Interested in becoming a wildlife rehabilitator?
"Don't bother acquiring a license".
One may take the exam, be interviewed by the regional wildlife manager and wait for the piece of paper one will get in the mail. However, it won't protect you. The reason for this is the agency giving the license out, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, is virtually unaccountable in terms of the licensing systems they are charged to administer.
The DEC is an administrative agency. Administrative agencies, by the virtue of their creation, are unlawful entities. In existence for the last century, administrative agencies were created by a president, Woodrow Wilson, who didn't want to wait for the people to weigh in before passing legislation. So, the administrative state was born.
Administrative, or regulatory, agencies, are valuable in that they provide specialist knowledge and skill in a variety of areas - in this case, the environment. If you don't understand how specialized this agency is in environmental matters, listen to the current Commissioner, Basil Seggos, in an interview or when he's reporting to the state legislature to hear the brilliance both he and his staff have with environmental matters. It's almost like listening to a foreign language at times for some of us. There's a wealth of issues and concepts of which one could even pretend to consider as a part of the environmental scheme of our society.
Although the staff's knowledge in environmental matters is impressive, some staff have squarely betrayed the state's populace and continue to do so without remorse. The Special Licenses Unit is the division of the DEC which approves the rehabilitation of wildlife. Wildlife, that is, animals living in a free state, are owned by the people of the State. According to the NY Environmental Conservation Law (ECL), it states "the state" owns the wildlife. However, this is an oversimplification of the Public Trust Doctrine. In fact, this alteration of the ECL is a relatively new concept which undoubtedly the DEC used to replace the mention of the public trust in the state for the management of wildlife in older versions of the ECL. This change is rather telling of the way the Department thinks of and treats the state's natural resources, at least in terms of wildlife, and the relationship the state's citizenry should have with it. Such a topic is outside of the discussion contained herein.
The betrayals by agency staff result from both the mistakes of law as well as those of personal innovation. By law, the administrative agencies are fitted with the distinct ability of legislating, executing and enforcing its regulations. These three activities have long been established as three separate branches of government in terms of the state and federal Constitutions. In fact, such a concept is one of the pillars upon which many other constitutional rights and civil liberties rest. Unfortunately, in an administrative context, the state may do any of those three things without impunity; that is, without any weigh-in and vote from the populace. No elected representatives are involved in the creation, interpretation and enforcement of any rules, regulations or even statutes comprising the ECL.
Likewise, rules and regulations are routinely created, amended and repealed along agency-only guidelines or preference, completely excluding the public which pay for the very existence of an agency which responsible for such an onslaught against the liberties of the people. Any public hearing or commentary held or requested for and from the public respectively, rarely, if ever, result in any heed by agency staff. In fact, often, in the wild and exotic animal industry, the agency heralds the desires and agenda items of outside organizations advocating for specific and special interests, such as animal rights groups. This type of handling agency affairs is extremely alienating to the public, especially those who are affected by the rules, regulations and statutes.
In our case, the agency has changed the interpretation of rules, regulations and laws at the drop of a hat; which, according even to the pro-staff administrative legal standards and protocols, are not allowed to do. However, such does not seem to phase the culprits or seem to change their interpretations, or even the existence, of rules, regulations and laws on a dime, and they do so without impunity, no matter to whom we complain or how many times we've tried making the agency legally accountable. The latter is almost 100% prone to judicial deference to the agency on both matters of law and fact - a very dangerous doctrine to follow which has resulted in a plethora of abuses in probably one of the most abusive licensing schemes in our country today, that of wild and exotic animals.
Because the regional Lieutenant at the time, William Powell, was sore over a mild argument he and our facility Director had six months prior, he put Department staff to task in throwing as much "mud against the wall", so to speak, to see what will stick. Hence the Director, Carrie Leo, was cited for activities for which she was clearly licensed such as the possession of wild animals. She was also accused of not doing things there was no mandate to do in the first place, for example notify the Department when a facility intakes coyotes for rehabilitation. These things may not fool rehabilitators; however, they do effectively sway other members of the public and authorities who do not understand the concept of rehabilitating wild animals to begin with, much less the do's and don'ts of licensing provisions.
Don't try running to the courts for justice either. Judicial deference will ensure the Court will always unequivably side with the agency, no matter how corrupt or abusive their treatment has been to the licensee or target. Basically, one must be strong to endure the Department's onslaught of covertly acting against one's interests, rights and liberties while understanding the system in order to help change it. Oh, and no matter what the licensing requirements are, don't even bother with getting one - why get something that can change at a moment's notice to treat you like you never had it to begin with? It's not worth the trouble especially when the unlicensed network of wildlife rehabilitators is far more vast and resourceful than that of the licensed and the enforcement and administrative staff don't even know their own regulations well enough to understand what is covered by the licenses and what is not. This gives the reader an idea of how high the rate of recidivism the Department has after delicensing people. However, the Department doesn't seem to concern itself with quality. So, then, when it comes to the regulatory interpretations which change (literally) as often as the number of times staff members change their underwear, why should we?
For any additional information, feel free to contact us at caringforcottontails@gmail.com.
Stay tuned for the next "Don't Bother" Article written by our Director entitled "Don't Bother with the System".
The DEC is an administrative agency. Administrative agencies, by the virtue of their creation, are unlawful entities. In existence for the last century, administrative agencies were created by a president, Woodrow Wilson, who didn't want to wait for the people to weigh in before passing legislation. So, the administrative state was born.
Administrative, or regulatory, agencies, are valuable in that they provide specialist knowledge and skill in a variety of areas - in this case, the environment. If you don't understand how specialized this agency is in environmental matters, listen to the current Commissioner, Basil Seggos, in an interview or when he's reporting to the state legislature to hear the brilliance both he and his staff have with environmental matters. It's almost like listening to a foreign language at times for some of us. There's a wealth of issues and concepts of which one could even pretend to consider as a part of the environmental scheme of our society.
Although the staff's knowledge in environmental matters is impressive, some staff have squarely betrayed the state's populace and continue to do so without remorse. The Special Licenses Unit is the division of the DEC which approves the rehabilitation of wildlife. Wildlife, that is, animals living in a free state, are owned by the people of the State. According to the NY Environmental Conservation Law (ECL), it states "the state" owns the wildlife. However, this is an oversimplification of the Public Trust Doctrine. In fact, this alteration of the ECL is a relatively new concept which undoubtedly the DEC used to replace the mention of the public trust in the state for the management of wildlife in older versions of the ECL. This change is rather telling of the way the Department thinks of and treats the state's natural resources, at least in terms of wildlife, and the relationship the state's citizenry should have with it. Such a topic is outside of the discussion contained herein.
The betrayals by agency staff result from both the mistakes of law as well as those of personal innovation. By law, the administrative agencies are fitted with the distinct ability of legislating, executing and enforcing its regulations. These three activities have long been established as three separate branches of government in terms of the state and federal Constitutions. In fact, such a concept is one of the pillars upon which many other constitutional rights and civil liberties rest. Unfortunately, in an administrative context, the state may do any of those three things without impunity; that is, without any weigh-in and vote from the populace. No elected representatives are involved in the creation, interpretation and enforcement of any rules, regulations or even statutes comprising the ECL.
Likewise, rules and regulations are routinely created, amended and repealed along agency-only guidelines or preference, completely excluding the public which pay for the very existence of an agency which responsible for such an onslaught against the liberties of the people. Any public hearing or commentary held or requested for and from the public respectively, rarely, if ever, result in any heed by agency staff. In fact, often, in the wild and exotic animal industry, the agency heralds the desires and agenda items of outside organizations advocating for specific and special interests, such as animal rights groups. This type of handling agency affairs is extremely alienating to the public, especially those who are affected by the rules, regulations and statutes.
In our case, the agency has changed the interpretation of rules, regulations and laws at the drop of a hat; which, according even to the pro-staff administrative legal standards and protocols, are not allowed to do. However, such does not seem to phase the culprits or seem to change their interpretations, or even the existence, of rules, regulations and laws on a dime, and they do so without impunity, no matter to whom we complain or how many times we've tried making the agency legally accountable. The latter is almost 100% prone to judicial deference to the agency on both matters of law and fact - a very dangerous doctrine to follow which has resulted in a plethora of abuses in probably one of the most abusive licensing schemes in our country today, that of wild and exotic animals.
Because the regional Lieutenant at the time, William Powell, was sore over a mild argument he and our facility Director had six months prior, he put Department staff to task in throwing as much "mud against the wall", so to speak, to see what will stick. Hence the Director, Carrie Leo, was cited for activities for which she was clearly licensed such as the possession of wild animals. She was also accused of not doing things there was no mandate to do in the first place, for example notify the Department when a facility intakes coyotes for rehabilitation. These things may not fool rehabilitators; however, they do effectively sway other members of the public and authorities who do not understand the concept of rehabilitating wild animals to begin with, much less the do's and don'ts of licensing provisions.
Don't try running to the courts for justice either. Judicial deference will ensure the Court will always unequivably side with the agency, no matter how corrupt or abusive their treatment has been to the licensee or target. Basically, one must be strong to endure the Department's onslaught of covertly acting against one's interests, rights and liberties while understanding the system in order to help change it. Oh, and no matter what the licensing requirements are, don't even bother with getting one - why get something that can change at a moment's notice to treat you like you never had it to begin with? It's not worth the trouble especially when the unlicensed network of wildlife rehabilitators is far more vast and resourceful than that of the licensed and the enforcement and administrative staff don't even know their own regulations well enough to understand what is covered by the licenses and what is not. This gives the reader an idea of how high the rate of recidivism the Department has after delicensing people. However, the Department doesn't seem to concern itself with quality. So, then, when it comes to the regulatory interpretations which change (literally) as often as the number of times staff members change their underwear, why should we?
For any additional information, feel free to contact us at caringforcottontails@gmail.com.
Stay tuned for the next "Don't Bother" Article written by our Director entitled "Don't Bother with the System".
