Breaking: PETA Court Victory—No More Tigers at Dade City’s Wild Things

For Immediate Release:
March 24, 2020

Contact:
David Perle 202-483-7382

Dade City, Fla. – Late yesterday, PETA was awarded a default judgment and permanent injunction in its Endangered Species Act (ESA) lawsuit against Dade City’s Wild Things (DCWT), which is now permanently banned from owning or possessing endangered tigers or allowing anyone else to keep them on its property.

The court’s ruling confirms that prematurely separating tiger cubs from their mothers, forcing them to swim with paying members of the public, and failing to provide tigers with adequate housing and care are violations of the ESA’s prohibition on harming or harassing protected wildlife, as PETA contended. Per the injunction, PETA will be able to relocate all the tigers in DCWT’s possession to a sanctuary accredited by the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries.

Below, please find a statement from PETA Foundation Director of Captive Animal Law Enforcement Brittany Peet:

PETA has taken out a major player in the cruel tiger cub–petting industry, which fuels the captive-tiger overpopulation crisis. This decision means a new life for the tigers at Dade City’s Wild Things, who will soon be able to roam vast habitats, swim in fresh water, and live as tigers should for the first time in their lives.

PETA’s motto reads, in part, that “animals are not ours to use for entertainment,” and more information about the group’s lawsuit against DCWT and about the eyewitness investigation that preceded it are available at PETA.org.

For Media: Contact PETA's
Media Response Team.

Contact

Get PETA Updates

Stay up to date on the latest vegan trends and get breaking animal rights news delivered straight to your inbox!

By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our collection, storage, use, and disclosure of your personal info in accordance with our privacy policy as well as to receiving e-mails from us.

“Almost all of us grew up eating meat, wearing leather, and going to circuses and zoos. We never considered the impact of these actions on the animals involved. For whatever reason, you are now asking the question: Why should animals have rights?” READ MORE

— Ingrid E. Newkirk, PETA President and co-author of Animalkind