Comment permalink

Breaking: ASPCA Assists in Removal of More than 550 Birds in Virginia Cockfighting Case

Tuesday, May 6, 2014 - 2:15pm
yellow police tape surrounding crime scene

At the request of the Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (Virginia ABC), the ASPCA is assisting with the forensic evidence collection, removal, transport and sheltering of more than 550 birds, many allegedly used for fighting, from three properties near Pound, Virginia.

The seizure was the result of a comprehensive investigation on the illegal manufacture, transportation and distribution of untaxed distilled spirits, illegal cockfighting, and cruelty to animals, according to the Virginia ABC, which set the investigation in motion.

“Cockfighting is a violent blood sport that results in a tragic outcome for these victimized birds,” said Tim Rickey, Vice President of the ASPCA’s  Field Investigations & Response Team. “We’re grateful to the local authorities for pursuing this case and sending a message that cockfighting will not be tolerated in our country.”

A search warrant was executed over the weekend to remove the birds from the three properties, and the ASPCA established a temporary shelter at an undisclosed location, where the birds will be cared for and housed by veterinarians and skilled animal handlers. More than 80 ASPCA responders are working to support state, local and federal law enforcement agencies with the operation.

Cockfighting is illegal in all 50 states. In Virginia, cockfighting, possession of a fighting bird, attending a cockfight, and possession of cockfighting paraphernalia may be punishable as felonies, with each charge carrying a maximum penalty of five years in jail and a maximum fine of $2,500.

Add new comment






If any one of these birds is to be used as evidence in a future trial they all better be safe and in the same condition as when taken from their owners. We don't want to see evidence destroyed in any case do we?

Darlene Cian

How about investigating the Eastern Shore of Virginia!! All types of fighting go on here all the time. The police are afraid to go where these fights are held! They fight dogs cocks and anything else they can find. Peoples pets who wander off are never seen again. Pets taken right out of their yards!


The ASPCA got their name in the papers, mission accomplished as far as they are concerned... I wonder why the article does not mention about the huge lawsuit payout this group was involved in? Liberal news won't report that...

I. McQueen

My goal is the abolition of all animal agriculture. — J.P. Goodwin while executive director of the Coalition Against the Fur Trade (As quoted on AR-Views, an animal rights Internet discussion group).

It is time we demand an end to the misguided and abusive concept of animal ownership. The first step on this long, but just, road would be ending the concept of pet ownership. — Elliot Katz, President, In Defense of Animals, “In Defense of Animals,” Spring 1997.

Liberating our language by eliminating the word ‘pet’ is the first step … In an ideal society where all exploitation and oppression has been eliminated, it will be NJARA’s policy to oppose the keeping of animals as ‘pets.’ — New Jersey Animal Rights Alliance, “Should Dogs Be Kept As Pets? NO!” Good Dog! February 1991, p.20.

I don’t use the word “pet.” I think it’s speciesist language. I prefer “companion animal.” For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship ‘ enjoyment at a distance — Ingrid Newkirk, PETA’s President, quoted in The Harper’s Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223.

We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding. …One generation and out. We have no problems with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding — Wayne Pacelle – Former National Director of Fund for Animals.

Animal Experimentation

Even if animal research resulted in a cure for AIDS, we’d be against it. — Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA (Vogue, September, 1989).

To those people who say, `My father is alive because of animal experimentation,’ I say `Yeah, well, good for you. This dog died so your father could live.’ Sorry, but I am just not behind that kind of trade off. — Bill Maher, PETA celebrity spokesman.

On the consequences of stopping animal research: “Don’t get the diseases in the first place, schmo.” — PETA’s David Mathews (USA Today, July 27, 1994).

An animal experiment cannot be justifiable unless the experiment is so important that the use of a brain-damaged human would be justifiable. — Peter Singer, godfather of the animal rights movement, Animal Liberation: A New Ethic for Our Treatment of Animals, 2nd. edition, 1990.

Human Worth Vs. Animal Worth

The life of an ant and the life of my child should be accorded equal respect. — Michael W. Fox, Vice President, The Humane Society (The Associated Press, Jan. 15, 1989).

We are not superior. There are no clear distinctions between us and animals. — Michael W. Fox, Vice President, The Humane Society (Washingtonian Magazine, February 1990).

Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughter houses. — Ingrid Newkirk, PETA’s President, The Washington Post, November 13, 1983.

If Vice President Al Gore advocated killing rabbits to see if women are pregnant and called it a step forward for science, we’d all think he’d gone ’round the bend. We don’t need to do that sort of thing anymore, we’d say. We have better, kinder ways. — Ingrid Newkirk, PETA’s President (in The Washington Times August 29, 1999).

There is no rational basis for saying that a human being has special rights. A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy. They’re all mammals. — Ingrid Newkirk, PETA’s President (in The Washington Times August 29, 1999).

We feel that animals have the same rights as a retarded human child — Alex Pacheco, Director, PETA, (New York Times, January 14, 1989).

Surely there will be some nonhuman animals whose lives, by any standards, are more valuable than the lives of some humans. — Peter Singer, godfather of the animal rights movement, Animal Liberation: A New Ethic for Our Treatment of Animals, 2nd edition, 1990.

There are some circumstances, for example, where the newborn baby is severely disabled and where the parents think that it’s better that child should not live, when killing the newborn baby is not at all wrong … not like killing the chimpanzee would be. Maybe it’s not wrong at all. — Peter Singer, godfather of the animal rights movement.

Your dog can show you when he or she wants to go for a walk and equally for nonviolent sexual contact, your dog or whatever else it is can show you whether he or she wants to engage in a certain kind of contact — Peter Singer, godfather of the animal rights movement.

We need a drastic decrease in human population if we ever hope to create a just and equitable world for animals — Freeman Wickland, Animal Liberation League, and editor of “No Compromise” in “No Compromise”, September 1996.


Great points. If everybody would research the animal rights groups they will see they were all criminals earlier in life. They just found out there was money in what they do now, which is lie.


Hi there D.W.B, really are you serious!! There is no money in animal rights, most get paid just enough to live off of if that even. They do it because they value other life and see all that lives as being equal.

Paul owned by cat

Good point

Gamecock Supporter

ok were is the crime? sounds like to me they were having a chicken killing and drinking liquor while doing it. Question was there any human lives in danger if not then where is the issue? surely not in killing chickens.


Torture is torture, regardless of whether it is torture of humans or torture of animals. Only certain types of maladjusted people enjoy watching torture. People who enjoy animal torture are typically uneducated, angry, cruel, insecure, impotent and at the bottom of the pecking order in their own society. They enjoy torture because it allows them to pretend temporarily that they are powerful, influential, and in control - even if it IS only in control of the life or death of a chicken. These people have no empathy and are dangerous not only to animals but also to people. People who abuse animals also typically abuse their wives and children, and they bully others who are smaller than they are. They are mean little cowards.