As one who has lived with animals their whole life from typical house pets to livestock, I was sickened to learn about Crosland and his actions—which he doesn't deny—but what I found more upsetting is that he got away with it.
I believe in the rule of law and the presumption of innocence but I’m astonished that any jury would not judge what Crosland did as animal cruelty considering the testimonies that were presented.
Crosland’s justification for putting a live puppy into an aquarium with a snapping turtle was that the puppy was sick and likely to die. It would appear that he thought he only had two choices:
- 1. Let the sick puppy die of its illness (he had no intention of caring for the animal if no one was willing to take it off his hands) or…
- 2. Allow his turtle to eat it—alive!
Apparently, Crosland had not considered euthanizing the sick puppy.
(CC BY 2.0) brownpau
“…put (a living being, especially a dog or cat) to death humanely.” (Emphasis added)To quote a news report about the case:
“…to put to death, generally in order to avoid pain.” (Emphasis added)
“…to kill (a person or animal) painlessly, esp to relieve suffering from an incurable illness.” (Emphasis added)
Prosecutor David Morris said the incident occurred in Crosland’s classroom at Preston Junior High School, but after normal school hours with four students present.
One of those students… said he played with and touched the puppy before Crosland first tried feeding it to a snake in his classroom… When the snake paid no attention to the puppy in its tank, the teen said Crosland moved the puppy to the snapping turtle’s tank…
…Crosland told [a student] and his friends he would feed the puppy to the snapping turtle, and asked if they wanted to watch… The teen said Crosland then put the puppy in the snapping turtle tank. the puppy swam around before it was dragged to the bottom of the tank by the snapping turtle, the teen testified. “And then the puppy passed out and became unconscious,” the teen continued…
[Crosland’s son stated that] his father made a choice to let another animal gain from the death of the puppy rather than let the dog die from illness… [and is quoted as saying] “If you can lose a life to help another, then why not?”(emphasis added)I’ll tell you why not in two words: needless suffering.
Crosland claimed that the puppy was sick, but it was still able to swim in the tank before being “dragged to the bottom.”
Cue the heartless apologists who’ll say, “Yeah, well… the puppy didn’t suffer long.” It’s an easy thing to say for someone who is capable of reflection and able to endure suffering because they can at least look forward to some relief in the future. Dogs are not capable of that!
Here’s something that a lot of people don’t know about dogs:
Dogs live in the moment. They live their entire lives in the present tense without the ability to think about past events or to contemplate any kind of future. The only thing that any dog is aware of is the moment that it’s living in and the feelings that it’s experiencing in that moment.
When an ignorant dog owner comes home to find that their dog has gotten into the kitchen trash and made a mess, the first thing they do is get angry and start scolding the dog. They think that their dog feels guilty for what it did because they misinterpret their dog’s behavior when it’s being scolded.
Dogs have no grasp of concepts like guilt. The dog may have gotten into the trash an hour ago but because no one was there to correct its behavior when it happened, it has no idea that what it did was wrong or displeasing to its owner. When the owner comes back home, the dog is happy to see them until the owner starts scolding them.
What the owner interprets to be guilt in the eyes of their pet is actually fear.
In that moment, all the dog knows is that its owner—the alpha of the only pack that its little wolf-brain knows—is being aggressive. It has no idea why. The only thing that it can think to do is be submissive because it’s simply afraid.
Anyone who understands this knows that when that sick puppy was being held in the hands of Robert Crosland, all it knew was that it felt sick.
When that puppy was put into a tank of water, all it knew was that it had nothing to support its sickly frame and instinctively started to swim so it could keep breathing.
When the snapping turtle bit into the puppy’s body, all that puppy knew was that it was in pain.
When it was dragged to the bottom of the tank, all the puppy knew was the pain, that it couldn’t breathe and fear. It had no concept of an end to its suffering, all it knew was that it was suffering and it died in pain and fear.
It wasn’t able to reflect on its short life, nor more than it was able to look forward to death and an end to its agony.
One would think that a person who is charged with teaching science to children would have at least some rudimentary understanding of this, if not the innate sense of empathy that most people have for other living creatures.
If this individual was sincere in his desire to end the suffering of a sickly puppy while also wanting to feed his turtle, the humane thing to do would have been to euthanize the former before feeding it to the latter.
I’m not talking about taking the puppy to a vet to be put to sleep with drugs, as that would have rendered it unfit for his turtle to consume. Animals that are raised for human consumption are slaughtered—the simplest definition being, “… to kill (animals) for food.” This is done as humanely and painlessly as possible.
To quote Temple Grandin on the subject:
“Most people don't realize that the slaughter plant is much gentler than nature. Animals in the wild die from starvation, predators, or exposure. If I had a choice, I would rather go through a slaughter system than have my guts ripped out by coyotes or lions while I was still conscious…”One might also think that it would not be much of a challenge—especially in a conservative state like Idaho—to procure a low-caliber firearm to quickly and painlessly euthanize a sick animal while still being able to feed it to another.
―Thinking in Pictures: My Life with Autism (1995)
These considerations appear to have been beyond the comprehension not only of Robert Crosland but also the jury that let him get away with his actions. I shudder at the thought of not only the legal precedent this might set but of the example it has set for the children that Crosland teaches.
By the way, snapping turtles are considered an invasive species in Idaho and a permit is required to own one. Crosland did not have such a permit which resulted in his turtle being confiscated by the Department of Agriculture and euthanized—not used as live food for a larger animal to “gain” from its death.