Animal Cruelty Cases in Minnesota

Extension to appeal (no appeal): As stated below, Judge Clifton (USDA administative judge) permanently revoked Daniel Moulton's USDA license. However, Moulton had the right to appeal. On 10-26-21, Moulton filed for an extension to appeal and, on 10-29-21, the extension was granted for one month. When that time was over, Moulton filed for another extension to appeal, and it too was granted on 12-09-21 — for three months. During this time, Moulton continued to operate his chinchilla facility with all animals on site — no animals were confiscated. Rupa Chilukuri, attorney for the USDA-OGC who had argued the case against Moulton (see below), filed a complaint objecting to Moulton's request and asked that Moulton's request for extension be denied. It was still granted. Finally, on March 8 (2022), one day before the deadline, Moulton chose not to appeal. This means his federal license is permanently revoked — Moulton can no longer breed and sell chinchillas under the federal Animal Welfare Act.

NOTE: No animals were confiscated by the USDA. It has been suggested that the animals are no longer on the property; however, this has not been confirmed.

USDA Inspection - Following the revocation of Moulton's license (see below), the USDA conducted another routine inspection on 11-03-21. It found same or similar violations at the facility, including harm to animals. Inventory was recorded as 698 chinchillas.

USDA Hearing: On Friday, October 8, 2021, an administrative law judge found Daniel Moulton, owner of Moulton Chinchilla Ranch, unfit to hold an Animal Welfare license. Judge Jill Clifton permanently revoked the federal license of Moulton and imposed a $18,000 fine. This order pertains to a formal complaint filed by the USDA in 2018 against Moulton for over 120 violations of the Animal Welfare Act between 2013 and 2017, as cited by USDA inspectors. The USDA hearing started July 26, 2021 and lasted 18 days over 3 months. Moulton has 30 days to appeal the judge's order. See below for further details.

The animals: The chinchillas are still under the ownership of Daniel Moulton — living in the same conditions on the Moulton Chinchilla Ranch. The USDA did not confiscate any of the animals. The judge did not impose any order to remove the animals. Law enforcement did not seize the animals. Per the May 2021 USDA inspection report (see below), it is reported that Moulton has 738 chinchillas at his facility. As for care and observation of the animals, Moulton testified on 07-6-21 that "I'm not an 8:00 to 5:00 business down there with the chinchilla business. I have 750 animals, and I have -- at other times, I've had as much as 6,000, and I've had employees. I don't at this point."

PETA animal cruelty complaint: PETA had conducted an undercover investigation in 2020 of Moulton Chinchilla Ranch, finding evidence of animal cruelty. Their findings were submitted to the Fillmore County Sheriff Office, who conducted an investigation. The Fillmore County Attorney did not file charges and instead transferred the case to the Rice County Attorney. Animal Folks was notified in October that Rice County Attorney Fossum declined to file animal cruelty charges; the determination was made in August. See below.

Animal Folks animal cruelty complaint: In 2018 and 2019, Animal Folks filed an animal cruelty complaint against Moulton Chinchilla Ranch, alleging animal cruelty and providing evidence that these actions had been occuring for multiple years. The Fillmore County Sheriff Office conducted an investigation and submitted evidence to the Fillmore County Attorney Brett Corson, who declined to file animal cruelty charges. See below.

WARNING: Graphic photos, descriptions, and links on this page.

A broken system

This case illustrates why the system to protect animals is broken, and why reforms at the local, state, and federal levels are needed for the proper enforcement of laws.

Moulton Chinchilla Ranch: Profile

Moulton Chinchilla Ranch is located in the city of Chatfield, which is located in Fillmore County, Minnesota. The owner is Daniel Moulton.

Total animal counts for this facility have varied year to year. A range of 419 to 934 chinchillas were cited in USDA inspection reports between 2014 and 2021.

An article in the local Fillmore County Journal, written in 2016, stated that:

• "Daniel Moulton's parents started the business in 1966."

• "Daniel Moulton bought the property in 1988."

• "At one time, Moulton's chinchilla ranch held 6,000 animals."

• "Moulton markets and sells his chinchillas in various ways. He sells them as pets and breeding stock to individuals, pet shops, and other associations. His chinchillas have also been used for hearing research in the Navy, Army, at Johns Hopkins, the National Institute of Health, University of Minnesota, Mayo Clinic, and other facilities. He used to sell them for pelts as well, but hasn't done that for about 15 years."

Moulton Chinchilla Ranch is licensed and inspected by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). USDA license #41-B-0239. Enforcement of federal law falls to the federal government, not state authorities.

Minnesota does not license and inspect breeders or dealers of chinchillas. The MN Department of Agriculture (MDA) has a voluntary fur farming registration; Moulton is not registered on this list. This Minnesota statute does not give the MDA any inspection or enforcement authority for this type of facility.

All enforcement of state animal cruelty statutes is the duty of local law enforcement with charging and prosecution by the city or county attorney, depending on jurisdiction.

Multiple violations of the Animal Welfare Act

Animal Folks was aware of Moulton Chinchilla Ranch due to its multiple violations against the Animal Welfare Act (federal law) over many years, as documented by the USDA through inspection reports and photos. Animal Folks had requested these inspection reports (from July 2015 through present) and other enforcement actions, such as an Official Warning given to Moulton in 2013, through FOIA data requests.

A few examples of violations as documented on the reports:

(For all violations across multiple years, click on inspection reports posted below.)

• Chinchilla "was unkempt and had scab under its collar... found that the underside of the collar was embedded into the neck. ...observed hair loss, a putrid odor, and a granular and liquid pale discharge." (Feb. 2020)

• Chinchilla "was excessively drooling and not eating its food properly. ...its lower front (incisor) teeth were long and did not allow the chinchilla [to] close its mouth in a normal manner. Overgrown teeth can be painful and can cause improper chewing and lead to malnutrition." (Feb. 2020)

• There were "four females that had collars embedded in their neck tissue. ...the skin was eroded, there was matted hair and open lesions with visible redness and a pale liquid/granular discharge in the lesions." (Sept. 2019)

• "Most of the feeders front edges have rusted to the extent that rough and sharp edges are exposed to the chinchillas..." (Sept. 2019)

• "Both eyes were swollen with pale discharge." (Oct. 2018)

• "Under chin was moist and unkempt; touching under jaw had hard bumps; licensee said bumps are likely due to impacted teeth." (Oct. 2018)

• "Left eye was sealed shut with a pale crusty material." (Oct. 2018)

• Chinchilla "had an open wound on its back." "Untreated medical problems such as what was seen in the affected chinchillas cause unnecessary prolonged pain ... "(April 2017)

• "A deceased chinchilla was observed within an enclosure with live chinchillas housed on both sides of it. The deceased chinchilla was bloated, had peeling skin, a strong odor, and its limbs were stiff." (April 2017)

• "There was a large buildup of excreta, water, used bedding, and water building up under the animals....buildup of material created a strong ammonia smell and foul odor with the facility and a large number of small black flies were present throughout the facility." (Nov. 2016)

• Chinchilla "had a left head tilt and when it moved, it would circle left ...attending veterinarian has not been consulted to diagnose and guide any treatment for the animal." (July 2016)

• Multiple chinchillas - "eyes were sealed shut and swollen with discharge." (Oct. 2015)

• "The water lines ... have sections where the tubing has a greenish appearance. ...Unclean water receptacles may contaminate the water supply resulting in illness of many animals." (Oct. 2015)

• Employees — licensee must attain enough employees to adequately and properly care for the animals and perform all husbandry requirements

The above cites only a few examples noted in the inspection reports. 44 inspection reports of the Moulton Chinchilla Ranch (MCR) have been filed by the USDA between March 11, 2014 and May 26, 2021. (Each posted at end.) The number of chinchillas in the routine inspections ranged from 419 (June 2014) to 934 (October 2020). Of this count:

• 13 reports stated "no responsible person was available;" therefore, the inspection did not occur.

• At least 14 were focused inspections (i.e., follow-ups to check on a few animals based on prior visits).

Chinchilla not bearing weight on front legs, thin and unkempt appearance.

Examples of USDA inspection reports with photos:

• 02-25-20_MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 09-25-19 MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 10-16-18 MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 02-12-18 MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 05-25-17_MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 04-03-17_MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 02-08-17_MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 10-24-16 MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 10-24-16 MCR Inspection Report with photos - rescinded

• 08-22-16 MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 06-22-16 MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 06-22-16 MCR Inspection Report with photos - rescinded

• 03-14-16 MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 02-03-16 MCR Inspection Report with photos

• 02-03-16 MCR Inspection Report with photos - rescinded

To view entire list of USDA inspection reports for Moulton Chinchilla Ranch (2014 to present), scroll down to end.

USDA complaint and hearing

Moulton Chinchilla Ranch was under investigation for violation of the Animal Welfare Act by the Investigative and Enforcement Service (IES) of the USDA.

Case name: in re: DANIEL J. MOULTON, an individual, also known as DAN MOULTON, doing business as MOULTON CHINCHILLA RANCH

Case number: AWA docket 19-0004

For a list of hearing documents, go to: Animal Welfare Institute

An 18-page complaint against the facility was filed in November 2018 by the USDA, citing multiple separate instances of failure to provide adequate veterinary care, failure to provide and meet structural standards, and failure to meet other standards, such as cleaning up feces and urine.

A USDA administrative hearing was scheduled for April 6, 2020. This is a federal administrative hearing, not criminal. This date was cancelled due to COVID. A new hearing date was scheduled for July 2021. The hearings in 2021 were for violations from 2013-2017; it took years for the USDA to hold Moulton accountable for violations of the Animal Welfare Act and harm to the animals. Multiple violations by Moulton continued from 2017 to present and were not included in the 2018 complaint.

The hearing began on July 26, 2021 and lasted 18 days over 3 months. Animal Folks asked to attend the hearings, which was approved. It was held online. Moulton objected to our participation. Shortly before the first hearing was to begin, the judge imposed strict conditions for monitoring the hearing. We believed these conditions impinged on our and others' First Amendment rights. The Animal Welfare Act (AWI) filed multiple objections; and we agreed with AWI's filings. Because Animal Folks chose not to waive our First Amendment rights, we did not attend the hearings. We believe strongly in transparency and stand firm in our decision. AWI also could not attend; we applaud AWI's legal actions in support of transparency.

OPENING STATEMENT: The hearings provided considerable evidence showing that Moulton repeatedly violated the Animal Welfare Act. On the first day of the hearings, Rupa Chilukuri, attorney in the Office of General Counsel at USDA, made her opening statement. Excerpts below:

"For years, My. Moulton has failed to comply with the AWA regulations and its standards. The complaint lists over 120 allegations which occurred from 2013 to 2017, over 80 of which are veterinary care allegations. The allegations in this case are serious and numerous and the gravity of the violation severe.

So let's walk through the complaint. ... as I stated, it alleges over 80 veterinary care violations. That number is staggering. Again, these 80 violations occurred over the course of only four years. Specifically, APHIS alleges that Mr. Moulton failed to provide adequate veterinary care for his animals by failing to establish and maintain programs of adequate veterinary care that included appropriate methods to prevent, control, diagnose, and treat diseases and injuries and by failing to conduct adequate daily observations of animals.

Mr. Moulton's failure to provide this adequate veterinary care has resulted in immense avoidable suffering by the chinchillas. Animals had protruding growths and swellings on their bodies. They had wounds and missing limbs. One frequent condition was related to the chinchilla's eyes. They had hair loss around the eyes, eyes that were crusted shut, swollen eyes, eyes with discharge, reddened eyes, eyes that simply couldn't open.

And the inspectors, they repeatedly pointed out these issues to Mr. Moulton. They found these issues. On many occasions, he simply had failed to notice the debilitating conditions that these chinchillas were living with. And even if he did take note, he offen failed to obtain adequate veterinary care for these veterinary conditions, allowing his chinchillas to needlessly suffer rather than provide them with care they needed. And this was over and over and over again."

The opening statement continued to cite and describe other violations.

JUDGE'S ORDER: On Friday, October 8, 2021, after all testimony had been completed, the administrative law judge ordered Moulton's license be permanently revoked. Judge Jill Clifton also imposed on $18,000 civil fine on Moulton.

NOTE: Per FOIA data requests, Animal Folks learned there were two other complaints against Moulton Chinchilla Ranch by the USDA and each were closed. One was closed on April 8, 2011, with a Final Action of a Ticket. Another investigation was closed on October 1, 2013, with a Final Action of Stipulation. Records for both investigations were destroyed by the USDA in accordance with IES Records Retention Policy.

Chinchilla with hurt eye — crusted, swollen and with discharge.

This harm to the eyes was seen and documented with many of the chinchillas.

PETA complaint

PETA conducted an undercover investigation (warning: graphic video and photos) of Moulton Chinchilla Ranch, located in Fillmore County, Minnesota.

PETA's findings were submitted to the Fillmore County Sheriff Office who conducted an investigation of this facility for suspected animal cruelty.

Fillmore County Attorney Brett Corson referred the case to the Rice County Attorney's Office. In August 2021 (months after having the case), Rice County Attorney John Fossum declined to file charges.

County Attorney Fossum stated that his office was not charging the case "in part because of pending federal enforcement actions, which covers the same facts." Federal law and federal enforcement actions of federal law have nothing to do with state animal cruelty statutes. Further, the facts in the PETA case were for 2020; the facts in the USDA hearing were for 2013-2017. Though the evidence showed similar and repeated harm to the animals over multiple years, the facts were different.

Fossum also stated that "there were no felony charges available under state law," which is incorrect. Felony penalties are available if animal cruelty has occurred and results in death or great bodily harm to the pet or companion animal. (Some of the chinchillas were defined as pets and sold to pet stores.)

Fossum also stated that he "did not want to interfere" with federal actions. Pursuing justice when a crime has been committed is not interfering. Both federal and state actions can happen at the same time.

Animal Folks' complaints

In July 2018, Animal Folks presented a complaint of suspected animal cruelty to former Fillmore County Sheriff Tom Kaase. Animal Folks requested an investigation be conducted. No investigation or actions were taken. Via email, the former sheriff suggesting contacting the Minnesota Commissioner of Agriculture. (NOTE: The MN Department of Agriculture and Commissioner have nothing to do with these facilities or with the enforcement of animal cruelty laws.)

In April 2019, after a new sheriff had been elected in Fillmore County, Animal Folks re-submitted the compliant. As before, we believed the violations documented in the reports and photos met the definition of animal cruelty under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 343 and requested an investigation.

Photo from USDA inspection report. Chinchilla's collar had been embedded.

When removed, it showed an open sore with discharge and a strong, putrid odor.

An investigation was conducted by the sheriff's office but no search warrant was obtained (for the 2019 complaint).

The sheriff's office created and submitted an Incident Report to the Fillmore County Attorney. This report included the data Animal Folks submitted, such as the USDA inspection reports over multiple years, USDA photos showing conditions and harm to animals, USDA warning, two veterinary reports assessing the USDA photos, and related Minnesota laws, together with additional investigative efforts by the sheriff's office.

The incident report by the sheriff's office also included correspondence with the USDA, confirming that Moulton was licensed as a dealer under the Animal Welfare Act.

NOTE: During this time period, the USDA had removed inspection reports and other documents from their website making it difficult to obtain documents in a timely manner. The FOIA, too, was tardy in responding to data requests.

Charges denied by the Fillmore county attorney

The criminal investigation under state statutes for suspected animal cruelty is separate from any federal actions or federal law.

For the 2019 complaint against Moulton Chinchilla Ranch submitted by Animal Folks, all evidence was provided to the Fillmore County Attorney by the Fillmore Sheriff's Office.

In June 2019, the county attorney denied to file charges per this complaint and investigation. Animal Folks requested and received the county attorney's statement for denying charges. The denial focused primarily on two reasons:

1) The county attorney believed the Minnesota Department of Agriculture had authority over this facility to initiate various administrative sanctions or penalties, refer the case to local authorities, or revoke a license. NOTE: The Minnesota Department of Agriculture (DOA) does not license or inspect this facility. There is no Minnesota law that grants the DOA that authority. The DOA also does not enforce animal cruelty statutes; that is the role of local government.

2) The county attorney believed the USDA had a "good process" in place to investigate allegations of animal maltreatment and abuse. If the USDA referred the matter to his office, he stated he would review the matter further. NOTE: The federal government (USDA) does not enforce state criminal animal cruelty statutes; that is the role of local government. Further, rarely, if ever, does the USDA report animal cruelty they suspect or witness at a federal licensed facility to local law enforcement for action. The incident report by the sheriff's office also confirmed this fact: "Jennifer's [USDA] response details the USDA protocols for the investigative process from investigation through resolution including that the process allows for local law enforcement to be contacted if there is reason to believe animal cruelty exists. I have checked and did not locate any incidents where law enforcement was contacted by the USDA in this matter."

The violations of federal law (Animal Welfare Act) by this USDA-licensed facility occurred for years with little or no consequences to the facility owner by the USDA. We believe many of these violations met the definition of animal cruelty under Minnesota law, which is why this was submitted to local authorities for investigation and charging.

Animal Folks asked the county attorney to revisit his charging decision. He refused to file.

Animal Folks also submitted a letter to the USDA, Office of the General Counsel, inquiring about the policies and procedures for reporting suspected animal cruelty to local authorities. We requested that the USDA contact the county attorney about their findings at this facility. To our understanding, no contact was made.

More details and documentation

After denial of charges for animal cruelty by the county attorney in June 2019, Animal Folks continued to file additional documents with local law enforcement between 2019 and present.

This additional data included:

• Additional USDA inspection reports

• New USDA administrative hearing date

• Resources of national animal welfare organizations skilled in forensics

• Further data about basic animal husbandry skills for chinchillas

• Further data about Minnesota law, including Minn. Stat. sec. 346.35-44

Research institutions and animal disease

Concerned about conditions at Moulton Chinchilla Ranch and animals supplied to research laboratories throughout the United States, the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) also provided information about Moulton Chinchilla Ranch in its fall and spring 2020 newsletter. Links below. Their research also highlighted other chinchilla breeders licensed by the USDA.

• As USDA Dithers, Research Chinchilla Supplier Goes Unchecked

• USDA Photos Document Horrific Suffering at Chinchilla Research Supplier

The AWI newsletter cites some of the research facilities that have used animals from Moulton Chinchilla Ranch to include: Arizona State University, Medstar Health Research Institute, the University of Colorado School of Medicine, the University of Florida, the University of Minnesota, the University of Oklahoma, and Southern Illinois University.

Disease with the animals at Moulton Chinchilla Ranch has been reported in the inspection reports and is seen in photos. In the first article cited below, it is reported that Moulton had tried "to rid his facility of endemic Streptococcus zooepidemicus, a pathogen that causes conjunctivitis, abscesses, and other problems."

Within Minn. Statutes Chapter 343 (animal cruelty), another section applies directly to infectious or contagious diseases: Minn. Stat. sec. 343.28. Animal Folks reported this to law enforcement. It is unknown if law enforcement or any local or federal agency or veterinarian reported this disease to the MN Board of Animal Health, who is responsible for dangerous animal diseases.

• May 29, 2020: "Sick chinchillas languish at farms that supply U.S. researcher" by Meredith Wadman

• July 16, 2021: "Chinchilla dealer to appear in court for alleged animal welfare violations" by Meredith Wadman

USDA Inspection Reports: Moulton Chinchilla Ranch 2014-2021

Some reports are routine inspections, some are focused (follow-ups of specific animals and violations), and some indicate if an attempted inspection was made. These reports are now filed on the USDA website (at one time, they had been moved and/or redacted). Reports show same or similar violations over multiple years. Photos are included with some reports but must be obtained through FOIA data requests. Photos are posted above under Multiple Violations of Animal Welfare Act.

MCR = Moulton Chinchilla Ranch

2021

MCR - USDA Inspection Report 11.03.21 - routine; 698 chinchillas

NOTE: Above report follows license revocation.

MCR - USDA Inspection Report 05.26.21 - routine; 748 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_01.04.21 - focused; 2 chinchillas

2020

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_10.27.20 - routine; 934 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_03.12.20 - focused; 5 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_02.25.20 - routine; 546 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_02.04.20 - attempted inspection

2019

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_10.16.19 - focused; 4 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_09.25.19 - routine; 448 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_08.16.19 - attempted inspection

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_06.27.19 - attempted inspection

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_06.11.19 - attempted inspection

2018

MCR - USDA Inspection Report 10.16.18 - routine; 527 chinchillas

This was a pilot "announced" inspection by the USDA - where the licensee was contacted first before arrival by inspectors. Violations were still noted.

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_02.12.18 - routine; 516 chinchillas

2017

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_12.18.17 - focused; 0 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_11.27.17 - attempted inspection

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_11.01.17 - focused; 0 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_08.28.17 - routine; 683 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_07.31.17 - attempted inspection

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_05.25.17 - focused; 16 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_05.16.17 - attempted inspection

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_04.03.17 - routine; 908 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_03.14.17 - focused; 0 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_02.08.17 - routine; 855 chinchillas

2016

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_10.24.16 - routine; 751 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_08.22.16 - focused; 16 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_08.02.16 - attempted inspection

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_07.21.16 - attempted inspection

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_06.22.16 - routine; 770 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_06.06.16 - attempted inspection

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_03.14.16 - focused; 14 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_03.08.16 - attempted inspection

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_02.03.16 - routine; 899 chinchillas

2015

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_11.03.15 - focused; 0 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_10.28.15 - routine; 832 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_07.17.15 - attempted inspection

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_05.18.15 - focused; 214 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_05.05.15 - attempted inspection

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_04.06.15 - routine; 758 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_03.12.15 - focused; 128 chinchillas

2014

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_12.22.14 - routine; 759 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_10.22.14 - focused; 737 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_09.11.14 - routine; 737 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_07.23.14 - focused; 650 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_06.09.14 - routine; 419 chinchillas

MCR - USDA Inspection Report_03.11.14 - routine; 531 chinchillas

Partial view of inside facility. Cited for lack of sanitation.

MEDIA

• 10-08-21 KTTC: Chinchilla Farm License Revoked

• 10-08-21 License of leading research chinchilla supplier permanently revoked

• 10-08-21 The U.S.'s only research chinchilla supplied has been shut down. Here's why that matters.

• 07-28-21 Major U.S. chinchilla supplier heads to court with more than 100 animal welfare violations

• 07-16-21 Science Magazine re: Moulton Chinchilla Ranch

_________________________________________________

The problem: A broken system

This case illustrates the failings of the USDA in its protection of animals and the lack of knowledge or will by the county attorneys (local authorities) to take action to protect the animals.

Federal, regulatory actions are not quick, effective, or transparent. This inefficient process has been scrutinized and documented by multiple audits and case examples.

• The fact that it often takes years for any formal legal action by the federal government to occur illustrates the high risk to the animals.

• The fact that the USDA does not report incidents of suspected animal cruelty to local law enforcement or pro-actively share investigative records creates high risk for the animals.

• The fact that the USDA rarely, if ever, reports acts of animal cruelty to the U.S. Department of Justice for federal criminal action harms the animals and allows suffering to continue.

• The fact that the USDA rarely, if ever, seizes animals for their care and protection illustrates how the USDA favors business over the animals.

The problem also lies with county attorneys who decline to file charges when evidence is clear and convincing. When local authorities do not enforce the animal anti-cruelty laws as intended by the Minnesota Legislature and instead defer to federal regulatory law, then state animal cruelty laws (MN Statutes Chapter 343) become ineffective.

TAKE ACTION

Contact the Fillmore County Attorney

ALERT: Contact Fillmore County Attorney Brett Corson and ask that he either reconsider animal cruelty charges against Moulton Chinchilla Ranch or refer this animal cruelty case to the Minnesota Attorney General and request that they review it for charging. Animal Folks filed the first cruelty complaint in 2018 and 2019. PETA filed a cruelty complaint in 2020. The USDA hearings gave further evidence of animal suffering. For over 3 years, local authorites have refused to enforce Minnesota animal cruelty statutes and protect these animals. The animals are still in Moulton's facility.

SEND TO:

Fillmore County Attorney Brett Corson: bcorson@co.fillmore.mn.us

cc: Sheriff John DeGeorge: jdegeorge@co.fillmore.mn.us

Same message (customize in your own words). As always, be rspectful.

County Attorney Corson,

Based on the evidence presented to your office for animal cruelty against Moulton Chinchilla Ranch and the evidence presented during the USDA hearings, I am asking you to either reconsider charges of animal cruelty against Moulton Chinchilla Ranch or to refer the case to the Minnesota Attorney General and request he review it for charging. More than 700 chinchillas are still at the Moulton Chinchilla Ranch. I urge you to take action to protect these animals. Sincerely, [your name]

Systemic reforms are needed

At a minimum, reforms are needed; beginning with:

1. Holding the USDA accountable for allowing facilities to be licensed when they have repeated violations of the Animal Welfare Act

2. Development and implementation of new USDA procedures that are faster and more efficient for the processing of complaints and protection of animals, including training of legal personnel and confiscation of animals

3. Training of USDA personnel on reporting of suspected animal cruelty to local law enforcement

ACTION: Animal Folks and other organizations have reported this case and other cases to the USDA. We have specifically asked if they reported suspected animal cruelty to local authorities and their process for doing so.

ACTION: Help prevent animal suffering. Write to the USDA and:

1) Ask for their policy on reporting suspected animal cruelty to local or federal authorities.

2) Ask that animals be confiscated for their protection.

Email or mail letters to:

• Kevin Shea, USDA-APHIS Administrator, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC, 20250 or email: Kevin.A.Shea@aphis.usda.gov

• Rupa Chilukuri, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rm 2331-D, South Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC, 20250 or email: rupa.chilukuri@usda.gov

4. Training for law enforcement on animal cruelty and how to collect evidence in animal cases based on Minnesota law

5. Training of prosecutors and judges on animal cruelty and enforcement of Minnesota animal law

6. Training of veterinarians on reporting suspected animal cruelty as mandated reporters and accountability if they do not report

ACTION: Animal Folks has developed policies and materials for law enforcement, prosecutors and judges, and veterinarians on Minnesota animal cruelty law. Our recent training program is for veterinary students.

ACTION: Donate to Animal Folks to support our training sessions and further development and printing of training materials.

7. Discussion of local and federal costs for seizure and care of animals.

8. Structural change of the Minnesota criminal justice system for handling of animal cruelty cases, including removing certain cases where local authorities may have a conflict of interest in the enforcement of law

ACTION: Animal Folks works on legislative efforts to improve how animal laws are enforced, including structure and processes. These efforts are supported by our research, including the Animal Cruelty Databank of animal cruelty cases.

ACTION: Donate to Animal Folks to support our research and legislative actions.

9. Holding research laboratories accountable for purchasing animals from facilities with violations of the Animal Welfare Act

10. Holding pet stores accountable for purchasing animals from facilities with violations of the Animal Welfare Act

ACTION: Continued awareness is needed about research laboratories and pet stores who continue to purchase animals from these types of facilities.

"));