This is one of the three elephant seal pups rescued today by Marine Animal Rescue. This young seal has a small, but deep wound around his throat area.

The other seals were very thin, tired and also suffered from some small wounds and lacerations.

All the pups were immediately transported to the care center for medical attention.

MAR conducted 59 marine mammal rescues in April.

Peter Wallerstein
Marine Animal Rescue Specialist
Friends of Animals

The New Haven Register

By Mark Zaretsky, Register Staff

The United Illuminating Co. followed through on its effort to get rid of monk parakeet nests on its electrical equipment Thursday, bringing down 37 nests — and a hail of splattered eggs — in West Haven and Stratford as animal rights activists followed at least one of the crews.

The nest removal, which will continue today, also brought down some additional surprises: several smaller birds’ nests that had been built, apparently by birds other than the bright green monk parakeets, inside much larger monk parakeet nests. The smaller nests in several cases also contained eggs.

The monk parakeet eggs that came down in other places were slightly larger, about as big around as a quarter, and were a solid cream color.

Monk parakeets are the only species of parrot to build nests out of sticks. Frequently, they build those nests in proximity to the relative warmth of electrical transformers.

UI has removed nests four times over the past 18 months after drawing unwanted publicity and strong criticism in November 2005 for a program that, early on, included capturing birds and turning them over to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to be gassed.

The UI workers on a crew in West Haven were accompanied by four off-duty police officers and a UI-hired videographer.

They were shadowed by two people, one an employee of Friends of Animals, the Darien-based organization whose director, Priscilla Feral, warned earlier this week that if UI took down the nests this late in the season, it would likely find eggs.

UI also was shadowed by loudly chattering, frantic, bright green monk parakeets that swooped back and forth from time to time as some of the nests were taken down.

Observers watched two UI workers in opposing bucket trucks use 6-foot poles with hooks on the ends to take apart a nest nestled alongside a transformer on a utility pole on Contact Drive on West Haven’s West Shore.

When they finished, at least two broken, cream-colored eggs lay in a mass of goo on the ground, on the edge of a mound of sticks.

Nancy Rice of Fairfield, who works for Friends of Animals and followed the crew along with Cindy Erickson of Killingworth, said she watched UI bring down about a dozen nests prior to that one, and all but two had at least two or three smashed eggs come down with them. The other two had intact eggs, which Erickson planned to bring to someone she knew who had an incubator to try to hatch them.

“It’s just so disrespectful,” Rice said as UI workers took poles to the next nest on Contact Drive.

UI spokesman Al Carbone confirmed that 30 nests in West Haven and seven in Stratford were removed. He wouldn’t say whether it was UI’s strategy to smash monk parakeet eggs, or if it was an unintended consequence.

“The important thing is that the nests have been cleared,” Carbone said, pointing out that “the nests that are on the electrical equipment were a risk to health and safety.”

“We work closely with bird experts to find the most appropriate time to do the nest removal … outside the breeding season where possible,” he said. “I guess the timing of our nest removal is relatively consistent with past years. … We’ve tried to accommodate the breeding season whenever possible.”

Carbone noted that “the birds are considered invasive” and aren’t protected by state law.

Carbone said there were four reported fires on UI utility poles where monk parakeets nested from 2002 to 2005 — in West Haven, Milford, Stratford and most recently on July 14, 2005, in Bridgeport.

West Haven Fire Department Firefighter Bill Wilson, who lives on Contact Drive, near a removed nest site, said he has never responded to a fire caused by a parakeet nest.

Wilson said he understood UI needs to maintain its equipment, but wasn’t happy to see it destroying parakeet nests.

“I’ve always enjoyed the birds being here,” said Wilson, who has lived on the street for 14 years and the birds — which trace their roots to Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Uruguay and Paraguay — “have been here just as long as I have.”

On Baldwin Avenue, some neighbors were glad to see the nest fall and others weren’t.

Joyce Donegan, who lives across the street from it, said “it doesn’t bother me one way or another, but the birds were a pain in the neck. The racket they made was incredible.”

Her next-door neighbor, Meegan Keefe Carrier, was sad to see UI take down the nest — and her daughter, Shannon, 3, yelled “Stop it!” as they did so.

“I think it’s really sad,” Carrier said.

The director of an animal rights group that is battling United Illuminating in court over UI’s efforts to get rid of monk parakeet nests on its equipment blasted the utility Monday for its latest attempt, saying it’s coming too late in the season and could kill incubating eggs and chicks that have not yet learned to fly.

“It’s sinister and insensitive of UI to destroy nests after late March and up until August or later if the birds and their young are expected to survive the nest destruction,” said Priscilla Feral, executive director of Darien-based Friends of Animals.

“There’s no exact science” with regard to the monk parakeet breeding season, but “I’m saying there’s a high probability that the breeding season has started, and that they’re laying eggs and sitting on eggs,” said Feral, adding that her organization may seek an injunction to stop the program.

“This is practically May,” Feral said, pointing out that similar, past efforts by a New Jersey utility in the first week of May resulted in broken eggs in Edgewater, N.J. “We think May is too late, and we’re a day away from that.”

“It would be nice if UI would agree to hold off until August …” she said.

UI spokesman Al Carbone stressed that while UI is destroying the distinctive birds’ nests, it is not killing the parakeets themselves and is only removing nests from UI property, not from nearby trees or shrubs.

“We don’t touch the birds,” he said, and “there are many, many nests in trees and bushes that we do not touch.”

In addition, “We work with bird experts to determine what the best time is to remove the nest,” Carbone said.

“Obviously, the nests on electrical equipment are risks to public safety and they need to be removed,” he said.

The timing of the nest removal “is consistent with prior years,” he said, “and no eggs were observed” in the past.

UI has removed nests four times over the past 18 months after drawing widespread publicity and strong criticism in November 2005 for a program that, at that point, including capturing birds and turning them over to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to be gassed.

Friends of Animals sued UI in the wake of the 2005 eradication effort. That case is scheduled to go to trial May 21.

Monk parakeets, originally from South America, have found a home along the Connecticut coast in recent years and stay all year round.

They are known for their eye-catching, condo-style stick nests, as well as their gregarious — and often loud — social nature.

This spring’s effort aims to remove 66 nests from utility poles in West Haven, New Haven, East Haven, Orange and Stratford, Carbone has said.

(04/27/08) STRATFORD - United Illuminating has issued an eviction notice against monk parakeets nesting on their power poles, much to the chagrin of animal advocates.

See video.

The power company intends on taking down more than 60 nests beginning Monday. United Illuminating officials say the birds pose a safety hazard.

“We’ve had power outages, fires caused by these nests,” says spokesperson Al Carbone.

This isn’t the first such incident for the company. In 2005, United Illuminating removed all nests and had the birds destroyed. Friends of Animals, a local animal rights group, took the company to court in 2006 in an attempt to protect the wildlife.

The group’s president, Priscilla Feral, acknowledges the nests must go. However, she says moving the nests now is particularly cruel since it is breeding season. Feral likens the company’s action to throwing a pregnant mother out on the street.

“The parents are capable of flying, the chicks aren’t,” she says. “So they’re doomed, why would you smash the life out of baby chicks?”

Power officials claim the breeding season doesn’t begin until May and defend the actions they’re taking as necessary and not cruel.

Just as bizarrely, our great media outlets are actually giving this announcement attention.

Truth be told, the media have a penchant for bestowing attention on any animal activists who do or say something they think their viewers will find weird.

And in vitro meat sure fits the weird bill.

We humans are primates. Our bodies have no nutritional need for meat. If anything, it’s high time we get beyond our fascination with opening our mouths and inserting flesh.

The process of developing lab-grown tissues from animal cell cultures means using and experimenting with animals… for years. Make no mistake: The experiments won’t just all come to an end when a perfect copy of muscle tissue is made. Scientists plan to explore ways to limit fat, preserve traditional taste, and eliminate bacteria. Vladimir Mironov, a cell biologist and anatomy professor at the Medical University for South Carolina, has said: “We want to create something better than natural meat.”

Already, far too much control over our food is placed with scientists who treat living beings as their testing instruments. And the in vitro meat idea only reinforces the notion that flesh belongs in our diet, while ignoring the beauty and kindness of vegetarianism.

Imagine what could be done with a million dollars. The Candle 79 restaurant already offers seitan dishes with texture and seasoning that make them indistinguishable from meat, and they don’t harm a single animal. These folks are offering their community a vegan restaurant that can hold its own in New York City’s world of fine dining. Has anyone offered them a million for doing it? Don’t they deserve it?

We noted a very good blog entry today at “Bitten” by Mark Bittman. As you probably know, Bittman’s a renowned cookbook author (How to Cook Everything Vegetarian: Simple Meatless Recipes for Great Food) and author of the “Minimalist” column in the Dining section of The New York Times.

Bittman’s recent entry, “Get Out Your Chemistry Sets: It’s Time to Make Meat!” (April 22, 2008), points out that invented food hasn’t had much, historically, to recommend it. And the notion that technology is going to produce environmentally sound substitutes for animal farms is belied — by fish farming, for just one example.

Bittman’s bottom line? “[T]here is already an alternative to meat out there, one that can not only improve individual health but decrease harm to animals and the environment: it’s called vegetables.”

Right on, Mark Bittman.

- Lee Hall, for Friends of Animals.

By Mark Bittman

When I asked readers to tell me what cookbooks deserved to be included on an updated “50 Cookbooks I Can’t Live Without” list, I anticipated a lot of input, and I got it. (And fortunately a former intern, Suzanne Lenzer, helped me sift through the comments.) Click here to see them, and the original post, too.

The commenters gave me insight into how people are cooking, and what kind of books they are using for guidance, and enjoyment.

It would appear that the most prominent — and, to me, the most encouraging — trend is the role vegetarian cookbooks have assumed in today’s kitchen, even for people who aren’t vegetarians. Deborah Madison and Mollie Katzen both were mentioned time and time again, each for multiple books; while two vegan books, “Veganomicon” and “Dining With Friends: The Art of North American Vegan Cuisine” were also brought up frequently.

read full article

To the Editor:

In “Battling to Retain a Touch of the 19th Century” (Public Lives, April 4), you write of “healthy, happy, citified carriage horses,” yet the A.S.P.C.A., the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which you call “the agency that polices the horse-and-carriage industry,” now seeks to ban the industry from New York City.

Why? Because oversight is obstructed by the industry itself. In December, a stable owner was arrested for attempting to bribe an undercover investigator to ignore violations on licenses and how they were displayed.

Are the horses happy? Consider the audit released in September and covered in The Times. It found horses lacking water, forced to stand in their own waste or endure hot asphalt. And according to Newsweek, New York City has the highest carriage-horse accident rate in the country.

Second, a stable owner, Ian McKeever, claims, “We hold New York City’s most important commodity in the palm of our hands: the tourist industry.” But horse-drawn vehicles are outlawed in London, Paris, Toronto and Beijing, and those cities draw visitors aplenty.

The coalition seeking a ban, which includes Friends of Animals, wants New York listed among cities that keep only the humane and respectful aspects of centuries past.

Priscilla Feral
President, Friends of Animals
Darien, Conn., April 7, 2008

The hoots and expressions of delight continued for half an hour. Champ, Tina, Carmen (who’s now in her 50s), Buffy, April and Uriah wobbled around with their 20 lb. watermelons, smashed them open, or dribbled them like basketballs for the full length of the outdoor living area. It was a festive way to bring the chimpanzees into our celebration of this week’s official merger between Friends of Animals and the Texas-based sanctuary Primarily Primates. A truck brought the 80 watermelons - plenty to go around for 65 chimpanzees. The hours-long watermelon party was, we can reveal, a smashing success. Baby Grace jumped up and down on one to crack it open. Wish all of our readers could have seen her little feet fly!

When Amy, 11-year-old Hope and one-year-old Grace found their watermelons, Hope carried hers high to the top of the climbing structure, and pounded the whole melon while Grace danced on top of it, hanging from the enclosure’s peak by one arm. Twenty-seven-year-old Amy sounded off with happy grunts, eating each piece of watermelon to the rind.
Ten year-old Thomas never disappoints. Thomas took ample opportunities to fling pieces of watermelon back at the staff before devouring most of an entire watermelon before afternoon arrived.

Oliver

Reporting live from Primarily Primates, I’m Priscilla Feral.

Hunter retrieves the body of a wolf shot from a plane. (Photo courtesy Wolf)

Down for a week after a judge’s ruling, the state’s predator-control program is back at “full throttle,” according to a Fairbanks Daily News-Miner story. The Board of Game met in an emergency session to look at legal problems cited in the judge’s decision and made adjustments, according to the story. Pilot-gunner teams have reported killing 81 wolves in five control areas this winter, according to the story. The decision to go ahead with the program drew quick criticism from critics, including this from Priscilla Feral, executive director of Friends of Animals, which sued to stop the program:

“The (Game Board) and their apologists in the bureaucracy have a reputation as a nursery for nitwit schemes. When the courts have ruled that the state’s aerial wolf-shooting schemes are breaking the law, within days, the Board of Game concocts new rules. Clearly, they make stuff up, their process is a sham and they just want to shoot wolves everywhere in Alaska. This is an abuse of power.”

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Environmental News Service) March 18, 2008- A federal judge on Friday invalidated the aerial gunning of wolves in several areas of Alaska in a case brought by four conservation groups challenging the state’s wolf control program. At the same time, Superior Court Judge William Morse upheld the practice of shooting wolves from planes and helicopters.

…In his decision, Judge Morse examined the entire history of Alaska’s wolf control programs. His ruling upholds the aerial gunning program as a whole, while banning the practice in four areas covering up to 15,000 of the total of about 60,000 square miles covered by the program. The areas where the judge banned aerial gunning are the areas into which the Game Board extended it in 2006, notably covering the entire Forty Mile caribou herd near Tok and also in an area across Cook Inlet from Anchorage.

…From her office in Darien, Connecticut, Priscilla Feral, president of Friends of Animals, said, “Our efforts in the lawsuit stopped aerial wolf control in 12,000 - 15,000 square miles of Alaska - that’s four regions into which the state had expanded their reckless killing schemes in 2006. They’ve opened 60,000 square miles to aircraft and helicopter-assisted shooting as the bureaucracy is hell bent on killing wolves all across the state.”

“These ghastly forays must be halted by public publicy, a majority of voters on a ballot initiative in August, and through other reforms and legal challenges,” said Feral. “Alaska’s mean-spirited predator control programs are a blight on the continent. Friends of Animals is committed to holding the Board of Game’s feet to the fire; their process is a sham.”

read full article

The court decided that the three plaintiffs, including Chimps Inc., International Primate Protection League, and Marguerite Gordon, failed to provide sufficient evidence that the jurisdictional amount in controversy exceeded $75,000. Thus, the court entered a final judgment dismissing the lawsuit because plaintiffs had filed in the wrong court.

During a temporary takeover of Texas animal refuge Primarily Primates, many animals were taken away, including small apes known as gibbons, who went to the International Primate Protection League in South Carolina. Additionally, a rescued longhorn steer was apparently taken to the premises of a Texas rancher, and two chimpanzees were transported to the Oregon site, Chimps Inc. Last June, these three entities together sued Primarily Primates in federal court to retain “permanent possession” over these 15 animals. By claiming they met the rules for a federal case, the litigants forced the Texas refuge to defend the suit in Oregon.

The court found that among these three suing parties, the highest possible claim was $41,250, by the International Primate Protection League, for care of the gibbons, but that this fell far short of the $75,000 required to stay in federal court.

Last spring, the Texas Attorney General settled litigation over Primarily Primates, ending a six-month receivership of the sanctuary.

This January, the Fourth Court of Appeals in Texas turned down a suit to void a legal transfer of primates from an Ohio lab to Primarily Primates. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) took the researcher’s side, assailing Ohio State’s “irresponsible rush to discard the chimpanzees who brought such acclaim to the university” and then funding the failed lawsuit to obstruct the primates’ transfer to the Texas refuge. Near the close of the receivership, with PETA’s support, the chimpanzees involved in the suit were hastily placed at Chimp Haven of Louisiana, which operates under a contract with federal agencies including the National Institutes of Health.

When the new case, Chimps Inc. vs. Primarily Primates, attempted to rehash in Oregon most every point dismissed in Texas, Friends of Animals enabled the refuge to defend itself. “We don’t love conflict,” said FoA president Priscilla Feral. “Nor are we disparaging the sites where these litigants have placed the animals. But it’s plain wrong to allow any activist group’s obsolete agenda against a permanent-care refuge to take priority over the animals.”

“Each one of these 15 animals has a perfectly good home at primarily Primates,” said Feral. “In the case of the gibbons, very social primates, twelve were removed; one gibbon alone remains where whole groups were once running, jumping and singing. Now others insist that these gibbons and the three other animals are their property.”

Looking ahead

Primarily Primates donors and supporters have embraced the goal of making Primarily Primates a model sanctuary. Staff veterinarian (and primate specialist) Valerie Kirk works on the premises — a highly desirable situation that’s unusual in the sanctuary world. Shade trees have been planted around the gibbons’ newly expanded space. Work is underway to enlarge living areas and recreational equipment for the apes and monkeys. Videos are available at www.primarilyprimates.org
Lee Hall, legal director of Friends of Animals, stated, “Although humans can never truly replace the families and surroundings primates would have had in their own habitat, a refuge ought to have the concern that a parent has. When a sanctuary faces a setback, and animals are temporarily repositioned, it does not mean they’re gone forever or not safely returned. That would make for terrible policy. Support for Primarily Primates is in the best interest of these fifteen, and refuge animals generally.”

Priscilla Feral added: “During an emergency at the Texas sanctuary — which is no longer a factor — each of these three parties gave their word, in writing, to house animals temporarily. Then they sued to keep them. This finders-keepers notion, if allowed, would make for dangerous and unfair precedent. The primates and steer have good, secure living spaces at Primarily Primates, and people who are dedicated to their lifetime care.”

Primarily Primates director Stephen Rene Tello expressed thanks to Eugene-based Liam Sherlock of Hutchinson, Cox, Coons, DuPriest, Orr & Sherlock, P.C., who defended the sanctuary in this latest litigation.

Victoria—The killing season is about to begin: 275,000 harp and hooded seal pups are set to be shot or bludgeoned to death off Newfoundland’s northeast coast in Canada. Whether one is the killer or the one being killed, it’s a brutal and degrading way of life for everyone involved—and Friends of Animals thinks it’s time for this tragic, senseless practice to end.

Priscilla Feral, President of Friends of Animals, says, “A privileged nation and global power like Canada should take socially responsible action to provide alternative livelihoods to Newfoundlanders and others in economically depressed areas.”

While Canada’s government claims killing seals is both economically necessary and humane, Dave Shishkoff, Canadian Correspondent for Friends of Animals notes, “Canada’s economy should not depend on the mass slaughter of seals—or any other animal. Reducing living beings to pelts and faddish health supplements is unnecessary, irrational and vicious.” Despite claims to the contrary, there is no ecological reason to kill seals, either; they are killed for the quintessential human vanity: seal fur.

The Canadian government subsidizes the mass slaughter, which directly supports the fur industry. Friends of Animals says it’s time for the subsidies and the fur industry to end.

Feral states, “Seals are not commodities. They’re more than fur, more than oil. They are living, feeling ocean mammals, entitled to their freedom. The seal hunt must end and Canada’s government must assist employees of the seal kill in providing unemployment benefits until other work can be developed.”

Climate change, a proposed ban on all seal products by the European Union and a diminishing fur industry are all making seal killing less profitable. Shishkoff says, “Seals, however, should not have to wait for the seal market to collapse before we stop killing them. The slaughter needs to end now.”

Hunter retrieves the body of a wolf shot from a plane. (Photo courtesy Wolf)

…In his decision, Judge Morse examined the entire history of Alaska’s wolf control programs. His ruling upholds the aerial gunning program as a whole, while banning the practice in four areas covering up to 15,000 of the total of about 60,000 square miles covered by the program.

The areas where the judge banned aerial gunning are the areas into which the Game Board extended it in 2006, notably covering the entire Forty Mile caribou herd near Tok and also in an area across Cook Inlet from Anchorage.

…From her office in Darien, Connecticut, Priscilla Feral, president of Friends of Animals, said, “Our efforts in the lawsuit stopped aerial wolf control in 12,000 - 15,000 square miles of Alaska - that’s four regions into which the state had expanded their reckless killing schemes in 2006. They’ve opened 60,000 square miles to aircraft and helicopter-assisted shooting as the bureaucracy is hell bent on killing wolves all across the state.”

“These ghastly forays must be halted by public publicy, a majority of voters on a ballot initiative in August, and through other reforms and legal challenges,” said Feral. “Alaska’s mean-spirited predator control programs are a blight on the continent. Friends of Animals is commited to holding the Board of Game’s feet to the fire; their process is a sham.”

PREDATOR MANAGEMENT: Overall program upheld by court ruling on Friday.

By MARY PEMBERTON
The Associated Press

A judge on Friday invalidated the aerial killing of wolves in several small areas of Alaska while issuing a ruling upholding the state predator control program.

Superior Court Judge William F. Morse issued a lengthy ruling that took a look at the state’s wolf control program, now operating in five areas of Alaska. The program is being challenged by Friends of Animals, Defenders of Wildlife and the Alaska Wildlife Alliance.

The groups filed the lawsuit against the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and the Board of Game in 2006 in hopes of ending the aerial wolf control program.

Supporters say the program will help increase the moose and caribou that people in rural areas rely on for food. But critics contend that the Game Board does not have the science to justify killing hundreds of wolves under the guise of predator control.

“Alaskans have allowed their bureaucracy to be taken over by extremists — people who want to keep an air force to annihilate wolves and other natural predators,” said Priscilla Feral, president of Darien, Conn.-based Friends of Animals. “The state’s mean-spirited and deeply unpopular wolf-shooting forays must stop.”

read full article

Feral stated, “Alaskans have allowed their bureaucracy to be taken over by extremists — people who want to keep an air force to annihilate wolves and other natural predators. Alaska’s bloody spectacles are a blight on the continent.”

The game board plans to have state agents shooting wolves from helicopters before the caribou birth season in mid-May. The target area includes a handful of tiny villages (total population about 3,145) in the southern peninsula. This remote area in the Aleutian arc is also home to some 600 caribou, who may be hunted by wolves or bears, and whose newborns are sometimes eaten by eagles.

The justification for targeting the area’s few dozen wolves? To give human hunters inside and outside the community a steady number of caribou to shoot.

Rather than consider caribou conscious beings, the Board wishes to deem them the equivalents of vegetables. Referring to a two-year absence of caribou births, Cathie Harms, spokesperson for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) complained to the Anchorage Daily News, “We’ve already lost two cow crops.”

Priscilla Feral, whose advocacy group has sponsored wolf research in Alaska for 15 years, has successfully intervened in past killing plans. The group’s latest challenge to Alaska’s wolf control, in November 2006, awaits a judge’s ruling.

Dr. Gordon C. Haber, an Alaska-based scientist, notes that predation of caribou by other animals typically regulates itself whenever numbers of caribou drop.

Haber stresses that shooting would neither address any biological emergencies nor achieve anything necessary for human survival. Targeting one group of natural predators would tend to generate more predation by others, Haber said.

Priscilla Feral observed, “The area’s human residents have access to grains, vegetables and other food. And tourists who show up to stalk Alaska’s animals can stay in a lodge on the Peninsula, even in the remote Bristol Bay area, and read a menu like that found in hotels anywhere. Wolves are eking out a living here and ought to be allowed to do that.”

Feral said ecological science shows it’s unnatural to expect large groups of caribou to stay in one spot. Caribou naturally move when grasses and other foods are scarce.

“The state’s mean-spirited and deeply unpopular wolf-shooting forays must stop,” Feral said.

“We call upon Alaskans to raise their collective voice now against the game board’s latest chest-beating display of authority over animal life.”

* Since the early 1980s, at least one technical report prepared for the Alaska Board of Game states the caribou in the Alaska Peninsula declined due to shooting by hunters as well as low births linked to poor range conditions and predation. See James A. Fall, et al., “Subsistence Use of the Southern Alaska Peninsula Caribou Herd.” Technical Paper #191 for the Division of Subsistence of the Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game (1990).

Sea Lion on jetty.

With Lifeguards and Harbor Patrol alerted to watch out for her, a call came in the afternoon about a sea lion in the water, struggling to breathe and possibly entangled in the dozens of fishing lines at the end of Santa Monica Pier. Marine Animal Rescue (MAR) responded and with assistance from Santa Monica Harbor Patrol, MAR hoop netted the sea lion just before she would have been dragged by the surf and currents into the pier pilings.

Thanks to the Santa Monica Harbor Patrol for their assistance.

Peter Wallerstein
Marine Animal Rescue Specialist
Friends of Animals