Home Page
Also see Statement of Marshal Smith, USDA Whistleblower Statement of Dr. Isis Johnson-Brown, USDA Whistleblower Breaking the Law: Animal Care in U.S. Labs The Reporting of Animal Experimentation in the U.S.: Errors, Lies, and Contradictions Letter to the House Committee on Agriculture Concerning USDA's Failure to Enforce Their Regulations House Committee on Agriculture - Member Contact Information Letter to the Senate Committee on Agriculture Concerning USDA's Failure to Enforce Their Regulations Senate Committee on Agriculture - Members Contact Information |
Stop Animal
Exploitation NOW!
Articles and
Reports USDA Inspector Files Whistleblower Complaint with OSC January 5, 2005 Richard Botelho Jr, Animal Care Inspector for the United States
Department of Agriculture, Animal Plant Heath Inspection Service, Animal
Care agency, has filed a whistle blower complaint against USDA with the
US government "Office of Special Counsel," dated January 4, 2005. As an animal care inspector and citizen of the United States, Richard
Botelho Jr, believes the public needs to be aware of the prohibited
practices by the Animal Care's management at the eastern regional
office. The OSC whistle blower complaint alleges multiple violations of
federal regulations and law, gross mismanagement and waste of funds at
Animal Care's eastern regional office in Raleigh, NC. The Animal Care agency is responsible for enforcing the Animal
Welfare Act, which is federal legislation that ensures the humane care
and treatment of certain warm blooded and exotic/wild animals. Animal
Care conducts routine inspections at facilities that use regulated
animals in research, exhibited to the public, sold wholesale and retail
and transported. Licensed facilities would include but
are not limited to
zoos, circuses, wholesale dog / cat breeders, exhibitors, exotic / wild
animal dealers and exhibitors to include transporters. Animal Care's
Mission Statement: AC provides leadership in establishing acceptable
standards of humane animal care and treatment and to monitor and achieve
compliance with the Animal Welfare Act through inspections, education,
and cooperative efforts. Unfortunately, records show in the last several
years Animal Care in the eastern region has failed to use enforcement to
achieve compliance. This lack of enforcement has caused more prolonged health and welfare
problems for animals that AC is required to protect by the federal
Animal Welfare Act. The lack of enforcement has also caused more
incidents with potentially dangerous animals and the public. Animal Care
in the eastern region is failing to enforce the Animal Welfare Act,
which is endangering the animals we are responsible to protect to ensure
adequate care and treatment. Failing to enforce the minimum standards
and regulations of the AWA, has harmful risks to the animals and to the
public. Potentially dangerous animal are being allowed to be exhibited
to the public without direct control of a handler(s), sufficient
distance or barrier between the animals and the public. The OSC complaint states the Eastern Regional Office allows
licensee's with a history of repeat noncompliance's to operate without
any legal action against such licensees. Evidence shows that Animal Care
paid consultation fees to a licensee to consult with a facility which
had a history of repeat noncompliance's. Repeat violators of the AWA are
seldom given warnings. When legal action is taken against violators, only a
fraction of the proposed fine is given by a stipulation agreement. The
licensee does not have to admit to the history of repeated violations
when they accept a stipulation agreement.. Even when the investigation
shows the licensee has repeatedly violated the AWA, which affected the
health and welfare of the animals and or public, Animal Care issues a
warning or small stipulation. Facilities often accept these stipulations
and continue to violate the AWA minimum standards and regulations year
after year, stating it's just the cost of doing business. Even after
facilities pay multiple stipulations they continue to violate the AWA
without any further action by Animal Care. USDA licenses are rarely
revoked and commonly renewed, even when facilities have a history
multiple repeat violations and not in compliance. Research facilities
pay thousands of dollars in stipulations which usually cost the
taxpayers, because the research with animals is mainly funded by the US
government. Inspectors request warning letters and investigations for repeat
violators of the AWA from Animal Care management, never
to receive
such requests, and without any reply to the inspector. There are several
lawsuits against Animal Care from animal welfare groups for allegedly
failing to enforce the Animal Welfare Act, which may cost the taxpayers
thousand of dollars in attorney and settlement fees. The eastern
regional office has issued far less warning letters and stipulations
than the
western regional office. Recently there was an audit by USDA, Office of
Inspector General of the eastern regional office, due to the lack of
enforcement issued to facilities. This audit should now be available by FOIA. The whistle blower complaint states the eastern regional office
superiors hire inspectors in areas which are fully staffed. Inspectors
with a lack of facilities and work are often sent to other inspectors
facilities and paid for travel and lodging. Yet, other inspectors, with
over a hundred facilities more than other inspectors, which have not inspected
facilities for several years, are not given additional inspectors for
their territories. The OSC complaint states Inspectors are often approved to visit other
cities and states, just to visit relatives or site see, as long as they
conduct inspections in that requested territory. These visits are paid
by Animal Care, the taxpayers dollars. In most circumstances the
inspector assigned to that territory has never requested any additional
help from his or her superior. The whistle blower complaint states the eastern regional office of
Animal Care purchases laptop computers, digital cameras, and other
equipment when the current inventory are in excellent working condition.
Unnecessary purchases are made before the end of the fiscal year to
spend what monies are left in Animal Care's budget. The OSC complaint states inspectors were verbally reprimanded and
their complaints not heard by Animal Care management when they refused
to join coworkers at a training course at Plum Island, New York, where
animals were given a variety of diseases without pain management before
their death. Animal Care enforces pain management at research
facilities, however USDA fails to follow such standards during its own
training programs. The whistle blower complaint states an inspector alleges that Animal
Care management gave direct orders to an inspector to expunge files
which were FOIA from a federal agency due to an investigation of a human
death at a research facility. Other requested records from USDA, FOIA,
have taken over 2 years and requesters still have not received the FOIA
nor the reason for the delay. Inspector Botelho has been inspecting facilities for nearly 5 years
in SW Florida. He has conducted an astounding number of inspection,
nearly 1000 inspections which have uncovered over 200 persons operating
without a USDA license, some for many years. He has been given all
successful evaluations each year, has no prior discipline, and has an
exceptional sick leave record. Unfortunately, since Animal Care inspector Botelho has complained
about the gross mismanagement in the last several years and filed
numerous complaints against his supervisor and Director of the eastern
regional office, he has been retaliated against recently to include one
14 day suspension unpaid for alleged improper conduct. Five days after serving his first suspension, he was issued a
proposed 14 day suspension unpaid for alleged improper conduct. The
improper conduct Director for investigations division for RMSES, stated
inspector Botelho used profanity during a telephone conversation. The
telephone conversation was a complaint by inspector Botelho due to RMSES
investigators calling his home during late hours, harassing his family
and waking his children.. Inspector Botelho's first suspension states
that he had 5 complaints against him for alleged inappropriate conduct
from USDA licensees who have repeatedly violated the Animal Welfare Act
and was issued either warning or stipulations. It appears that 5
complaints, which were here say, out of 1000 inspections is a very high
percentage by Animal Care standards. The eastern regional office Director has not disciplined inspectors
with greater number of complaints initiated against them, to include
Ethics violations (conflict of interest accepting gifts from licensees)
AC management does not support their inspectors, but supports high
profile licensees when complaints are initiated against them, especially
if such facilities threaten lawsuits against the agency. There is a
complaint procedure for licensees, however none for inspectors who often
learn of complaints during an internal investigations or suspensions.
Management has unlimited funds for legal fees. Yes, their USDA
attorney is provided free of charge for their gross mismanagement at the
cost of the tax payers. There is seldom any accountability when
government superiors are found guilty of discrimination or retaliation,
except for future promotions. There is a free in-house grievance
procedure for Animal Care employees, but it is evident that the decision
would not be UN-bias, due to being made by the USDA administrator.
Inspector Botleho has hired an out of state employment attorney in the
last several months, which he has since paid over thousands of dollars
in legal funds. It has been over two years since inspector Botelho filed
initial complaints against USDA, APHIS, Animal Care. The US government
being back logged with complaints and lack of staff has yet to set a
hearing with a federal judge at the EEOC. Congress needs to help federal employees do their job with dignity
and respect, allowing them to file complaints in a timely and cost
effective manner. Help is greatly needed for employees who file
complaints against their superiors, due to the cost and time it takes
for employees to receive their justice. Federal managers are allowed to
issue discipline without pay and state that employees are guilty before
employees can prove their innocence, costing thousands of dollars to
them and their families. Most employees in inspector Botelho's situation
give into management and drop their complaint because of retaliation and
the lack of funds for legal representation. Since inspectors fear
complaints against them and do not get support from the management, most
end up picking their battles at certain facilities, turning their heads
from citing enforcement resulting in poor work ethics. Other federal
employees are given ultimatums to resign or be fired. Federal managers
need to be accountable for their gross mismanagement. History shows that
employees who file whistle blowers eventually will be wrongfully
terminated, hopefully history don't repeat itself for inspector Botelho
and congress will make some serious much needed changes in current
federal regulations and laws. Before Inspector Botelho filed this whistle blower complaint with the
Office of Special Counsel, he has recently forwarded such similar
complaints to his chain of command to include: Deputy Administrator, Dr.
Chester Gipson, APHIS Administrator, Dr. Ron Dehaven, Ann Venneman, USDA
Secretary of Agriculture, Agriculture Committee, Governor of Florida,
Jeb Bush and President George Bush. Hopefully his concerns and complaints will be heard by all animal
lovers worldwide for the health and welfare of the animals regulated by
USDA, APHIS, Animal Care. Animal Care inspectors need to be supported to
enforce the Animal Welfare Act. Repeat violators of the AWA need to be
issued the appropriate legal action by Animal Care management. Inspector Botelho can be reached by e-mail at:
[email protected]
. Legal funds for animal care inspector Richard Botelho, Jr. are being accepted and can be sent to: Mahoney & Mahoney. LLP
|
