Thursday, January 12, 2012

Apalachian Chief - Heaven to Hell

Horse Heaven - Apalachian Chief at his previous stable
April 2, 2010

Horse Hell
Thank you, OSPCA, and the veterinary community. Clap, clap, clap.
A question for you all.

Which is worse? Slaughter, from which Chief was saved at the auction, or this? Comments are open, but will be moderated. Sorry.

After allowing Chiefs' health to deteriorate to this state from April 1, 2010, to November 27, 2010, less than a year later, late October 2011, reports say, Apalachian Chief's's vet euthanized him, at the request of the owner.

Reports from the stable say the owner refused to medicate Chief, and continued to insist that mucking and other necessities were not required, nor desired. Reports say the stable owner was owed for Chiefs' board, but started feeding and medicating Chief out of their own pocket. Reports say Apalachian Chief was improving. None of these reports can be verified, safely, for the reporter's sakes.

One final report. The OSPCA threatened to charge Chief's owner, unless the new location of Chief was  divulged. The initial response from the OSPCA, upon being notified that Chief had been moved Nov. 27, 2010, was that they knew where he was. Did the OSPCA ever question the new stable owner? Did they follow up? Why would they? They had decreed in November, 2010 that Apalachian Chief was fine. Apalachian Chief was under a vet's care. Again, two vets condoned this "care" on August 9, 2010..

No crime has been committed. Reports say that the owner deemed that Apalachian Chief was not improving.The vet does what his client requests.

How many more animals shall this owner enjoy the privilege of neglecting to poor health and then euthanizing?
Answer, just keep counting.

To Apalachian Chief.
Aye, a long run home.

addendum, June 9, 2013. Just an excerpt from the NFACC site.
Regarding equines. You know, like Chief.

Here's the link to the whole PDF, all five gabillion pages of it. Of course, people need to know how to read, for this to be useful. NFACCEquineCodeofPractice

Horses must have some form of exercise or turnout at least six days out of seven, unless under stall rest
for medical reasons or severe environmental conditions make this temporarily impossible."
Impossible, indeed.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Poll Results

Can Horses Be Healthy, stalled without exercise for long periods without any social contact or adequate food/water/sanitation?

The correct answers are A, C & D, and not one voter selected any of the politically & legally correct choices.

Which are:
Yes, Of Course. Correct.
No, Not Possible  Incorrect.
Who Cares? Correct.
Horses are animals, and they can be caged forever.Correct.
Our laws mandate food/water/shelter/sanitation, but not all at the same time. The standards of care are entirely at the discretion of the animal owner.

If living indoors, that animal never has to leave his "stall". By law, that animal does not have to be exercised. Everything is acceptable as long as the animal is not "in acute distress." Acute distress can only be reported/believed/accepted as a diagnosis by a licensed veterinarian.

Therefore, this horse, checked by two OSPCA-ordered veterinarians, was never "in acute distress". All animal welfare is based upon this veterinary opinion. Was the horse ever in acute distress? Chronic neglect does not often show itself as acute distress. (Until the animal dies of starvation.)

One must assume the people who knew the correct answers didn't feel comfortable selecting them.

Here's a great comment from a FHOTD reader.
Domdaisy says:
I’m Canadian and live in Ontario and I did not know about this until I saw this today. I can attest that the OSPCA in my area (not sure if it is the same one dealing with Chief) is extremely unhelpful when it comes to horses. They really do look at food, shelter, water at that is IT. And no, they don’t consider the quality of food, shelter or water either.
I’m also in law school and while I am certain that Ontario’s animal cruelty laws are both inadequate and vague, I think that the OSPCA could have still made a difference here. Yes, perhaps legally they may not be able to remove the horse due to our crappy animal rights laws. HOWEVER, if they had loudly and firmly proclaimed that their experts decreed Chief’s living situation to be deplorable it would have made a huge difference. If they contacted the media or even released a statement saying that they wish they could help Chief, but their hands were tied, that the laws suck, etc, it would have at least made it it clear that they stand for humane treatment of animals. Instead, I see them as sanctioning this abuse by ruling that Chief’s “care” doesn’t violate their standards. Maybe the OSPCA could have done nothing “legally” for Chief (which I am still not clear on if that was the case) but they certainly didn’t have to try to make it appear acceptable. If they had said “we hate this, but there is nothing we can do, please write to your MP to get our laws changed” then maybe I would still have respect for them. But. . . no."

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Rebuttal Letter from Doctor - Unfinished

As the Doctor has noted, her schedule has been very busy. Here's the letter Dr. Gaviller has been working on to the OSPCA, to refute the assertion by the OSPCA that any/all pictures shown on the CHDC blog were "several months old".

Pictures redacted, as most are already shown on this blog, in the months noted.

Quoting Dr. Gaviller below.

"The photos I was referring to were not as you say "more than 7 months old". In fact I can give you exact dates & times as the photos have EXIF data on them.

Nov. 19, 2010 – 3 photos, 2 taken at 3:17 p.m. & 1 at 3:18: ribs prominent, bloated belly, few shavings visible around edges of stall & near door, otherwise ‘stall’/garage floor covered with manure & looks rather wet
Nov. 15, 2010 - 2 photos taken at 3:26 p.m.: ribs prominent, bloated belly, few shavings visible at edges of otherwise manure-laden stall
Nov. 14, 2010 - 2 photos taken at 8:23 a.m.: ribs prominent, bloated belly, few shavings visible at edges of otherwise manure-laden stall, water bucket empty
Nov. 13, 2010 - 2 photos taken at 9:59 a.m.: ribs prominent, bloated belly, tailhead prominent, very light skiff of shavings on top of otherwise manure-laden stall; manure stains visible on his right side
Nov. 11, 2010 - 4 photos, 1 at 3:54 p.m., 2 at 3:55 p.m., 1 at 3:56 p.m.: ribs prominent, bloated belly, few shavings visible at very edges of stall, rest of stall not only laden with manure but looks quite wet,  water bucket with a few inches of water at the bottom plus what looks like manure at the bottom

Oct. 25, 2010 - 8 photos, 3 at 9:50 a.m., 5 at 9:51 a.m.: ribs prominent, bloated belly, a good layer of shavings!, water bucket empty except for manure at the bottom, Chief cribbing; a reasonable supply of OK-looking hay visibly available to Chief although he has to reach over a high stall wall to get it - not ideal - potential for wood slivers, bag of sweet feed visible
Oct. 23, 2010 - 6 photos, 5 at 10:04 a.m., 1 at 10:05 a.m.; ribs prominent, bloated belly, tailhead prominent, a prominent crib-line visible on his neck, no shavings visible on top of manure-laden stall, just some hay spilled in area where he has been eating - looks like he has cleaned up all the hay he can reach - and has subsequently exposed some rather moldy-looking hay
Oct. 21, 2010 - 15 photos & 2 videos, 4 photos at 1:36 p.m., 4 at 1:37, 7 at 1:38, 2 videos taken at 1:37 p.m.: ribs prominent, bloated belly, tailhead prominent, water bucket almost empty and debris visible on the bottom, shavings only evident at edges of filthy, wet, manure-laden stall, hay available barely within reach is very moldy-looking; videos show Chief cribbing and appears to actually be eating some of the wood pieces he breaks off
Oct. 20, 2010 - 11 photos, 4 at 6:08 a.m.: ribs prominent, light skiff of shavings on otherwise manure-laden stall, water bucket appears to be about 1/4 full with debris visible in the bottom; 4 photos at 8:15 a.m., & 3 at 8:16: ribs prominent, bloated belly, tailhead prominent, light skiff of shavings present - no change, Chief cribbing on door to stall, 1 of stall sides made from particle board - top is well chewed from past cribbing episodes, no change in water bucket, bag of sweet feed visible
Oct. 18, 2010 - 4 photos taken at 3:21 p.m. plus 1 video taken at 3:21 p.m.: ribs prominent, bloated belly, crib line prominent, nice layer of shavings, water bucket 1/2 full but also lots of debris in the bucket, picture too dark to determine type of debris, lots of very moldy hay readily available some of which has been eaten; video show Chief not so much cribbing but more just eating his stall door - apparently in preference to the available moldy hay - interpretation: he is hungry and the food available is not appropriate
Oct. 17, 2010 - 16 photos, 5 taken at 11:11 a.m., 8 taken at 11:12 a.m., & 3 taken at 11:13 a.m.: ribs prominent, bloated belly, light skiff of shavings over top of manure on stall floor, water bucket almost empty   with debris at the bottom, very moldy hay available, bag of sweet feed visible
Oct. 16, 2010 - 8 photos, 5 taken at 6:33 a.m. and 3 at 6:34: ribs visible, bloated belly, crib line prominent, reasonable amount of shavings on top of manure, water bucket almost empty with debris/ manure     on the bottom, moldy hay available, bag of sweet feed visible
Oct. 10, 2010 - 9 photos, 3 taken at 6:27 a.m.: water-bucket less than half-full & dirty, a good bed of shavings on top of manure, manure stain on his side, ribs prominent, bloated belly, very moldy hay available; 3 taken at 7:26 a.m.: no change
Oct. 9, 2010 – 6 photos, 4 taken at 11:12 a.m. & 2 at 11:13 a.m.: ribs prominent, belly bloated, tailhead prominent, shoulders muscles appear to be atrophying, crib line prominent, head deep in feed bowl in 1 photo, floor of stall filthy, wet, manure covered except where bits of hay spilled in corner
Oct. 8, 2010 – 12 photos, 7 taken at 9:52 a.m. & 5 at 9:53: ribs visible, floor of stall is filthy, wet, covered with deep layer of manure, no shavings visible, water bucket is almost empty, round mold covered bale of hay available for him – picking at it in 1 photo, licking stall sides in another
Oct. 7, 2010 – 6 photos taken at 10:20 a.m.: bloated belly, floor filthy with manure, only sign of shavings is slight hint at stall edges, new very moldy round bale of hay present – at 1 end of bale the mold is actually black – this is not appropriate hay for a horse – later photos (see above) show the mold is present throughout the bale, not just on the exterior surface
Oct. 6, 2010 – 5 photos, 1 taken at 9:23 a.m., 1 at 9:25 & 3 at 9:26 a.m.: ribs visible, only hay present is small amount (less than a leaf) of moldy-looking hay in a hay net, the manure on the floor shows evidence of some shavings mixed in but the shavings do not appear fresh
Oct. 5, 2010 – 6 photos taken at 3:05 p.m.: ribs prominent, bloated belly, water bucket is almost empty and filthy, small amount of dusty, moldy hay available in hay net hanging outside stall, few remains of bale on the floor is not within Chief’s reach, Chief is cribbing, at least 1/3 of stall floor is thickly covered with wet manure, rest has evidence of shavings mixed in but does not appear fresh
Oct. 2, 2010 – 13 photos, 4 taken at 11:46 a.m., 4 at 11:47, & 5 at 11:48 a.m.: ribs prominent, bloated belly, crib line prominent when Chief not cribbing, Chief is cribbing in 2 photos and licking the stall door in 2 photos
Oct. 1, 2010 – 9 photos, 4 taken at 5:27 p.m. & 5 at 5:28: ribs prominent, bloated belly, relatively fresh skiff of shavings visible mixed with some manure on stall floor but Chief has pawed down to bare floor in several spots – total bedding thickness appears to be about 2-3 inches at most except where it’s piled against the wall from his pawing or lying down, water bucket virtually empty (can see dry bottom at 1 edge) with debris at the bottom, reasonable amount of hay appears within reach and no visible mold but still doesn’t look like good hay."
end quote.

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Further Letters from Doctor

Previous Letters from Doctors

From: Pat Gaviller
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 4:55 PM
To: Ward McAlister/OSPCA
Subject: Re: Apalachian Chief
Hello Ward
It is my understanding that you tried to reach me today by phoning my former clinic. I will try and call you but as we are in the process of moving to B.C. and currently have no phone and no cell service at our place in B.C. I am frequently unreachable by phone. Therefore email may be the easiest way to contact me. I am somewhat confused by your mention of letterhead to my former clinic manager as nowhere in my previous email/ letter to you was the Country Hills Veterinary Clinic even mentioned and I have no email letterhead for the clinic. I would be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Kind regards,
F. Patricia Gaviller D.V.M.

From: Ward McAlister []
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 8:02 AM
To: Pat Gaviller
Subject: RE: Apalachian Chief
Hello Dr. Gaviller,
My investigator found your contact on the internet and I assumed, mistakenly your original message was sent using their account. My apologies.
Anyway I wished to speak to you directly and give you a update and a overview of what we can and cannot do under the OSPCA Act.
Please  Google “Ontario Society for the  Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.36.” .
Hope this clarifies some of the challenges we face when dealing with issues of animal welfare in the Province.
Thank you
Ward McAlister
Sr. Inspector Central Region,
& Investigation Advsior
Hello Ward,
I apologize for taking so long to get back to you but life has been very busy. I did Google the reference you suggested – I had in fact already looked over the current version of this Act in detail prior to my initial letter. Then and since I have also perused the website of the OSPCA and the Alberta SPCA. Having dealt with issues of animal abuse in practice on a number of occasions I know how difficult they can be to deal with. I know that education is the 1st priority and is the preferred approach versus animal seizure and owner prosecution.
However to quote the Canadian Agri-Food Research Council’s Recommended Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Farm Animals: Horses (the underlining is mine)…
1.1.4 It is the responsibility of people working with horses to be knowledgeable of the proper care and handling of horses. Ignorance is not acceptable as an excuse for cruelty and neglect.

Besides it is my understanding that the owner of Apalachian Chief is registered with the Ontario Racing Commission and has worked as a groom so even ignorance is a hard pill to swallow as an excuse in this case. And as I also stated in my original letter I would rather be able to examine an animal and see for myself – that has not been possible in this case. Nevertheless to quote your own Act –
Veterinarians’ obligation to report
11.3  Every veterinarian who has reasonable grounds to believe that an animal has been or is being abused or neglected shall report his or her belief to an inspector or an agent of the Society. 2008, c. 16, s. 8.

And so I chose to report what I felt and continue to feel to this day, is a bona fide case of animal abuse in the form of neglect. Again to quote the Act –
Standards of care for animals
11.1  (1)  Every person who owns or has custody or care of an animal shall comply with the prescribed standards of care with respect to every animal that the person owns or has custody or care of. 2008, c. 16, s.
18.1 HYPERLINK "" \l "s18p1s1"(1) Every person is guilty of an offence who,
 (b) contravenes or fails to comply with section 11.1;

And although finding these regulated standards of care took some doing I was able to find them …, relevant sections are quoted below – the asterisks are mine as I believe this is where the owner is falling short of her responsibilities.

Basic standards of care for all animals
2. (1) Every animal must be provided with adequate and appropriate food and water. O. Reg. 60/09, s. 2 (1). ***
(5) Every animal must be provided with an adequate and appropriate resting and sleeping area. O. Reg. 60/09, s. 2 (5). ***
(6) Every animal must be provided with adequate and appropriate,
(a) space to enable the animal to move naturally and to exercise; ***
(b) sanitary conditions; ***
(c) ventilation; ***
(d) light, and;
(e) protection from the elements, including harmful temperatures. O. Reg. 60/09, s. 2 (6). ***
(7) If an animal is confined to a pen or other enclosed structure or area,
(a) the pen or other enclosed structure or area, and any structures or material in it, must be in a state of good repair; ***
(b) the pen or other enclosed structure or area, and any surfaces, structures and materials in it, must be made of and contain only materials that are,
(i) safe and non-toxic for the animal, and ***
(ii) of a texture and design that will not bruise, cut or otherwise injure the animal; and …

Now I understand from some of the blogs where well-meaning people have tried to bring attention to Chief’s plight, that there have been some 17 (?) visits by the OSPCA to the premises in question; and the OSPCA’s own press release states that orders have been issued and the owner has complied with these orders. Well I’m sorry, but from the photographs (and a picture is worth 1000 words) it would seem that compliance lasted at the most a day or 2 before Chief’s stall was back in an unsanitary state, his water bucket was empty, and his food supply was again very questionable – present in insufficient amounts, often not reachable/ present at all, and of very poor (in fact I would call it ‘inappropriate’) quality.

Of course the results of the OSPCA visits also beg the question as to how it was that the owner managed to have food, water and clean bedding present and timed so well with these visits when it appears blatantly obvious from the photographs and documented reports that this was the exception and not the rule?
One would almost suspect that the OSPCA had a leak and that somehow the owner was made aware of the impending visits – but I’m sorry, I digress.
As I’ve been investigating Chief’s case I’ve also become aware that the OSPCA has come under fire in recent months and years for a number of seizures of animals that were later returned without prosecution and indeed with the implication that the seizures were in fact not legitimate. I can understand that this might make the OSPCA particularly cautious now, not wanting to act too quickly if a case does in fact not warrant seizure. However given the continuing sorry state of Chief’s domicile I can’t believe that the OSPCA’s inspectors can believe this is true in his case.

The only actual improvement I can see in the last 2 months is a mild (and I stress mild) weight gain – but this is likely only a small regain of some fat stores; there is no sign of regaining lost muscle. And he still has an unhealthy bloated appearance. That pendulous belly is also unlikely to be fat – I would be suspicious of intestinal parasitism and/or bloat due to poor digestion related to poor quality forage/ poor feeding regimen in general. Using the Body Condition Scoring System for Horses I would suspect that he at best would be a ‘3’ – however without being able to ‘feel’ him this is only a best guess. Of course the ideal score in this scale is a 5.

3 - THIN Fat built up about halfway on spinal vertebrae, transverse processes cannot be felt. Slight fat cover over ribs. Spinal vertebrae and ribs easily discernible. Tailhead prominent, but individual vertebrae cannot be visually identified. Point of hip appears rounded, but easily seen. Point of buttock evident. Withers, shoulders and neck accentuated.

And to quote the OSPCA act in terms of non-compliance…, again the asterisks are mine – although I am not privy to all the dates of the visits or details of any orders I would surmise from the photos that the orders are not being appropriately complied with...
Authority to determine compliance with order
11(6)  If an order made under subsection (1) remains in force, an inspector or an agent of the Society may enter without a warrant any building or place where the animal that is the subject of the order is located, either alone or accompanied by one or more veterinarians or other persons as he or she considers advisable, and inspect the animal and the building or place for the purpose of determining whether the order has been complied with. 2008, c. 16, s. 10 (3).

Taking possession of animal
14.  HYPERLINK "" \l "s14s1" (1)  An inspector or an agent of the Society may remove an animal from the building or place where it is and take possession thereof on behalf of the Society for the purpose of providing it with food, care or treatment to relieve its distress where,

(a) a veterinarian has examined the animal and has advised the inspector or agent in writing that the health and well-being of the animal necessitates its removal;

(b) the inspector or agent has inspected the animal and has reasonable grounds for believing that the animal is in distress and the owner or custodian of the animal is not present and cannot be found promptly; or

(c) an order respecting the animal has been made under section 13 and the order has not been complied with. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.36, s. 14 (1). ***

Time for compliance with order

13.(4)  An inspector or an agent of the Society who makes an order under subsection (1) shall specify in the order the time within which any action required by the order shall be performed. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.36, s. 13 (4).
13.(5)  Every person who is served with an order under subsection (1) shall comply with the order in accordance with its terms until such time as it may be modified, confirmed or revoked and shall thereafter comply with the order as modified or confirmed. R.S.O. 1990, c. O.36, s. 13 (5); 2008, c. 16, s. 10 (2).
18.1 HYPERLINK "" \l "s18p1s1"(1) Every person is guilty of an offence who,
(d) contravenes subsection 13 (5); ***
(e) contravenes or fails to comply with an order of the Board; or ***
(f) knowingly makes a false report to the Society in respect of an animal   being in distress. 2008, c. 16, s. 16.

I would also emphasize some quotes from the OSPCA website…
How to recognize animal cruelty
Look for these common signs of neglect or intentional cruelty witnessed by Ontario SPCA investigators:
 * Animals who are repeatedly left alone without food and water. Often they are chained up in a yard.
* Animals kept in dirty conditions including being forced to stand in their own urine and excrement

Neglect: Neglect is the failure to provide adequate water, food, shelter or necessary care. Examples of neglect include: starvation; dehydration; inadequate shelter; parasite infestations; failure to seek veterinary care when an animal is in need of medical attention; allowing a collar to grow into an animal's skin; confinement without adequate light, ventilation, space or in unsanitary conditions; and failure to trim hooves or nails resulting in excessive growth (e.g. hooves curling upwards). In some cases neglect is simply a result of the owner's ignorance, and can be rectified by law enforcement authorities, like the Ontario SPCA, educating the owner and issuing orders to improve the animal's living conditions. In more severe cases, circumstances may require the Ontario SPCA, or other law enforcement authorities, removing the animals immediately to provide urgent medical care.

Signs of neglect – Chief is repeatedly left alone for extended periods of time without food  and water and is kept in dirty conditions including being forced to stand in his own urine and excrement. Neglect: The failure to provide adequate water, food, shelter…– I feel these conditions are met repeatedly. Necessary care? – that is harder for me to judge at a distance – without looking at, palpating and smelling his feet; without doing a microscopic exam of his feces to determine parasite load; without doing a blood test to determine other vital parameters… And what about exercise…….. please….. it is necessary for a horse’s physical, mental and emotional well-being!

I feel the OSPCA has done enough in terms of trying to educate this owner – this is not a case of ignorance. And is she really complying with all the orders? There is the letter of the law which I feel gives the OSPCA more than enough back-up to seize Chief There is also the spirit of the law – let’s face it – this owner would appear to have no intention of fulfilling Chief’s basic needs. I could go further quoting from the Recommended Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Farm Animals: Horses – but I would end up quoting almost the entire code as Chief’s owner is non-compliant with both the spirit and the letter of this Code. The neighbours who have been reporting Chief’s neglect to the OSPCA are in fact doing their duty not only as caring members of the public but also as knowledgeable members of the horse industry themselves.

The ‘Code’ states…
1.1.2 People involved in the horse industry should be aware of the welfare of horses under their care or the care of others. This may involve reporting cases of cruelty or neglect to the proper authorities, who have the authority to lay charges under federal and provincial regulations.

So… Ward, I ask you and your peers at the OSPCA to revisit Chief’s case yet again and put yourself in Chief’s ‘shoes’ – ask yourselves if you can in all good conscience allow this to continue – do you really want to wait until Old Man Winter wreaks his havoc and takes Chief’s situation from bad to worse? I applaud the good work the OSPCA has done in the past. Please don’t drop the ball now.
Dr. F. Patricia Gaviller, D.V.M., B.Sc.


Saturday, November 27, 2010

The one true reason

Chief's story, which has finally ended today. 7 months, and 27 days, over. He is wearing a warm blanket, and he is not in that garage anymore. People finally returned. They had been here before. That is all that matters in this story.

As the CHDC says, no horse is ever truly safe. They are just safer with some people, than they are with others. Could be worse, I'd always think, reading some of the horror stories out there. Not all of them, of course. Cases like the starvation of those 33 horses near Barrie in 2005 come to mind.
How long did that take for the one horse to finally go down?
Consider that, too. Why isn't an animals' neglected distress "actionable" until the animal is near death?Why is neglect so impossible to stop? Why do so many people prefer to keep animals in a state of permanent distress, which is what I consider neglect to be? And why is it so utterly impossible for the government's appointed Animal Welfare Officers to detect? How is it even possible for an equine veterinary specialist to condone a horse in a cage?

Puppy Mills are also considered suitable and adequate, as long as there is food water shelter & sanitary, you are good to go. No exercise is required, according to the decrees I have listened to, from our Animal Welfare officers.

Animals are stoic. They do not scream and cry when they run out of food. They just stop living, very, very slowly. Perhaps that is why neglect is so impossible. It is too quiet. The media wants a bang, not a whimper. Whimpers are dull.

Chief was a demonstration of the Animal Welfare Laws, as they stand in this province of Canada.

Chief was sent to remind us that it does not matter what kind of animal you are, you may be caged in inappropriate circumstances that negatively impact your health. For as long as is "necessary".

You suffer, because it is a "necessary" suffering. Your owner deems it necessary. And that is all you are, an owned product. Merchandise. For Sale. You have as many rights as a farm animal, and they don't really have many, at all. Pets are just animals. You can pack them tighter together, the smaller they are.

As long as you are at least alive, you are decreed to be healthy. Go down, collapse, OH, then, the law notices.
But not before.
Never before.
There are more cases like Chief's out there. We do not hear about them. The neglected are quiet.

Someone Talked.
Chop, Chop.

To Raising A Ruckus. One voice at a time.

For KC. RIP.