Slashdot Mirror


This Blog Is Republishing All the Animal Welfare Records the USDA Deleted (vice.com)

Last year, thousands of animal welfare records were removed from the web by the Department of Agriculture. Now, a government transparency blog is on a mission to recover and republish as many of these records as possible. From a report on Motherboard: "Whenever there are documents that were online, but got pulled offline, they're automatically important," said Russ Kick, who runs the blog The Memory Hole 2, where many of the documents have already been re-published. "Nobody's going to go through the trouble to delete something that doesn't matter." The documents, which were removed by the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) late last week, included inspection records and annual reports made under the Animal Welfare Act and the Horse Protection Act. The USDA indicated that removing the documents was in response to a court decision, but a spokesperson contacted by Motherboard would not specify what court case. The records were typically used by animal welfare groups to keep tabs on how well these laws were being enforced, but were also used by the general public to research the inspection records of everything from dog breeders to circuses and zoos. "I've learned that if I see something and think 'I'm really surprised the government posted this,' I need to download it," Kick told me. "So when I found these reports, I thought 'this is surprising,' and I downloaded them."

15 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. Fahrenheit 451 by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    First, disappear all the records. History is for losers. Information is sad.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Fahrenheit 451 by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, history is for losers when the history is full of lies.

      "Trump's raid on Yemen was actually a great success, but the left-wing media doesn't want you to know that."

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  2. Shock of all shocks by Nutria · · Score: 4, Informative

    Trump did not order the files taken down, having been done under the not-so-watchful eye of Barack "Government should be transparent" Obama.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    1. Re:Shock of all shocks by Nemyst · · Score: 4, Informative

      Except he most likely did, considering the files were taken down last week, not last year. TFS has it wrong (though it says last week later in the summary).

  3. Privacy by otterpop81 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because privacy is a basic human right, unless it's records about others.

    1. Re:Privacy by sjames · · Score: 2

      And a company is not a human.

  4. Probably not very exciting by bigman2003 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work at a place that gets inspected by APHIS. APHIS also puts our material into quarantine.

    We have permits for all kinds of things that sound icky and salacious. If someone read the reports they might think, "Wait, something bad is going on here- why are they doing this? Let's follow the trail and find out what they are doing!"

    They would be very disappointed to find out what is really going on- that it is all part of 'normal' business. That the icky sounding stuff would be absolutely pedestrian if you understood it.

    APHIS is a prettyboring place once you get over the idea of 'quarantine'. My guess is that these records would be boring at first glance, andpretty much just spreadsheet data regardingregular inspections once you have an understanding of what they are doing.

    But...maybe that's all just a conspiracy...

    --
    No reason to lie.
  5. Alternative facts by sh00z · · Score: 2, Insightful

    More Trump lies. It was last WEEK, not last year.

  6. Other records need protection too by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    Like this one for example...

    People should be more careful who they vote for

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  7. More information by No+Longer+an+AC · · Score: 2, Informative
    1. Re:More information by Obfuscant · · Score: 2

      Kinda hard to adjust a bulk deletion, ne?

      Not when the "deletion" is a takedown from a website.

      I take things off my websites (I run five) all the time. Does that make all that stuff "automatically important"? That's what Russ Kick thinks:

      Whenever there are documents that were online, but got pulled offline, they're automatically important

      So every time I update my personal website with a new "editorial" on some issue and take down the previous one, my opinion suddenly becomes important to him?

      And does the fact that you don't have a link to the data mean the data has been permanently deleted? What an odd notion, most likely fed by a complete ignorance of how the web works. The "web" is not just another view of a filesystem like Explorer on Windows or Nautilus on Linux. It is a painting created by the web operator that consists of things that may be files on the system, collected as the operator wants you to view them, or live data, or extracts from a database. I have heard people tell me that a URL or URI must be a physical link to some file on the system. The point is, the disappearance of something from a website doesn't mean the information has been deleted, it means the operator has changed the picture he has painted for you.

      And an even stupider idea Mr. Kick has:

      "Nobody's going to go through the trouble to delete something that doesn't matter."

      As my home directory and other directories fill up over time with cruft and obsolete downloads, I ROUTINELY delete things that don't matter anymore. As a web operator, I ROUTINELY take down material that doesn't matter anymore. An announcement of an activity that took place in 2010 doesn't matter anymore. It used to, but not today. And a list of things that are happening today will be obsolete and not matter anymore next week, if not sooner. Perhaps Mr. Kick never deletes anything from his web pages because he just doesn't want to "go through the trouble" of keeping it up to date, but a lot of other web operators do.

  8. Re:Good by Wootery · · Score: 4, Informative

    People will take you more seriously if you don't lead with idiotic nonsense like Animals should be treated as a separate nation.

    Not posting as an AC would also help.

    It's possible to make a strong moral case against meat-eating, but you're not even close.

  9. Re:Signal to Noise Ratio? by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 3, Interesting

    BS, the reason most offices implement the shred everything rule is so that the employees don't have to make a decision about whether or not something meets the "Shred This" criteria. Better safe than sorry.

  10. Except that USDA statement is a LIE. by denzacar · · Score: 4, Informative

    "The review of APHIS' website has been ongoing, and the agency is striving to balance the need for transparency with rules protecting individual privacy.
    In 2016, well before the change of Administration, APHIS decided to make adjustments to the posting of regulatory records.
    In addition, APHIS is currently involved in litigation concerning, among other issues, information posted on the agency's website.
    While the agency is vigorously defending against this litigation, in an abundance of caution, the agency is taking additional measures to protect individual privacy.
    These decisions are not final. Adjustments may be made regarding information appropriate for release and posting."

    A blatant and stupid lie.
    Trump administration forgets that people from the Obama administration are still alive and around.

    Matt Herrick, director of Communications of USDA under Obama, tweeted this regarding the disappearing of animal abuse reports:

    Decision by @usda 2 remove animal abuse reports not required.
    Totally subjective. Same option given 2 past admin. We refused. #transparency

    And it's not the first (and probably not the last) time that Trump administration, once caught doing something they shouldn't be doing, tries to blame it on Obama.
    Like the Muslim ban, Yemen raid fiasco (BTW, that was "winning"), Trump's disastrous calls to Mexican and Australian heads of state... and now this.
    More here.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  11. Re:Signal to Noise Ratio? by Darinbob · · Score: 2

    I worked one place where a manager said it's a good idea to keep everything because it might need to be subpoenaed someday. I worked a different place where a manager said to purge old stuff because it might need to be subpoenaed someday.