5 wild animals to be returned to wife of Ohio man who let them free

The wife of the man that freed the exotic but dangerous animals in Ohio is fighting to get custody of the six surviving animals being held at the Columbus Zoo. NBC's John Yang reports.

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Five wild animals will soon be returned to the widow of a man who released them into the Ohio countryside last year, state officials said on Monday, raising concerns of a repeat of the panic that gripped the state when dozens of beasts including lions, tigers and bears roamed free.

Seven months after Terry Thompson released 56 exotic animals near Zanesville, Ohio, and then committed suicide, the Ohio legislature still is struggling to draft regulations on wild animal ownership. Ohio is one of only a handful of states with no restrictions on exotic animal ownership.

The state Agriculture Department said on Monday it had no legal way to prevent the five remaining animals - a spotted leopard, a black leopard, two Celebes Macaque monkeys and a brown bear - from being given back to Thompson's widow, Marilyn.


She has said she will take them back to the farm and put them in the cages they fled last October.

"This raises concerns, as she has indicated the cages have not been repaired, and has repeatedly refused to allow animal welfare experts to evaluate if conditions are safe for the animals and sufficient to prevent them from escaping and endangering the community," the Agriculture Department said.

The agency said the only hope of preventing their return to the Thompson family within 24 hours from the Columbus Zoo is for the county Humane Society to seek a court order to inspect the farm.

"Until then we can only hope that local officials choose to act to prevent another tragedy," the Agriculture Department said.

The local Humane Society could not immediately be reached for comment.

After Thompson, who had been charged with animal cruelty 11 times since 2004, released the lions, tigers and other wild animals last October, law enforcement officials had to go on a big game hunt. Authorities warned residents to stay inside while they killed 49 of the 56 animals.

Six were captured and sent to the Columbus Zoo but one spotted leopard later died there. Another animal was presumed eaten by others and was never accounted for.

The surviving animals have been held at the Columbus Zoo.

The state Senate passed a bill last week that would ban Ohio residents from buying lions, tigers, bears, elephants, wolves, alligators, crocodiles, and certain kinds of monkeys as pets, unless they follow strict guidelines.

Existing owners of wild animals can keep them if they follow the new rules, which include permit fees, registration and constructing proper facilities. The Ohio House may not vote on the measure until the end of May.

More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:

Follow US News on msnbc.com on Twitter and Facebook

Copyright 2013 Thomson Reuters. Click for restrictions.

Discuss this post

How could they return them. They lived in horrible conditions before the were freed and now they go back to that? If they are letting them back the owner should now have to make huge area's for them and the cages they lived in before should all be destroyed. I hate zoo's and the like but they are getting better at thinking of the animals health and welfare. If they have to be kept they should be able to roam around and feel a little freedom instead of being locked up. AND these new inclosure's should be biult and operational before they are giving back. With wildlife people to inspect everything.

  • 5 votes
Reply#1 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 3:04 PM EDT
Reply

Lets hope the ligislature didn't overreact. Too stringent regulations could hurt exotic animals by closing sanctuaries unnecessarily. Many of these animals have no other way to survive due to loss of habitat.

  • 2 votes
Reply#2 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 3:07 PM EDT

First, we support big oil with our taxes, so they just need to deal with our government regulations. Second, will be interesting to see if this gentleman ends up working for that industry, as happens with many ex-government employees. Finally, what loonies would send this guy death threats?

    Reply#3 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 3:43 PM EDT

    Why aren't these animals being kept by the zoo? At least they, and the public would be safe. This woman sounds like a nut. (I mean look what her husband did). Is she even bothered by the fact that 46 beautiful exotic cats etc. were killed because of her wacko husband? There were abuse charges in the past, what has changed? These animals were let out of cages and were terrified - only to be shot! There is no way the city or whoever is in charge in Ohio should let them be given back to her so they can go back into those cages. They have been through enough. Very Sad.

    • 5 votes
    Reply#4 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 3:56 PM EDT

    How was it that the husband who had these animals was charged ELEVEN times for cruelty to animals since 2004, yet he had as many as almost 60 animals just last year. Just WHAT does the Dept of Agriculture do? In this case did the Dept of Agriculture just go out, slap a fine on this worthless piece of sh*t, and then walk away? ELEVEN TIMES! Where was the enforcement to prevent the cruelty ? And the wife. It's obvious she is NO better. WHAT does she even want the animals for? It's apparent she didn't care for them any more than her husband. What a really screwed up situation this is. And of course, as always, the animals will pay the price.

    ANOTHER POINT. So many people advocate gun control but say NOTHING against people keeping wild animals. A gun will only kill someone if it's picked up and fired. A wild animal has a will of it's own, and may attack without provocation. Allowing wild animals in the "care" of idiots such as the ones in this article is a receipe for danger. Wild animals belong in the WILD.

    • 6 votes
    Reply#5 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 3:57 PM EDT

    Private citizens should not own any of these animals. Even if all permit fees are paid, and the facilities are adequate, what stops anyone from doing what that guy did and just opening all the cages? At any rate, these are wild animals that are best appreciated, alive, in the wild, not in some yahoo's garage.

    • 6 votes
    Reply#6 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 4:06 PM EDT

    Mike, there are several reasons for animals to be in "approved" sanctuaries...not "pets"...owned by private citizens. Due to the illegal animal trade, hundreds of thousands of animals are brought to this country and kept as pets in unsafe environments, some abused, abandoned when the animal outlives its "fun" or "cute" factor, or simply becomes too much to handle. Approved and licensed sanctuaries are NECESSARY to care for these creatures as they can no longer live in the wild. Killing them is simply wrong. Permits and fees help greatly at forcing the proper care since the fees can be cost prohibitive if you do not truly wish to care for the animal.

      #6.1 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 5:38 PM EDT
      Reply

      Federal legislation should be enacted to impose restrictions on exotic animal ownership in any and all states.

      Federal laws apply to the importation of such animals and federal laws should also apply to exotic animal ownership in all states.................period!

        Reply#7 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 4:17 PM EDT

        I'm glad she is not my neighbor.

        • 1 vote
        Reply#8 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 4:18 PM EDT

        What a f'ing idiot!

          Reply#9 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 4:40 PM EDT

          Many of us have worked for years to ban the practice of private individuals from owning exotic animals and this case clearly illustrates some of the problems.

          Darthdon...I doubt this would have any effect on a legitimate sanctuary and I mean a sanctuary not a roadside zoo.

          The worst possible outcome for these animals is to be returned to this woman.

          • 1 vote
          Reply#10 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:03 PM EDT

          Perhaps the only merciful thing here is that she is only taking on five animals, and there is a better-than-average chance for these five--as opposed to the overcrowded population that the couple housed before--to be properly fed, housed and kept in a clean environment. Less animals equals less responsibility.

          In light of the conditions that these creatures lived in before, however, calling that location a "sanctuary" is quite the stretch!

            Reply#11 - Mon Apr 30, 2012 7:09 PM EDT

            Let's see what happens when we release potentialy deadly wild animales that must kill to survive ??????????????? go free to roam .

              Reply#12 - Sat May 5, 2012 11:31 PM EDT

              We did not know that thay might kill a child, we're sorry, we just them to be free like thay were in the garden of eden.

                Reply#13 - Sat May 5, 2012 11:36 PM EDT
                You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.