March 30, 2001

Dr. Robert Gibbens, Supervisor
Western Region, APHIS/USDA
9580 Micron Ave., Suite J
Sacramento, CA 95827

Via Facsimile and Certified Mail

Dear Dr. Gibbens:

Please consider this a formal complaint against Six Flags Marine World (SFMW) by In Defense of Animals and an official request for an investigation of the numerous Animal Welfare Act (AWA) violations attested to in the sworn affidavits of two former employees of the Land Animals Keeping Department at the park. These affidavits attest to animal beatings, neglect, suffering and terror caused by inadequate veterinary care, improper housing, mishandling by untrained and unqualified personnel, and exposure to noise from thrill rides and growing crowds at the park. As you know, this testimony must be considered as legal evidence by your agency.

Along with the affidavits, we have included an analysis of some of the many widespread AWA violations at SFMW attested to by these former employees.

Previously, my organization submitted a complaint to the USDA seeking an investigation of the seemingly large number of animal deaths at SFMW, and detailing allegations by an anonymous employee about inadequate care at the park.

In a January 22, 2001 letter, V. Wensley Koch, Supervisory Animal Care Specialist for USDA's Western Region, dismissed IDA's concerns and the whistleblower allegations. She stated that the USDA had found veterinary care at the park to be "excellent" and staffing levels to be "adequate to ensure USDA standards are met." She concluded that the SFMW animal death rate reported by IDA (six animals in three years) was "not unusual," and further reported that the USDA had found "no evidence of negative impact" on animal welfare from the thrill rides at the park.

Dr. Koch concluded her letter with the admonition, "While it is part of our job to investigate public complaints, investigation of invalid complaints diverts our limited resources from focusing on areas where real problems exist and can thus actually be detrimental to overall animal welfare. . . If you submit a complaint in the future, it would help if you would include only specific information or evidence which you believe indicates a violation of Animal Welfare Act requirements has occurred. . . . "

The enclosed affidavits include evidence that directly conflicts with your agency's findings of "excellent" veterinary care, "adequate" staffing, and no "negative impact" from the thrill rides at the park. From these affidavits, we also now know that at least 23 animals have died at the park
since 1997, many under conditions that suggest negligent care as a contributing factor to death.

It is possible that routine inspections would not uncover the type of evidence included in these affidavits. Now, however, your agency has sworn evidence that would be recognized in a court of law about serious transgressions of the Animal Welfare Act at SFMW. Based on the evidence now in your possession, we believe that an official USDA investigation of this matter is warranted. At minimum, this investigation should include: interviews with both Ms. Hindman and Mr. Wilson; interviews with other current and former SFMW employees who can attest to these violations; and a review of keeper logs, medical records and the animal death data base that would corroborate the evidence in these affidavits.

In conclusion, we must address two concerns relevant to your investigation. First, we wish to inform your agency about the climate of fear that is prevalent among SFMW employees. Both Ms. Hindman and Mr. Wilson have testified to the unwillingness of SFMW management to address employee concerns about animal care. We have spoken to additional employees who have requested anonymity but have reported the pervasive attitude of "keep quiet or lose your job" at this amusement park. It is important that your agency understand these conditions and the challenges they may present before undertaking your investigation.

Finally, we must address our concerns about the adequacy of USDA's oversight of SFMW. Both Mr. Wilson and Ms. Hindman raised concerns about the inadequacies of USDA inspections. Mr. Wilson attests: "From what I witnessed, the U.S. Department of Agriculture inspections of the park were not adequate. The USDA inspector would be taken on a walking tour of the Land Animal department with the manager, Mark Jardarian. The inspector would just poke his head into areas, but he would not actually inspect much. He didn't pick anything up, or look under anything. I never saw this inspector examine any of the animals, or even look at them closely. I also never saw him speak to any of the non-management employees. The park always tried to predict when the USDA inspector would be coming and they would clean things up in anticipation of his visit. When the inspector showed up unexpectedly, word would go around the park to hurry up and clean up and improve things before the inspector arrived in our area. "

The testimony of Ms. Hindman and Ms. Wilson about inadequate inspections of SFMW, in conjunction with both the tone and the substance of Dr. Koch’s January 22, 2001 response to IDA's original complaint, give us cause for serious concern. We believe that a decidedly different approach to AWA enforcement at SFMW will be necessary if a thorough and credible investigation of the evidence presented to you in these affidavits is to be undertaken.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Suzanne Roy
Program Director

Enclosures: Analysis of AWA violations at SFMW
Affidavit of Aaron A. Wilson (PDF format)
Affidavit of Melissa A. Hindman (PDF format)

Full text of formal complaint :: News Release :: IDA Home Page