Laws That Protect Animal and Human “Workers”

Posted by Daniel Lutz, ALDF Litigation Fellow on May 1, 2014

On October 5, 2013, an employee at the G.W. Exotic Animal Park in Wynnewood, Oklahoma suffered serious injuries when a tiger nearly ripped off her arm.

tiger-cc-cynicalview-article-image-feature

Following the tiger attack, ALDF and other organizations submitted complaints to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in December 2013. OSHA responded with gusto, initiating an investigation only two days after receiving ALDF’s complaint. The four-month investigation led to a citation for numerous violations of the Occupational Safety and Health Act’s “general duty clause.” OSHA found that G.W. Exotics creates risk of death or serious physical harm by exposing human employees to contact with wild animals. The agency proposed a $5,200 fine (now negotiated to $2,400) for failing to protect employees, via protective barriers, from contact with wild animals.

Often, when it comes to abuses at zoos and other captive animal entertainment facilities, the harmed “employees” are not workers but rather captive animals. For example, over twenty tigers recently died at G.W. Exotics. When animals are injured or killed by captivity conditions, OSHA cannot investigate what went wrong and enforce the law. Instead, the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has jurisdiction, under the Animal Welfare Act.

Captive animal abuses—even clear Animal Welfare Act violations—rarely lead to more than a slap on the wrist. In a 2010 internal audit, the USDA itself said, “In 1995 and again in 2005, we reported that the monetary penalties were often so low that violators regarded them as a cost of business and that APHIS reduced the stipulations by making them basically meaningless. In our current audit, we found that this problem has not yet been corrected.”

So how encouraging, then, to learn that OSHA responded quickly to the G.W. Exotics attack! While “general duty clause” enforcement is not a sufficient replacement for an industry-wide rule requiring a permanent physical barrier between employees and animals—for which ALDF has petitioned—OSHA’s enforcement actions were noteworthy for three reasons.

  1. OSHA found that G.W. Exotics “did not adequately protect employees” because it had failed to erect protective barriers separating the employees from dangerous wild animals. Being struck, mauled or bitten by such animals is now a recognized industry hazard.
  2. OSHA’s enforcement against animal entertainment facilities like G.W. Exotics was recently buoyed by a decision of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. In that case, OSHA similarly issued a “general duty clause” citation to SeaWorld for the death of an orca trainer. Over SeaWorld’s objections that human interaction with orcas does not pose a “hazard,” the Court scoffed. Writing for the majority, Judge Judith Rogers wrote, “The nature of SeaWorld’s workplace and the unusual nature of the hazard to its employees performing in close physical contact with killer whales do not remove SeaWorld from its obligation under the General Duty Clause to protect its employees from recognized hazards.”
  3. On top of the penalty, OSHA required “abatement,” or that G.W. Exotics take steps to remove the dangerous animal hazard. OSHA specifically suggested that G.W. Exotics follow safety standards set by the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries (GFAS), the preeminent certification body for animal sanctuaries and rescue facilities.

OSHA deserves kudos for its attention to human-wild animal interactions at decrepit, dangerous animal exhibitor facilities. An industry-wide permanent barrier rule would best protect employees and animals alike at facilities across the nation. But at least in the case of G.W. Exotics, the agency has indirectly yet powerfully encouraged the humane, responsible care of captive animals through its emphasis on employee safety.


6 thoughts on “Laws That Protect Animal and Human “Workers”

  1. MammaMia says:

    The sooner this place will be closed down, the better. This horrible abuse has been going on for WAY too long. Anyone who defends this practice simply cannot be right in the head. This is not for the animals, it’s to nurture one’s ego and make money out of young, defenseless animals. Shame on them.
    I can’t understand how people are even willing to work at GW Zoo, seeing the employers could not care less about the staff’s safety.

  2. Bonnie says:

    It is great that OSHA investigated, fined G.W. Exotics, and requires barriers to protect workers from the animals. What needs to happen is for G. W. Exotics to be shut down and for all exploitation of wild animals to cease. A real sanctuary for the thousands of wild animals in captivity – a place for each species to roam in safety (so many acres per pride, pack or group), no breeding, no sale, trade or bartering of the animals, and no commercial exploitation. The Wild Animal Sanctuary in Colorado is such a place for all the animals it has rescued. Unfortunately, it cannot rescue all of those in need – or all those legally (but not humanely) kept captive like at G.W. Exotics and in circuses and roadside zoos around the country. Stronger laws are needed to end this. I applaud and support ALDF’s to have such laws enacted.

  3. Helen Tanguis says:

    Those zoos are made up of wild animals and they do not want to live in cages. That incudes the manner in which they were fed. Their instincts are wired in their brains telling them to hunt. They are not to be fed.

    I know I get tired of eating the same old thing.

  4. Christopher says:

    Well said, Mr. Daniel Lutz.

  5. Jill McHenry says:

    re: GW Exotic Animal Park, sometimes when an entity is not run correctly and is unable to comply with the law it is necessary for the government to step in and correct a horrible situation. This is a country that runs on laws please step in and force this company to run things correctly.

  6. Marie says:

    The movement to right such atrocities should use the wild animal sanctuary as a model to raise the level of animal care. To set industry standards for those already in operation. Until the day comes that all animals held in captivity no longer exists. These beautiful creatures belong in the wild to live free, the same freedoms we as humans enjoy. No animal should be held captive and live out its days in cement cages. Whomever does this should try living in those conditions. They wouldn’t last long. The punishments should be harsher and enforced to the fullest.

Be a Partner in Protection!

Donate monthly to help animals.

or make a one-time gift »

Stay Connected

Sign up for Action Alerts.


Join Us

Follow ALDF on these networks:

Facebook Twitter YouTube Pinterest

Stay Connected

Sign up for Action Alerts.