Animal Supporters Criticize Film Industry for Reports of Rampant Animal Abuse

American Humane Assoc

Treatment of animals in the entertainment industry is governed by the American Humane Association, which is accused of lax oversight in a recent lawsuit. The cofounders of Animal Support speak out against the practice of animal neglect and abuse on the sets of large budget films.

From: PRWeb

New claims that production supervisors from the American Humane Association may have turned a blind eye to instances of animal abuse and neglect on film and television productions were cited in Superior Court of the State of California case Barbara Casey v. The American Humane Association on July 30th 2013, case no. BC 497991). Julian Omidi, Maria Abaca and Dr. Michael Omidi, the cofounders of the non-profit Animal Support, are exceedingly concerned about this assertion and want to ensure that all animals are treated with the care and respect they deserve.

“The American Humane Association must employ trustworthy and unbiased overseers to enforce the standards for keeping and using animals within the entertainment industry,” says Dr. Michael Omidi, cofounder of Animal Support.

Nick Nolte appears in a scene from Luck. HBO cancelled the horse-racing series after a third horse died during production. Photograph: Gusmano Cesaretti/AP

Nick Nolte appears in a scene from Luck. HBO cancelled the horse-racing series after a third horse died during production. Photograph: Gusmano Cesaretti/AP

Large films and television series that employ animals must have the American Humane Association stamp of approval that no animals were harmed during the filming process. The controversy originated from Barbara Casey, former director of production for the American Humane Association film and television unit.
Complaints were that several television and film productions have circumvented or ignored animal safety standards and yet have still been awarded the Association’s closing credit assurance that “no animals were harmed.” According to case no. BC 497991, several television programs and films, including “Luck,” “Temple Grandin,” “The Hobbit,” “Life of Pi,” and “War Horse” had multiple instances of animal abuse, but were nonetheless given the approval of the AHA.

Continue Reading

  • Jan Schultz

    Oh this is not good news. But better to get it out here and get some eyes open on this problem of bought off inspectors before things get really out of hand.

    October 25, 2013
    • maite

      It has been “out there for thirty years”
      a little too late for many of these exploited animals.
      But there will be more animals to be used.
      What the animals need is real sentinels.
      Have not seen movies in years…and have missed nothing.
      Harmony Kennels Foundation.
      Vacaville, CA

      October 26, 2013
  • Robynne Catheron

    I think the Animal Humane Association has always been pretty lax (read: ignorant, lazy, uncaring), and my personal opinion is that their definition of inhumane wildly differs from ours, in that an animal wasn’t permanently injured during filming. If horse is forced to fall down causing him to limp for a couple of hours afterward but seems fine later, no violation. If a trainer smacks a dog for misbehaving but leaves no mark, no violation. That association needs a complete overhaul and should be required to be compliant with the Humane Society, ASPCA, and even PETA, if necessary. I’ll never understand people who don’t have compassion and respect for animals, or those who stand by and allow mistreatment of them. Does anyone know if there something we non-Hollywood people can do to fix this?

    October 25, 2013
  • BlessUsAll

    I agree with Robynne that the AHA has always been “pretty lax” — and then some. Hardly surprising, when one knows its source of funding. It seems to me that one sure way to eliminate the abuse is to research online before going to any movie, and if there are instances of even mild abuse, don’t go to the theater or buy the DVD. The industry would have to enforce its vaunted standards of animal care if enough film-goers boycotted — and actively protested.

    I’m grateful that not one penny of mine went toward any of the movies cited in the PR release: LUCK, TEMPLE GRANDIN, THE HOBBIT, LIFE OF PI, WAR HORSE.

    Several friends almost persuaded me to see LIFE OF PI, but I refused on the basis that I cannot stand to see any animals suffer, even if they’re fictional characters. Now I’m extra glad I didn’t give in.

    No offense intended, but considering that the HSUS and the ASPCA and PETA aren’t even compliant with their own missions (all three liberally kill or sanction the killing of healthy, adoptable animals), I wouldn’t model the needed AHA overhaul on those morally-bankrupt organizations.

    October 25, 2013
  • IcareAboutAnimals
    October 27, 2013
  • mustang man

    The AHA is nothing more then an industry overseer paid by the industry it is supposed to be watching. You can expect the same kind of oversight from them as you can by a USDA inspector at a slaughter plant, otherwise minimal if any at all. This has been a scam org since its begining and will not change anytime soon. IF a animal looks like it would been hurt in a film be assured it did get hurt or killed.

    October 28, 2013