Who Owns The Website?
The smear campaign otherwise known as 911AnimalAbuse, was perpetrated by the notorious roadside zoo operating under the name of Big Cat Rescue. Before it was abruptly removed, there was a section on the site's homepage that displayed who curated the website. The curators were Carole Baskin, CEO of Big Cat Rescue, and Susan Bass, Director of Public Relations for Big Cat Rescue. We assume that particular piece of information was taken down in an attempt to conceal Big Cat Rescue's involvement.
Furthermore, one of Big Cat Rescue's competitors, Doc Antle, filed a dispute over the ownership of one of Big Cat Rescue's domain names that used his name to link to the 911AnimalAbuse website.
Apparently fed up with Big Cat Rescue's shenanigans, Doc Antle and his attorneys brought their case to The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Using previous court cases, they argued why Big Cat Rescue's domain name was infringing on the unique and well established name of "DOC ANTLE".
During the dispute, Big Cat Rescue stated their ownership of the 911AnimalAbuse website.
What Is The Purpose?
We believe 911AnimalAbuse was created for the sole purpose of publicly smearing the name and reputation of Big Cat Rescue's competitors and critics. If the website was truly being used to expose animal abusers as the name seems to imply, why are there pages dedicated to publishing disparaging and unfounded claims directed at those that criticize Big Cat Rescue?
Many of the critics they created pages about have never been convicted of animal abuse related crimes or have no animals to begin with. Some critics had the misfortune of having their name, phone number, and home address published on 911AnimalAbuse due to who they associate with, places they visited, or who they have on their friends list on social media.
If you're a big believer in the right to privacy, then you should be appalled by Big Cat Rescue's actions of posting the private information of some of their critics. That's exactly what happened to animal welfare advocate and rabbit rescuer, Linda Sue.
Big Cat Rescue apparently believed associating with one of their competitors through social media was enough to warrant adding Linda Sue to their website. At least, that's what they would have you believe. The truth, however, is that Linda is a vocal critic of Big Cat Rescue's live feeding practices, which involve putting live domesticated rabbits into a cage with wild bobcats.
Linda's 35 years of being a voice for rabbits led to her volunteering at three wildlife centers and researching the live feeding protocols of numerous other wildlife centers. In that time, she learned that the method of feeding live prey to cats is not necessary because cats are very instinctual and domesticated prey animals such as rabbits lack the same characteristics of their wild counterparts.
In closing, we find it quite preposterous that Big Cat Rescue publishes the past mistakes of their competitors while exempting themselves from the same level of scrutiny. Each time we point out Big Cat Rescue's flaws and past atrocities, Big Cat Rescue and their supporters throw a tantrum and practically claim that the past is irrelevant and is no longer an accurate representation of their current state of operations. If it's wrong to hold Big Cat Rescue accountable for their past, then it's also wrong to continue holding onto the past of different facilities.