Judge's ruling allows cockfighting in Caddo Parish

The Associated Press
2/3/04 7:40 PM

SHREVEPORT, La. (AP) -- Caddo Parish cannot enforce its animal cruelty ordinance to shut down cockfights because the ordinance conflicts with state law allowing the practice, a state district judge ruled Tuesday.

Judge Charles Scott's ruling blocks Sheriff Steve Prator's warning in November 2003 that he would arrest the operators of two cockfighting arenas -- one near Ida, another near Vivian -- if they continued staging fights, as they have for years. Prator had said the fights violated the parish animal cruelty ordinance.

Scott conceded that some consider cockfighting "barbaric," but argued that the case hinged on state law that supersedes local ordinance.

"This case is about whether persons in Caddo Parish may rely on state law, which does not prohibit cockfighting, or whether they are subject to fine and/or jail under the parish ordinance," the judge wrote.

The arenas stopped staging cockfights after the sheriff's warning last year, but asked Scott to allow them to reopen, arguing that Louisiana law allows cockfighting.

Before Tuesday's ruling, Wayne Pacelle, a vice president of the Humane Society of the United States, said local governments have the right to write their own laws in some cases.

"That's why local governments are constituted: to set standards within the community against whatever particular activity we're talking about," he said.

Activists opposed to animal cruelty have long argued that cockfighting is inhumane.

Source  http://www.nola.com/newsflash/louisiana/index.ssf?/newsflash/get_story.ssf?/cgi-free/getstory_ssf.cgi?n4030_BC_LA--Cockfighting-Cadd&&news&newsflash-louisiana

02/02/04

By WAYNE PACELLE
Special to the Register

Two major cockfight busts within a week at opposite ends of Alabama -- last Sunday in Mobile County and days earlier near Hunstville -- were commendable attempts by local law enforcement to shut down a barbaric activity.

Unfortunately, those arrested for staging the bouts only face misdemeanor charges and a maximum fine of $50. That's because Alabama's cockfighting laws are the weakest in the nation.

Had the perpetrators been charged with running a cockpit in neighboring Florida, they could face a third-degree felony charge calling for up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.

Cockfighting is banned in 48 states (legal only in Louisiana and parts of New Mexico) and it's a felony in 31. Unfortunately, a number of states in the South have ineffective anti-cockfighting laws.

In fact, The Humane Society of the United States rates Alabama's law against cockfighting as the nation's weakest. It is legal in Alabama, for example, to attend cockfights, to own and train fighting birds, and to possess fighting implements.

Cockfighters claim that roosters fight by instinct, but there's nothing natural about juicing birds up with drugs to heighten aggression and clot blood, then strapping razor-sharp knives and gaffs to their legs to inflict maximum damage and pain, and forcing them to fight in an arena from which there's no escape.

It's a cruel and bloody business of slashed throats, punctured lungs and eyes gouged out as one or both birds fight to the death.

Recent major cockfighting busts in Georgia, South Carolina and, now, two in Alabama indicate that law enforcement officials are taking the matter seriously. But despite the best efforts of county sheriffs to conduct their duty, they are hindered in taking a bite out of the industry by the weak fines and lack of jail time.

The paltry fines are a minor cost of doing business for cockfighters who profit from their illegal gambling and their sale of fighting birds. If you speed on Interstate 65, you are likely to pay a bigger fine than if you organize a cockfight in Alabama.

Magazines promoting cockfighting are packed with advertisements for fighting roosters, for drugs, and for fighting knives and gaffs. One of the national monthly cockfighting magazines, The Gamecock, is loaded with ads from gamecock breeders in Alabama.

In the December 2003 issue, an Alabamian boasts that he sells "The Winningest Fowl in the World." He advertises the sale of "battle cocks" for "$250 & up" and declares, "Shipments made worldwide!!!"

He makes little effort to conceal his conduct, all but daring the federal government to enforce the law against him.

Indeed, if he is shipping "battle cocks" to Louisiana, Mexico, Guam, the Philippines or any other jurisdiction where cockfighting is legal, he is committing a federal crime. The question is, if Alabama bans cockfighting and if federal law bans shipping fighting birds outside of the state, why is he raising "battle cocks" at all?

In 2002, Congress passed a statute that criminalizes any interstate or foreign commerce in fighting roosters and dogs. The federal law provides penalties of up to one year in jail and up to a $15,000 fine for each violation.

It's to crack down on scofflaws that the Congress is now considering new legislation to further strengthen penalties for violations of the federal law against interstate traffic in fighting animals.

The new legislation, S. 736 and H.R. 1532 -- which has the support of about 250 members of Congress -- would make it a federal felony to ship birds in interstate or foreign commerce.

In addition to more than 100 law enforcement and humane groups, mainstream agricultural groups are now calling for upgraded penalties for animal fighting. An outbreak of Exotic Newcastle Disease -- the highly contagious avian disease that kills any infected bird -- occurred in southern California last fall, where the state veterinarian has speculated that some 50,000 individuals raise fighting birds there.

The massive network of backyard cockfighting operations and transport of fighting roosters to and from the state provided the "perfect storm" circumstances for its spread throughout southern California and into Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and Texas.

In response, federal and state authorities killed more than 3.8 million birds and spent more than $200 million in taxpayer funds to contain the disease.

Cockfighting is an illegal blood sport whose core conduct involves naked animal cruelty. It is a highly profitable industry where staged fights are magnets for illegal gambling and other criminal behavior.

And it is a dangerous business that threatens to cause serious economic harm to mainstream agriculture.

The Alabama Legislature opens its 2004 session on Tuesday. Before they adjourn, legislators should exhibit no tolerance for these vicious exhibitions that are staged for little more than the opportunity to bet on the death of an animal, and the sadistic pleasure of watching them slice each other to pieces in Saturday-night knife fights.

Wayne Pacelle is a senior vice president of The Humane Society of the United States. His e-mail address is wpacelle@hsus.org.

Source http://www.al.com/opinion/mobileregister/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1075718782304310.xml