August 13, 2001
Jennifer Knox - 757-622-7382

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is asking the Houston
Public Works Department to immediately reconsider its decision to deny PETA a permit to display two fiberglass cows. The cows are covered with messages of vegetarianism and nonviolence. The application was denied on the grounds that the displays were a form of ³commercial advertising,² although PETA is a charity with nothing to sell but the idea that cows are gentle and don¹t deserve to become hamburgers and handbags.

The PETA cow at the heart of the controversy is dressed in a religious robe and carries a sign reading, ³Though Shalt Not Kill. GoVeg.com.² The artwork, by Dallas artist Greg Metz, challenges the idea that the First Commandment, ³Thou shalt not kill,² is followed by the words ³human beings.² PETA believes that people who care about animals should stop eating them

In a letter faxed today to Douglas W. Wiersig, acting deputy director of the division of Houston¹s Public Works and Engineering Department, which oversees permitting issues, PETA¹s legal counsel, Matthew Penzer, writes, ³PETA¹s cows are not designed to attract attention to a commercial business but rather to attract attention to, and thereby eliminate animal suffering.² Adds Penzer, ³We are confident that a fair and impartial review of the facts will reveal that our cows fall under the category of expression consistently found by the courts to be noncommercial and constitutionally protected and that a permit will therefore be promptly granted for our displays.

PETA¹s letter to Mr. Wiersig follows. Please call me if you have any questions.

August 13, 2001

Douglas W. Wiersig,
Acting Deputy Director City of Houston
Public Works and Engineering Department
Traffic Management and Maintenance Division
P.O. Box 1562
Houston, TX 77251-1562

Dear Mr. Wiersig:

On behalf of the more than 700,000 members of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), I am writing to address your office¹s improper refusal of our applications to engage in protected expressive conduct and speech by displaying two fiberglass cows with messages of nonviolence at two public areas in the city of Houston. As a nonprofit organization committed to eliminating animal cruelty and suffering, it was and continues to be our intention to exercise our First Amendment right to engage in expressive conduct that furthers this purpose. As such, last month we properly completed applications to the permitting office requesting permits to display our cows from August 29 until September 5. The applications also specified the public locations that we wished to use, as well as a brief description of the cows themselves (although no information was listed as to what would be written on them). Despite our applications¹ having been appropriately completed, with all requested information given, the permits were denied on the grounds that our displays amount to commercial advertising, a puzzling (and inaccurate) conclusion in light of the fact that there was absolutely no information received by your office, either through the applications or when you personally spoke with our representative, regarding what would appear on the cows. The conclusion that they were commercial advertising was made without seeing them or knowing what they would look like. There is simply no way to reach a fair and objective determination that we intend to engage in commercial speech without actually reviewing the ³speech² that we intended to display. Whatever the reason for denying our applications, it certainly wasn¹t based on a review of the facts.

The cows that we intend to display are dressed in solemn religious attire. They hold signs that read, ³Thou Shalt Not Kill. GoVeg.com.² On their sashes are the messages, ³Blessed Are the Merciful. Go Veg.² These displays are part of our effort to expose the misery suffered by animals in the food industry for no other purpose than to provide humans with a preferred taste. This suffering includes inadequate housing and veterinary care, strict confinement and isolation in some cases and immobilizing overcrowding in others. The animals endure miserable deaths'which include being hung upside down by one leg and having their throats slit, their bellies ripped open, and their limbs cut off'all too often, as was recently documented in The Washington Post, while the animals are still fully conscious. We are determined to eliminate such practices by spreading a message of nonviolence and compassion, but we cannot do so as long as our rights of free expression are denied, as is the case here.

I have reviewed the fax sent to us by Kerry Parker, the person in your office who oversees permit applications, specifying the ordinance on which the denial of our applications was based. There is nothing in that ordinance, which pertains to advertising by commercial businesses, that is applicable to this matter. PETA¹s cows are not designed to attract attention
to a commercial business but rather to attract attention to, and thereby eliminate, unconscionable animal suffering.

We are confident that a fair and impartial review of the facts will reveal that our cows are not, in fact, commercial advertising but, rather, fall under the category of expression consistently found by the courts to be noncommercial and constitutionally protected and that a permit will therefore be promptly granted for our displays. Please contact me immediately upon receipt of this letter so that we can quickly and amicably resolve this matter. PETA and its members are committed to exposing and eliminating animal cruelty and rely on the protections of the First Amendment to accomplish such goals. We are determined to exercise those rights afforded us under the law and will pursue all legal remedies, including the filing of a lawsuit, if this matter is not quickly resolved.

Thank you.