STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

CORINNE OLTZ,

Petitioner,

vs.

FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION,

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

) Case No. 07-1176

)

)

)

)

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

This case was heard, pursuant to notice, on July 9 and 10, 2007, by video teleconference at sites in Miami and Tallahassee, Florida, before Eleanor M. Hunter, an Administrative Law Judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Alan S. Ross, Esquire

Robbins, Tunkey, Ross, Amsel, Raben Waxman & English, P.A.

2250 Southwest 3rd Avenue, 4th Floor Miami, Florida 33129

For Respondent: Stanley M. Warden, Esquire

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 620 South Meridian Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

Whether Respondent established that this case meets the criteria for the revocation of Petitioner’s Class I, Class II,

and III captive wildlife permits, pursuant to Florida Administrative Code Rule 68A-5.004 and Chapter 372, Florida

Statutes (2007).

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

On or about January 19, 2007, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission (“Respondent” or “Commission”) served Corinne Oltz (“Petitioner” or “Oltz”) with a Notice of Intent to Revoke License for Class I, II, and III permits or licenses to possess, exhibit and sell wild animals issued under the name of Corrine Oltz, or the business name of Pangaea Productions, Inc. On January 29, 2007, the Commission issued an amended emergency order suspending their Class I and II licenses and permits. On or about February 22, 2007, Oltz filed a Petition for Hearing Involving Disputed Issues of Material Fact. The Commission forwarded the matter to the Division of Administrative Hearings with a request for the assignment of an administrative law judge on March 13, 2007.

Initially set for hearing from June 18-20, 2007, the final hearing was continued and rescheduled for July 9-11, 2007, at the request of Respondent.

At the final hearing, Petitioner presented the testimony of Corrine Oltz, and Petitioner’s Exhibit 1, which was received.

Respondent presented the testimony of Luis Villegas, Lieutenant Patrick Reynolds, Dr. Laurie J. Gage who is an expert

veterinarian with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and Captain John D. West. Respondent's Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 were received into evidence. The parties also submitted and the undersigned received their Joint Exhibit 1.

The two-volume transcript of the proceeding was filed on July 18, 2007, and the parties’ Proposed Recommended Orders were filed on August 28, 2007, and August 29, 2007.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Petitioner Oltz is the owner of Pangaea Productions, which she operates along with a related not-for-profit corporate entity, Wild Animal World. The businesses provide wildlife shows and exhibits, and care for the animals.

2. Oltz became a volunteer at Pangaea in 1996, then an investor when she became partners with Grant Kemmerer after buying the interest of his previous partner, Thomas Batchelor, in November 1997. Oltz was first licensed, as she remembered, in 1999. Oltz is now and has been since 2001, the sole owner of Pangaea Productions.

3. Respondent Commission is the state agency that issued Oltz licenses and/or permits, including a Class I license, pursuant to which she exhibited a leopard; a Class II license that authorized her to exhibit, among others, monkeys, servals, and cougars (also referred to as panthers); and a Class III license to exhibit animals that include a scorpion, an

   alligator, an albino Burmese python, a parrot, a porcupine, a fox, and an anteater. The categories of wildlife are established based on how dangerous each group is in Florida Administrative Code Rule 68A-6.002 (1).

4. Respondent Commission seeks to revoke Oltz's licenses to possess, exhibit, and sell captive wildlife in all classes due to incidents that occurred in the years listed below under circumstances that will be described in more detail in the findings of fact that follow:

   2006 Class II cougar attack on four-year old Aisha Elgazzar when Oltz was the animal handler;

   2006 Escape of a Class II serval cat during a show that Oltz was conducting;

   2001 Class I leopard attack on seven-year old Matthew Tully when Oltz was the exhibitor in charge of the leopard;

   1999 Escape of a Class II serval cat from Oltz's home when she had no permit or required precautions.

   1998 Class II cougar attack on five-year old Holly Moynahan while Oltz was the handler;

   1998 Class II cougar attack on eight-year old Victor Parades while another employee of Pangaea Productions was the handler ; and 1998 Class II cougar bite of animal handler Kimberly Royal, another Pangaea employee.

   
   

5. The Commission has issued over 5,000 Class I, II and III permits, approximately 300 in Class I, 4,000 in Class III, leaving the remainder of about 700 in Class II. From 2001 through 2005, 32 injuries to members of the public, and 58 to owners or handlers, or a total of 90 injuries were reported to

   the Commission. Of the 32 injuries to the public, 18 were caused by Class III, 8 by Class II, and 4 by Class I animals (including the 2001 leopard attack on Matthew Tully).

6. Typically, Oltz’s wildlife shows begin with her showing and allowing people, usually children, to touch or pet the Class III animals. There have been no incidents, bites or other injuries from the Class III wildlife. Lieutenant Patrick Reynolds of the Commission implied in his testimony that Oltz had allowed a Class III large yellow python to escape into her neighbor's tree farm. His testimony that he received notice that the python was in the nursery on the border by Oltz's property, that the python had been given by the farmer to a friend by the time Reynolds got there, and given to another person by the time he contacted the farmer's friend is rejected in light of the absence of corroborating evidence, his apparent lack of impartiality in dealings with Oltz, and the animosity that has developed between the two of them over the years. Contradicting Reynolds, Captain John West, also a Commission staff person, testified that he was not aware of any Class III injuries and/or incidents involving Oltz.

7. Before Oltz displayed the Class II cats, she warned her audiences that the next animal would be bigger and stronger, that they would not be allowed to touch it, and that they must remain seated, and stay calm and quiet.

8. On November 18, 2006, Oltz displayed wildlife at a birthday party for a seven-year-old at the home of Francisco Unanue in Coral Gables, Florida. Approximately 40 children attended, many with their parents. Oltz had previously notified the homeowner of the requirement of shade for the animals and a tent had been set up on the edge of a swimming pool, which she also used as a barrier to prevent Oltz and the animals from being approached from behind since this was not a swimming party and no one was swimming. After each animal was taken out and showed to the audience, it was returned to its cage. The cages were stacked on either side of Oltz with the pool behind her.

9. Following the typical sequence for her shows and after her warnings, Oltz took Georgia, a 60-pound cougar in a complete body harness on a leash, out of a cage.

10. While Oltz was talking to and facing the audience, she admitted that she knew the cat was focusing its attention on something behind her but, assuming it was a float in the pool or some other object, she continued to face the audience and talk about the cougar. Four-year-old, Aisha Elgazzar came from behind the cages along the edge of the pool. The cat had been focused on Aisha and attacked her, causing injuries to her eye, cheek and ear that required stitches. Other adults at the party intervened to hit the cougar assist Oltz by pulling the cougar away from the child.

11. Although Oltz testified that she tried to use cages to create barricade behind her and to keep audiences at least ten feet from the animals, based on measurements taken at the Unanues' home during his investigation and the videotape of the wildlife show at the birthday party, which was viewed during the hearing, Lieutenant Reynolds' opinion is credible that there was a twelve inch space between the kennels stacked three high and the pool, and that the some in the audience were as close as four feet in front of the show. Otlz pointed out that the videotape shows Aisha on her father's lap earlier during the show and implied that he should have kept her there. The videotape also shows Aisha and at least one other child on a glider near the other end of the pool during the wildlife show, but Oltz never looked behind her.

12. After the November 2006 attack, Oltz received an order requiring her to suspend showing Class II animals and to surrender the cougar involved for euthanasia so that its brain could be examined to determine whether it had rabies.

13. In an attempt to avoid the possibility of the seizure of Georgia, Oltz kept the cat with her at all times, and argued that testing Georgia approximately two weeks after the incident was pointless since Georgia had been vaccinated against rabies and that rabies shots for the child had to have started within

    48 hours of the bite, if in fact infected. According to Oltz,

    the warrant to seize the cat was prompted by revenge and pressure from the injured child’s father. There was credible evidence that the health department might reasonably have issued the warrant to avoid having the child unnecessarily continue a series of rabies shots. There was also expert testimony that rabies shots developed for dogs and cats have, as far as has been documented, effective in preventing rabies in captive wildlife and the vaccination of captive wildlife is prudent. It is, however, an "off-label" use, meaning officially not approved having not been specifically developed for use on captive wildlife.

14. On October 31, 2006, while Oltz was displaying a serval cat at a south Florida resort, an inflatable Halloween decoration behind her began collapsing and falling towards her. The frightened serval jumped out of her arms, Oltz let go of the leash, and the cat escaped. The cat was captured approximately seven weeks later. As a result of the incident, Oltz was charged and acquitted of a criminal offense for permitting the serval to escape.

15. On December 8, 2001, Oltz was hired to exhibit animals at a Broward County park. She placed a one-year-old, 50 pound leopard in a corner that had shelter and what she believed were adequate barriers on two sides, bushes on one and a fence on the other. The leopard was in a full body harness chained to a

    post. Although she was the handler responsible for the leopard, Oltz turned her attention to another trainer who was handling a lemur to suggest how he might accommodate the wishes of a photographer to photograph the lemur in a tree. While Oltz was distracted, seven-year-old Matthew Tully came through the bushes and was bitten on his head by the leopard.

16. As part of a plea bargain to settle criminal charges, Oltz surrendered her Class I license to the Broward County Court. While Oltz testified that her Class I license was permanently revoked, the evidence did not indicate that it was ever surrendered to the licensing agency for the state, the Commission, but she is not requesting, in this proceeding, nor and does not seek to possess a Class I license or permit.

17. Although the cat that attacked Matthew was a leopard named China, Oltz reported falsely that it was a serval for fear of having to give up the leopard. She admitted that she tried to persuade her former partner, Kemmerer, who had moved to Pennsylvania, to say that the leopard was with him. Kemmerer reported her attempt to get the animal out of Florida to Reynolds. Oltz's other apparent motivation for making the false report that it was a serval rather than a leopard was that, at the time, she did not have enough property under lease to meet the size requirements for keeping a Class I animal. Oltz pled

    nolo contendere to making a false report and to other charges stemming from her negligence in the incident.

18. Oltz testified that she booked the engagement that led to Matthew's injuries through an agent whom she had used before and whom she blames for knowing that the particular exhibit he requested was not suitable for an event like a company family picnic. She testified that the agent used her as a last minute substitute for petting zoo that canceled. Nevertheless, Oltz made a conscious decision to proceed with the exhibit even after she personally saw that it was inappropriate for the venue. She testified that it was her plan to compensate for the danger by limiting the time the animals were out of their cages.

19. In October 1999, a serval cat named Foster escaped from Oltz’s home and was recovered after a couple of hours. She blames the escape on a visitor to her home who left the door open. Although Oltz testified that Kemmerer, who held all the licenses at that time, was living with her, she conceded that Kemmerer had a separate address-of-record, and that the escape was from her address-of-record. Oltz had not obtained, until after the incident, a personal pet license to keep Foster in her home rather than at the ranch area where the wildlife animals were allowed to be kept under the licenses. Only after the escape did she obtain the required license, and comply with the

    requirement to have a separate room for the serval with bars on the window, and a door with an automatic locking mechanism.

20. In March 1998, Kimberly Royal, a handler who had worked for Pangaea Productions for four years, was bitten by Shasta, a cougar, and her finger was severed and surgically reattached. Oltz believes that the handler was at fault and should not have stuck her finger into the cage to scratch the cat and that handlers are not expected to have the same protections as members of the public. Commission witnesses agree that a higher duty of care is owed to the general public than to handlers and other employees, although they too should be protected from the negligence of others and incidents affecting employees must also be reported. There is no evidence that Oltz or Pangaea were responsible for Royal's injury.

21. In May 1998, Randal Wilson, a handler for Pangaea Productions, with the consent of her then co-owner, Kemmerer, according to Oltz, allowed public contact with the same cougar that had bitten Royal, Shasta. The cougar bit Victor Parades, an eight-year-old, who with his parents was allowed to enter a barricade to take a picture standing behind the cat. Victor darted in front of the cougar towards his two or three-year-old sister, who had been barred because of her young age from the photo shoot, when he saw her climbing over the barricade. The cougar attacked Victor, biting into his thigh requiring

    emergency room stitching to close the wound. Wilson was also bitten on the hand trying to stop the cat. According to Reynolds, Kemmerer said he was out-of-town and denied that he made the decision to use Shasta around children after she had previously bitten a handler. Reynolds believed Kemmerer, not Oltz, who testified that she would have preferred to have Wilson use Scuffy, a cat that was more appropriate for use around children. She did not indicate that she made her preference known at the time, and in fact said that she was still learning the business, that Kemmerer was in charge and, therefore, that he is to blame. The Commission subsequently changed its rules so that photo shoots with dangerous animals are allowed only with contracted professionals, not with members of the general public.

22. On December 23, 1998, Oltz was the handler at a wildlife show for a birthday party for a young child when five- year-old Holly Moynahan was attacked by the cougar, Chase. Oltz testified that Holly's mother dropped her off at the party and that she, Oltz, did know that her mother was not present. Holly, she testified in deposition, was unaccounted for when everyone sat down. Holly came from behind the kennels, between the kennels and some bushes. The cat, reportedly, jumped on Holly's back and its teeth sliced open her scalp from her head to the base of her neck. Subsequent criminal charges were

    resolved in a settlement agreement. For a probationary period of one year, Oltz was required to use a portable fence as a barrier between wild cats and the public. The judge required that the barrier be approved by Lieutenant Reynolds.

23. There was a dispute between Oltz and Reynolds over the adequacy of the barriers she proposed to use. Reynolds testified that the barriers that he did not approve were a free- standing portable dog kennel approximately 30 inches tall and one made out of white PVC pipe with plastic ties. Ultimately, he approved one made with metal panels equipped with stanchions, that he believes was made to comply with his requirements, at the direction of Kemmerer not Oltz. Oltz testified that Reynolds deliberately held up approval of a barrier.

24. The approved barrier was used for the year during which there were no injuries, then discontinued. Reynolds said the use of the barrier was to be continued, based on a policy set by Kemmerer before he left Pangaea, but that Oltz changed the policy. Oltz said the requirement was applicable only during the probationary period and that barriers give a false sense of security, as she said was later shown in a subsequent incident involving injuries to Victor Parades. Oltz testified that it is preferable to have a second trainer to watch what is happening behind the main trainer, but she only made that preference optional for her clients, offering lower prices if

    only one rather than two handlers attended a show. In 2007, for example, she testified that only 30 shows were booked at the higher cost for two trainers.

25. In the same incident in 1998, Oltz was charged by the USDA of mishandling the lemur for agreeing to place the lemur in a tree. According to Oltz, the lemur was not mishandled and she only entered a consent agreement with the USDA to avoid a personal fine of up to $65,000 and another fine against Pangaea for up to $50,000. Instead, she entered into the agreement and paid a $5,000 fine.

26. Oltz testified that Pangaea Productions had an audience of 191,632 people at public and private events in 1997, with no incidents of bites or escapes.

27. In 1998, it had an audience of 41,417 at private shows and 186,150 at public shows or exhibitions, or a total of 227,567 people. That was the same year that Oltz says the handler was injured at her own fault and that the Victor Parades' injuries by the same cat that injured Royal, were Kemmerer's fault. It is also the year that Oltz was sentenced to probation, after being the sole handler when a cougar injured five-year old Holly. Inexplicably, Oltz testified that she was not licensed until, she believed, 1999.

28. In 1999, when the serval cat, Foster, escaped from Oltz’s home for only a couple of hours due to what Oltz claimed

    was a visitor's negligence, 38,872 private attendees and 175,200 public attendees, or a total of 214,072 people saw Pangaea Productions shows and exhibits, with no injuries. In 2000, total attendance was 205,000 with no injuries to the public.

    That was during the time that Oltz was required to use a court- ordered barricade.

29. In 2001, when Oltz took complete control of the business, 209,462 people attended shows and exhibits, and the leopard attacked Matthew Tully while she was the exhibitor in charge of the leopard. During 2002, one park discontinued the use of Pangaea Productions shows and exhibits due to the negative press related to Matthews's injuries. In 2002, the total number of people who attended shows and exhibits was 64,738, with no incidents of bites or escapes.

30. In 2003, 47,197 people attended shows and exhibits, with no adverse incidents. In 2004, 44,995 people attended exhibits or shows with no attacks or bites. In 2005, 48,848 people attended the shows and exhibits with no injuries.

31. In 2006, the total number of people attending shows or exhibits was 53,526, when Oltz handled the cougar that attacked Aisha Elgazzar, and the serval escaped on Halloween.

32. After the cougar attack in November 2006, Oltz has continued to do shows with only Class III animals. As of the date of the hearing in 2007, she had conducted 312 shows with a

    total attendance of approximately 20,000, with no bites, injuries, or escapes.

33. Over the years, Oltz has had an audiences of 1,307,326 people with four injuries to the public, or three one millionths of a percent of attendees injured.

34. Oltz currently owns a spot nose guenon monkey, a vervet monkey, three serval cats, and two panthers, or a total of seven Class II animals; and 39 mammals, alligators, and snakes that are Class III wildlife.

35. Oltz earns a salary of $35,000 a year, from approximately $200,000 a year in gross receipts to Pangaea Productions. She is a high school graduate, who also took psychology and mathematics classes at a community college.

36. Oltz believes her business will be adversely affected by not having a cougar in the exhibits and shows, but that a serval could be substitute of and that the financial impact also could be mitigated by the use of monkeys, the second most frequently requested animal after the cougar.

37. Oltz also asserted that at least five other competing businesses exhibit captive wildlife, including cougars, the animal most requested for the shows, and that her shows are safer because all of the animals she uses are hand raised and vaccinated for rabies. None of her animals has ever been found to have any diseases. By using the same animals over and over

    in shows, in contrast to some of her competitors, Oltz asserted that her animals learn the routine and behave better.

38. Oltz’s animals are kept in larger than required cages, designed to resemble their native habitats and are subject to random inspections at least every four months by USDA. The concrete floors of the cages are sterilized weekly.

39. Only after Hurricanes Katrina and Wilma did the Commission find unsafe damaged older wooden cages at Oltz's facility. The Commission has never had issues concerning the sanitation or cleanliness at current Pangaea location

40. In response to Oltz's assertion that the Commission unfairly and arbitrarily targets her and overlooks violations by her competitors, Lieutenant Reynolds testified that she has had a lot more incidents than her competitors.

41. One competitor is Batchelor, the former Pangaea partner from whom Oltz bought her interest, who reportedly had three bites from 1997 or 1998 to 2005. Reynolds investigated Batchelor for a cougar bite around 1997 to 1998, and a lemur bite in 2004, both to the members of the public. Reynolds believes that Batchelor now uses a stage and barricades for his shows but conceded that Batchelor probably does not carry a stage to birthday parties. In 2005, Batchelor was cited for improperly securing a cage after a ringtail lemur escaped and bit a worker at his ranch. Although Reynolds testified that he

    once "camped out at the State Attorney's Office" trying to get Batchelor prosecuted criminally, the Commission has not taken any action to restrict, suspend or revoke any licenses held by Batchelor.

42. Another competitor is Vanishing Species, operated by Jeffrey and Barbara Harrod, in Broward County. Lieutenant Reynolds initially testified that he has not investigated nor heard of incidents involving that company that resulted in injuries to the public. On cross-examination, Reynolds did remember investigating when a Siberian tiger bit Mr. Harrod himself. Captain West recalled investigating the biting and scratching of a three-year-old, during a photo shoot, by the Harrods' monkey, for which they received a warning in February 2000. Eight months later, a five-year-old child was bitten on the chest while petting a cougar owned by Vanishing Species. A recommendation for non-renewal of the Harrod's license was, according to Captain West, forwarded to the administrative staff in Tallahassee, but their license was, nevertheless, renewed.

43. Otlz testified that Lieutenant Reynolds overlooked violations by the Metro Zoo. Reynolds testified that after a tiger killed a handler at the Zoo, the final finding was that it was "handler error." Metro Zoo has had incidents that Reynolds considers not unusual for large wildlife facilities, including a kangaroo bite, and elephant that threw a handler against a rock

    resulting in broken collar bones, ribs and bruised spleen, and an orangutan that broke a veterinarian's arm.

44. Despite Oltz's allegations and Reynold's discrepancies and claim of lack of memory, the record supports that conclusion that Oltz has had more incidents than her competitors. Even excluding the handler's bite and the Parades' attack where she was not the handler and blames Kemmerer for selecting the wrong cougar, her situation is distinguishable from that of her competitors.

45. First, the attacks on the Elgazzar, Tully and Moynahan children were serious and resulted from the same negligent failure to pay adequate attention to the surroundings, and to her failure to take reasonable safeguards, including the use of barricades or another person to observe what was happening behind her.

46. Second, Oltz blatantly and deliberately violated the law by identifying a different cat in the most recent attack and by keeping a serval as a pet without the proper permit and precautions.

47. It is also a matter of great concern, if not an aggravating circumstance, that Oltz blames others: (1) when she failed to, at least give her opinion, about the appropriate cat to use; (2) when she did not refuse to display animals in what she knew to be an improper venue with children, (3) when she had

    not obtained the proper permit or installed the required precautions for keeping a Class II animal in her home, (4) when she suggested that the injuries to a child occurred because her mother dropped her off at a birthday party and that a father was at fault for not keeping his child on his lap throughout her show. Her attitude and priorities, as well as her disregard for the law, will be troublesome for the Commission, especially if Reynolds in the investigator assigned to her area and if she continues to have a captive wildlife permit.

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

    
    

48. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties to this action pursuant to Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

49. Petitioner seeks revocation of Respondent's permit to keep and exhibit captive wild animals, under Chapter 372, Florida Statues. Violations of the provisions of Chapter 372, Florida Statutes, the rules of the Commission, and other criminal laws serve as the bases for the Commission's proposed revocation of all of Petitioner's wildlife permits and licenses.

50. In this disciplinary proceeding, the Commission has the burden of proof and must establish that the allegations in its Administrative Complaint by clear and convincing evidence. Dept. of Banking & Finance, Division of Securities & Investor Protection v. Osborne Stern & Co., 670 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996).

51. To determine whether revocation of a license or permit is authorized, the Commission has promulgated the following criteria in Rule 68A-5.004(5), Florida Administrative Code:

    1. The severity of the conduct;

    2. The danger to the public created or occasioned by the conduct;

    3. The existence of prior violations of Chapter 372, F.S., or the rules of the Commission;

    4. The length of time the licensee or permittee has been licensed or permitted;

    5. The effect of denial, suspension, revocation or non-renewal upon the applicant, licensee or permittee's existing livelihood;

    6. Attempts by the applicant, licensee or permittee to correct or prevent violations, or the refusal or failure of the applicant, licensee or permittee to take reasonable measures to correct or prevent violations;

    7. Related violations by an applicant, licensee or permittee in another jurisdiction;

    8. The deterrent effect of denial, suspension, revocation or non-renewal;

    9. Any other mitigating or aggravating factors.

1. Applying the criteria of the rule, the following conclusions are made:

   1. Petitioner's conduct of shows with Class I and II wildlife were serious.

      
      

   2. Substantial danger and injuries to the public occurred due to Petitioner's repeated negligence in substantially similar situations with Class I and II wildlife.

      
      

   3. Petitioner has violated applicable laws, including those in Chapter 372, Florida Statutes, rules, and criminal laws

      related to controlling and housing captive wildlife.

      
      

   4. Petitioner, who is 38 years old and has a high school diploma, will suffer a substantial financial loss from the loss of income and the substantial investment in wildlife that would have to be sold or destroyed if she loses her license, and no evidence was presented of the market value for the wildlife, if sold, that might mitigate her financial losses.

      
      

      1. Petitioner has consistently, except when court-ordered, not taken reasonable measures to safeguard the public, by not using barriers or including the compensation for a second handler in the fees she charges.

         
         

      2. There is not evidence that Petitioner has violated laws in other jurisdictions, although she admitted that she attempted to have a licensee in another jurisdiction aid and abet her violations of law.

         
         

      3. Given the Commission's apparent leniency (through Lieutenant Reynolds) on others with captive wildlife permits, the Commission might be encouraged to enforce its rules more strictly and that could deter others form taken unreasonable risks. Due to the apparent leniency of the Commission, even in its regard to recommendations from its investigators, there is no evidence to suggest that revocation of Petitioner's licenses will deter others nor that she should be punished for anyone's conduct but her own.

         
         

      4. Petitioner's refusal to take responsibility for her company and her own actions. By her own testimony, she established a pattern of blaming others and using extremely poor judgment in, among, other things, knowingly allowing an inappropriate exhibit in an inappropriate

      venue. The attempt to elude authorities by lying to protect a dangerous animal demonstrates, in general, greater concern for the wildlife than for injured victims. One mitigating factor is the lack of evidence of any incidents or injuries involving Class III animals.

      
      

2. Although the Petitioner surrendered her Class I license to the Broward County Court, there is no evidence that it was permanently surrendered to or revoked by the Commission, the licensing authority designated by state law.

3. Petitioner requested a condition on her Class II license that would, at least, allow her to substitute certain Class II animals, serval and monkeys, in her shows and exhibits. The evidence of past incidents with servals and the fact that regulatory classifications are based on the relative danger of the group of animals in the class require a conclusion that it is too risky to allow Petitioner to keep any Class II animals whether or not the undersigned has the authority to do so.

4. Petitioner's willful and wanton lies to the authorities would suggest that she should not keep any captive wildlife and that conclusion would be reasonable but for two factors. First, the rule requires a consideration of the effect on her ability to maintain her livelihood. Secondly, the Commission had no credible evidence of any incidents involving Class III wildlife.

5. Although not binding in this de novo proceeding, the recommended action is consistent with the Commission's decision in its Amended Emergency Order Suspending Class I and Class II licenses.

RECOMMENDATION

Based upon the foregoing Findings of Facts found and Conclusions of Law reached, it is hereby

RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered which revokes Class I and II captive wildlife permits and/or licenses issued to Corrine Oltz and/or to any related business entities.

DONE AND ENTERED this 10th day of October, 2007, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

S

ELEANOR M. HUNTER

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

(850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675

Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 10th day of October, 2007.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Stanley M. Warden, Esquire Florida Fish and Wildlife

Conservation Commission 620 South Meridian Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600

Alan S. Ross, Esquire Robbins, Tunkey, Ross, Amsel,

Raben Waxman & English, P.A.

2250 Southwest 3rd Avenue, 4th Floor Miami, Florida 33129

Ken D. Haddad, Executive Director Florida Fish and Wildlife

Conservation Commission Farris Bryant Building 620 South Meridian Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600

James V. Antista, General Counsel Florida Fish and Wildlife

Conservation Commission Farris Bryant Building 620 South Meridian Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

15 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that will issue the Final Order in this case.

Docket for Case No: 07-001176

Orders for Case No: 07-001176