in the area where the attacks occurred, officials said during the news conference.Florida is home to more than 4,000 black bears, according to the wildlife commission. It has tracked them from the Panhandle and Ocala National Forest in the state’s midsection, to Big Cypress National Preserve in South Florida, which was near where the attack on Monday occurred.Wildlife officials on Tuesday reminded people of what they should do if they encounter a bear, which can come into contact with humans and pets while prowling for food.“Stand your ground,” Mr. Orlando said. “Make yourself look large. Talk to the bear in a calm fashion. Do not run. Do not play dead.”In a worst-case scenario, he said, people should take action.“Even if a bear is touching you,” he said, “you need to fight back.” More

    More stories

    • 88 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      We Can Have More Humane Chicken Eggs

      by

      Every spring, I’d eagerly await my special package — a box that arrived peeping. Inside were just-hatched chicks, still egg-shaped and covered in down.I would raise the chicks in my home office. During our first month together, there was always a chick or two in my sweater, on my shoulder or perching atop my head. They considered me their mother.Later, when they moved outside to a coop, they ranged freely over the eight acres my husband and I own in rural New Hampshire. Whenever they caught sight of me, they would greet me as if I were a member of the Beatles, racing toward me with wings outstretched. When they began to lay eggs, I was elated. I had gotten the hens to keep me company, but nothing tastes better than an egg from a free-range chicken you know personally. I’ve been a vegetarian since 1980, so I felt great about accepting this gift from my sweet little flock, which I called the Ladies.I had no idea that while the Ladies enjoyed shelter and sunshine, fresh bugs and freedom, their newborn brothers faced a gruesome fate shared by 6.5 billion male chicks around the world each year. These male birds can’t lay eggs but also aren’t raised for meat. Because they come from egg-laying breeds, they don’t grow big or fast enough to be used for food. So they are ground up alive or gassed to death.The practice is especially egregious because unlike many baby mammals and songbirds, which are born blind, naked and helpless, newborn chicks are capable little creatures. Within hours of hatching, they are standing, running and successfully finding food. When they are thrown into the grinder or gasser at 1-day old, these male chicks are alert and aware.Unwittingly, I was complicit in this monstrosity.The good news is that a new technology can help end it. Called in ovo sexing, it determines the sex of the chick embryo long before it hatches, allowing the producers to get rid of the male eggs and hatch only the females. Eggs from in ovo sexed hens have been available in some European countries since 2018 and now make up about 20 percent of Europe’s market, driven in large part by bans on chick culling in several countries, including Germany and France. Come summer, the first such eggs are due to become available in U.S. supermarkets.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump administration moves to narrow protections for endangered species

      by

      The Trump administration is planning to narrow protections for endangered species, in a move that environmentalists say would accelerate extinction by opening up critical habitats for development, logging, mining and other uses.The proposal is the latest deregulatory effort by Donald Trump, who has made it a priority to dismantle endangered species protections as part of a broader quest to boost energy extraction and industrial access, even in the US’s most sensitive and vulnerable natural areas.The new proposal from the US Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service offers a new interpretation of the of the 1973 Endangered Species Act, which would strike habitat destruction from regulations.At issue is a long-standing definition of two terms in the Endangered Species Act: “harm” and “take”. “Harm” has meant altering or destroying the places those species live. “Take”, meanwhile, is a term used in regulations to denote any actions that include hunting, capturing, wounding or killing a protected species, which has included altering or destroying the places those species live.The US Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service said in a proposed rule, issued on Wednesday, that habitat modification and destruction should not be considered “harm” because it is not the same as intentionally targeting a species, which is defined as “take”.“The existing regulatory definition of ‘harm,’ which includes habitat modification, runs contrary to the best meaning of the statutory term ‘take,’” the proposal says.Challenges to the legalese could enable a much more limited application of the regulations, which would free industry to continue or begin activities that would impact habitat.But habitat loss is considered the strongest driver of species loss. Striking the word or changing these definitions could cause catastrophic damage to species already close to the brink.“If [you] say harm doesn’t mean significant habitat degradation or modification, then it really leaves endangered species out in the cold,” Noah Greenwald, endangered species director at the Center for Biological Diversity said, adding that the proposal “cuts the heart out of the Endangered Species Act”.Environmentalists argue that the definition of “take” has always included actions that harm species, and the definition of “harm” has been upheld by the US supreme court.Spotted owls and Florida panthers both are protected because the current rule forbids habitat destruction, Greenwald said. The legislation has helped safeguard more than 1,700 species and their habitats, preventing 99% of those listed from going extinct, most famously the bald eagle.But if the new rule is adopted, someone who logs in a forest or builds a development would be unimpeded as long as they could say they didn’t intend to harm an endangered species.The proposed rule was expected to be published in the Federal Register on Thursday, kicking off a 30-day public comment period. Environmental groups are already planning to challenge the rule in court if it’s adopted. Questions remain about whether the Trump administration is legally able to repeal a rule already upheld by the supreme court.The proposal “threatens a half-century of progress in protecting and restoring endangered species”, said Drew Caputo, an attorney at Earthjustice. He added that the law currently “recognizes the common-sense concept that destroying a forest, beach, river, or wetland that a species relies on for survival constitutes harm to that species”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIt’s not the first attempt by the administration to undermine protections. One of Trump’s first executive orders after returning to the White House in January, declared a national energy emergency even amid a record glut of oil and gas drilling, and calls for the endangered species committee, a group nicknamed the “God squad”, to meet at least quarterly.This committee, which would be led by US interior secretary Doug Burgum, five other senior officials from different government agencies and a representative from an affected state, has rarely been used but has the power to override the Endangered Species Act even if it results in the extinction of a species, hence its existential nickname.Changing the rule could prove an easier strategy to override protections. It could also threaten conservation areas kept safe because of the species that call them home.The issue is of particular concern in Hawaii. The islands have more endangered species than any other state – 40% of the nation’s federally listed threatened and endangered species – even though Hawaii has less than 1% of the land area of the US, according to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.Maxx Philips, Hawaii and Pacific Islands director for the Center for Biological Diversity, said removing these safeguards will accelerate Hawaii’s extinction crisis and erode the biological and cultural heritage of the islands.She pointed to the example of tiny native bees that forage on and pollinate coastal dune plants. Very little oceanfront property remains undeveloped and what is left tends to be fragmented pockets. Other listed species living on the shoreline – like green sea turtles – could also lose their homes if protections are removed.“Habitat is life, right?” she said. “And without it, there is no recovery and without recovery, there is only extinction.”Oliver Milman and the Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 150 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      4 Men Charged With Trying to Smuggle Thousands of Ants From Kenya

      by

      The men, including two Belgian teenagers, pleaded guilty to smuggling thousands of live queen ants, which the Kenyan authorities said were destined for markets in Europe and Asia.Four men, including two Belgian teenagers, pleaded guilty in a Kenyan court this week on charges of trafficking thousands of live ants, which the Kenyan authorities said they had intended to sell as pets. The Belgians, David Lornoy and Seppe Lodewijckx, both 19, were found with the insects this month at a guesthouse near Lake Naivasha, one of several popular nature areas in Kenya. They had thousands of live queen ants, packed in syringes and test tubes designed to keep the insects alive for months, according to the Kenya Wildlife Service.The court said the ants were worth the equivalent of around $7,000 and, citing intelligence reports, said they had been destined for exotic pet markets in Europe and Asia. The unusual case underscores what Kenyan officials say is a trend in wildlife smuggling, which has often been associated with high-value species and animal products: There is money to be made in smuggling smaller, lesser-known species, too. Live beetles have been found hidden in snack packs from Japan; live bits of coral are more and more often being secreted through U.S. ports. “This case highlights a growing global threat: the biopiracy of native species,” the Kenya Wildlife Service said in a statement. It said that the unauthorized collection of the ants “not only undermines Kenya’s sovereign rights over its biodiversity but also deprives local communities and research institutions of potential ecological and economical benefits.”The queen ants the men pleaded guilty to smuggling are highly valued by rare insect collectors, who often keep colonies of the ants in formicariums, or artificial ant farms, where they can be observed building complex colonies and tunnel systems. The species they were collecting, the Messor cephalotes native to Kenya, is the largest harvester ant in the world. Two other men, Dennis N’gang’a of Kenya, and Duh Hung Nguyen, a Vietnamese citizen, were also charged in a separate case with illegally collecting ants and dealing in live wildlife species. They were found with hundreds of live garden ants, worth around $1,500, the wildlife service said.In announcing the arrests, the Kenya Wildlife Service released photos of a living room littered with test tubes, cotton swabs and packing materials. The delicately packed tubes — some containing multiple live ants in separate compartments — were designed to sustain the animals for around two months, the wildlife service said. In a court appearance on Tuesday, Mr. Lornoy and Mr. Lodewijckx appeared distraught and said they had been collecting the ants for fun, The Associated Press reported. They pleaded guilty and were awaiting sentencing. Edwin Okoth contributed reporting. More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Grandmother Is Stranded When Her Parrot ‘Plucky’ Can’t Board Flight

      by

      Plucky, an African gray parrot, accompanied its owner on a Frontier Airlines flight to Puerto Rico in January. But a gate agent would not let it on board the return flight.Maria Fraterrigo, a grandmother from the Bronx, was booked in seat 4A on a flight from San Juan to Kennedy International Airport on Saturday night. But when she got to the gate for her return flight to New York, she said, an agent for Frontier Airlines stopped her.Her companion, an African gray parrot named Plucky, which Ms. Fraterrigo has claimed as an emotional support animal and can say the names of her grandchildren, was on a no-fly list.Despite being allowed to bring Plucky on her outbound Frontier flight without incident in January, she said, the agent told her that parrots were among several types of birds and other animals prohibited by the airline. She said that rule essentially left her stranded.“This guy from the counter yells at me and tells me, ‘You’re not going to make this flight,’ ” Ms. Fraterrigo, 81, recalled in a phone interview on Wednesday. “ ‘Give it to somebody. Get rid of it.’ I said, ‘No way, I’m not going to get rid of my baby.’”For four days, her travel plans were stuck in limbo, until Frontier appeared to have relented, ticketing her on another flight scheduled for Wednesday night. Plucky was expected to be in tow when Ms. Fraterrigo, completing her first trip since losing her husband in 2019, finally got to board.Her situation illustrated the tension between airlines and passengers over what kinds of animals are permitted on commercial flights, which at times might have gotten confused with a petting zoo until the federal government tightened rules for service animals on them. Miniature horses, pigs and other unusual pets found their way onto planes, but an emotional support peacock did not.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Who will win bigly from Trump tariffs? | Brief letters

      by

      After Donald Trump raised a range of tariffs, the US stock market tanked (Report, 4 April). If Trump rescinded these, within weeks the stock market would bounce back. Wouldn’t it be interesting to know in advance when that was going to happen? Somebody could make a great deal of money.John KinderRomsey, Hampshire In the past, we referred to the ABC of the cost of living crisis: Austerity, Brexit, Covid. Now, it seems, we have to add D for Donald and E for Elon. I don’t want to think about what F might stand for.Ruth EversleyPaulton, Somerset Re your article (‘She treats everyone with a deep growl’: can you train an angry cat to be more sociable?, 30 March), sometimes it just requires patience: in his 20th year my adopted feral cat Twix finally gave up being antisocial and climbed on to my lap for a cuddle, and there he remains at every opportunity, living his best life.Rosemary JacksonLondon Re your report (Birmingham declares major incident over bin strike as piles of waste grow, 31 March), we can now acknowledge that, like medical staff, binmen are essential frontline workers, without whom public health collapses? The solution to the impasse? Attlee got it right. Stuff their mouths with gold.Jenny MittonSutton Coldfield, West Midlands I hadn’t noticed seat heights on Mastermind (Letters, 1 April) but I comment every week to my wife about the amount of manspreading, to the extent that when we board a bus or train, we often say quietly to each other: “A few potential Mastermind contestants here.”Ray JenkinCardiff More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Elephants and rhinos at increased risk of poaching due to Trump funding cuts, groups say

      by

      Environmentalists have urged the Trump administration to reverse its decision to cut off funding for key conservation work aimed at saving iconic at-risk species, including anti-poaching patrols for vulnerable rhinos and elephants.International conservation grants administered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) have been frozen by Trump, throwing conservation non-profits around the world into disarray. These grants, amounting to tens of millions of dollars, help protect imperiled species in countries that lack the US’s financial muscle to combat threats such as poaching.An environmental group, the Center for Biological Diversity, said it would sue the FWS if the funding isn’t restored. It said the money is vital for patrols safeguarding rhinos in Africa, which have suffered a 94% population decline over the past century, as well as efforts to reduce human-elephant conflict and help conserve species such as freshwater turtles and monarch butterflies.“The Trump administration’s funding freeze for anti-poaching patrols and other international conservation work is maddening, heartbreaking and very illegal,” said Sarah Uhlemann, international program director at the center.“These Fish and Wildlife Service funds help protect elephants, rhinos and other animals across the globe that Americans love. No one voted to sacrifice the world’s most iconic wildlife to satisfy some unelected billionaire’s reckless power trip.”In a letter to the FWS, the center said that the funding halt violated the US Endangered Species Act, which requires the government to consider at-risk species in its decisions, and flouted proper agency procedure in rescinding funding. “This insanity has to stop or some of the world’s most endangered animals will die,” said Uhlemann.The freeze on grants is part of a broader crackdown on US foreign aid by Trump and his billionaire backer Elon Musk. A judge has ordered the freeze to be reversed, although the administration has yet to comply with the directive.In his previous term in office, Trump sought to weaken the Endangered Species Act and has set about trying to bypass the conservation law during his latest term. The president has demanded that a little-known committee, nicknamed “the God squad” due to its ability to decide if a species becomes extinct, help push through fossil fuel and logging projects in the US even if they doom a species.Experts have said that the use of the committee in this way is likely illegal. A court case may now unfold over the stymying of FWS grants for international conservation, too.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAlongside illegal poaching, legal hunting tours in Africa are popular with some Americans, including Donald Trump Jr, who was pictured holding a severed elephant’s tail more than a decade ago.The FWS was contacted for comment on the potential lawsuit. More

    • 100 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Birds of Paradise Glow on Their Mating Parade

      by

      Elaborate poses, tufts of feathers, flamboyant shuffles along an immaculate forest floor — male birds-of-paradise have many ways to woo a potential mate.But now, by examining prepared specimens at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, scientists have discovered what could be yet another tool in the kit of the tropical birds — a visual effect known as photoluminescence.Sometimes called biofluorescence in living things, this phenomenon occurs when an object absorbs high-energy wavelengths of light and re-emits them as lower energy wavelengths.Biofluorescence has already been found in various species of fishes, amphibians and even mammals, from bats to wombats.Interestingly, birds remain woefully understudied when it comes to the optical extras. Until now, no one had looked for the glowing property in birds-of-paradise, which are native to Australia, Indonesia and New Guinea and are famous for their elaborate mating displays.In a study published on Tuesday in the journal Royal Society Open Science, researchers examined prepared specimens housed at the American Museum of Natural History and found evidence of biofluorescence in 37 of 45 birds-of-paradise species.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Georgia Man Sentenced to 475 Years for Dogfighting

      by

      Vincent Lemark Burrell was found guilty last month of more than 100 counts of dogfighting and animal cruelty after dozens of dogs were found in poor condition at his home.A Georgia man who the authorities said kept more than 100 dogs in cruel conditions at his home has been sentenced to 475 years in prison after being found guilty last month of dogfighting and cruelty to animals, prosecutors said.The man, Vincent Lemark Burrell, 57, of Dallas, Ga., was found guilty by a jury on Jan. 30 of 93 counts of dogfighting and 10 counts of cruelty to animals.The verdict came after a four-day trial in which the authorities said they had found 107 dogs, many of them underweight, scarred and missing teeth, chained up in his yard in 2022, the Paulding County District Attorney’s Office said in a statement.Judge Dean C. Bucci of the Paulding County Superior Court gave Mr. Burrell the maximum possible sentence.The authorities had been acting on a search warrant issued after an Amazon driver raised concerns about the welfare of the dogs, which the driver said he saw chained in the yard, according to the statement.Officers sent to Mr. Burrell’s house in Dallas, which is about 32 miles outside of Atlanta, found the dogs, most of them pit bulls, without access to food or water, the Paulding County Sheriff’s Office said at the time.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More