8/15/2019 Awhpc Osu Iacuc Complaint 4 Summary
1/3
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: Suzanne
Roy Date: Mon, Apr 18, !1" at #:# $M%&'(e)t: Mare
%terili*ation +esear)h - Follow po: isa /rant
2): ia)&).)[email protected]&,
+e'e))[email protected]&,
[email protected]&,+i)[email protected]&, 4A22
, [email protected]
Dear Lisa,
You had told my colleague Eric Kleiman in a phone
conversation today, April 18, thatthe concerns about this research
expressed by AW!" are being #blo$n out o%proportion 'hat is hardly
the case&
As $e have stated repeatedly in various complaints and comments,
the outcome o%the spay $or(shop is directly relevant to the )L*+s
analysis o% the proposed action&
'he EA on page - states.
In September 2015, the BLM solicited the USGS to convene a panel
of veterinaryeperts to assess the relative merits and drawbacks of
several surgicalovariectomy techniques that are commonly used in
domestic horses forapplication in wild horses. ! table
s"mmari#in$ the vario"s methods %as sent tothe BLM &Bo%en,
2015' and provides a concise comparison of several methods(
)fthese, ovariectomy via colpotomy appears to be relatively safe
%hen practiced by aneperienced s"r$eon, and is associated %ith the
shortest d"ration of potentialcomplications after the operation( In
mar*ed contrast to a s"$$estion by the +-evie% &201.',
t his panel of experts identied evisceration as not being
arisk associated with ovariectomy via colpotomy. /Emphasis
added&0
You no$ (no$ that the expert panel relied on inaccurate
andor incompletein%ormation to ma(e its conclusion that ovariectomy
#appears to be relatively sa%e$hen per%ormed by an experienced
surgeon# and that, in #mar(ed contrast to asuggestion by the 23",
this panel o% experts identi4ed evisceration as not being
aris(&& 'he EA repeatedly cites the expert panel+s
conclusions in support o% theproposed action&
'his is the very de4nition o% 5a$ed& You no$ (no$ that
a substantial, statisticallysigni4cant number o% the animals on
$hom Dr& !ielstic(, presumably the#experienced surgeon#
re%erenced by the panel, operated su6ered complications
thatre7uired extensive postsurgical care& You no$ (no$ that at
least t$o o% the animalsdied as a result o% the surgery one burro
and one mare that Dr& !ielstic( %ailed todisclose, even though
the expert panel $as speci4cally assessing #spay techni7ues
%or mares in 4eld conditions is %ailure to report this mare and
the outcome /herdeath0 severely undercuts his
credibility&
'he expert panel noted, 9one o% the ma:or complications
could have been the trainingitsel%&; 'hat conclusion $ould not
have been reached had the panel been in%ormed byDr& !ielstic(
about the mare, her death and the %act that Dr& !ielstic( $as
the onlyperson involved $ith her surgery&
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]
8/15/2019 Awhpc Osu Iacuc Complaint 4 Summary
3/3
in postsurgery /see =imone 2etherlands declaration0, let alone
her death& You told*r& Kleiman that Dr& !ielstic( $as
9reliable&; Cn the contrary, his credibility isseverely
undercut by the documentation that BLM now possesses. Becausethe EA
relied on fawed inormation and withheld inormation, at aminimum, it
must be amended and BLM must interview the eyewitnesses,again at a
minimum. A sworn adavit is considered evidence that the BLM
cannot ignore. !he oundation o this EA is based on this atally
fawed,incomplete and withheld inormation and must be
withdrawn. Again < as( that this be included as part o% the
administrative record and that youcon4rm receipt o% this email and
the three emails < previously sent you today,%or$arding the
in%ormation < have sent to the C=@
