"To one whose mind is free, there is something even more intolerable in the suffering of animals than in the sufferings of humans. For with the latter, it is at least admitted that suffering is evil and that the person who causes it is a criminal. But thousands of animals are uselessly butchered every day without a shadow of remorse. If any person were to refer to it, they would be thought ridiculous. And that is the unpardonable crime. That alone is the justification of all that humans may suffer. It cries vengeance upon all the human race. If God exists and tolerates it, it cries vengeance upon God." Jean Christophe.

Amanda Lollar Responds

I should point out that the below again are just allegations. Lollar chose to sue and get an injunction against Mary for posting what Mary regarded as proof of Lollar breaking the law. Now Lollar is equally guilty of posting what I regard as libelous stuff against Mary.  --Ed
UPDATE -  The truth about the episiotomy:
Amanda Lollar has worked and trained under the direction of a veterinarian for over 20 years. She has developed many life-saving procedures for insectivorous bats over the past two decades. 

Mary Cummins filmed the episiotomy while attending her internship at Bat World sanctuary, and even helped during the procedure. Her voice can be heard offering to assist with the lighting, as well as my voice addressing her. She also took photos after the procedure. What Ms. Cummins failed to explain is that the bat had a pup stuck in her birth canal, likely for several hours. Waiting would have caused the death of the mother, an agonizing death at that. There was no vet available, and most veterinarians don’t do procedures on bats at 11pm anyway. I have preformed this procedure numerous time to save the life of the mother, as we have a wild sanctuary which is home to 30,000 bats as well as a nursery colony. I rescue mothers in trouble every summer.
Cetacaine is used to anesthetize the vaginal area before an incision is made – that is what is being applied with the cotton swab. As with humans, general anesthesia is not used for an episiotomy (which is not considered actually surgery). The pup was stillborn, likely from being stuck in the birth canal for so long. After the pup was discovered dead, the mother was placed under general anesthesia so she could be cleaned up and the incisions closed with surgical glue. The mother fully recovered and was later released.
Mary Cummins has made false complaints about us to Texas Parks and Wildlife, the USDA, the Texas Veterinary Medical Board, the Texas Department of Health, USFWS,  the Mineral Wells Department of Health, the City Manager, the Fire Marshal, Code Enforcement, the Chief of Police and we suspect the IRS. Each and every one of the officials who investigated her complaints found them to be without merit, some even called and offered their help in fighting Ms. Cummins. Mary Cummins has also sent numerous false and damaging emails to the large majority of our supporters, who in turn forwarded her emails back to us in support. 
An injunction was scheduled on May 4th, 2011, to force Mary Cummins to remove the defamatory statements she has made about Bat World Sanctuary and Amanda Lollar from the internet. Approximately three days before the injunction, numerous new pages containing false and damaging statements appeared on dozens of internet sites, including facebook, indybay, twitter, myspace, care2 and more. Copyrighted videos from Amanda Lollar’s most recent book were illegally downloaded and altered in an attempt to display cruelty, then uploaded to youtube. Other recent defamatory items include photos Mary Cummins took without permission while interning at Bat World Sanctuary. 

The Poppy Foundation

Tina Clark

Studies have indicated that surveys show completely different outcomes depending on the way the questions in the survey are worded. One person will answer the very same question in two completely different ways depending on the wording of the question. Therefore, one survey could have two or more completely contradictory outcomes based simply on the way the questions were worded.

Choosing one word over another, even if those words ostensibly mean the same thing, can make a huge difference in the way we look at things, and can even completely change one’s world view. In our relationship with non-human animals, the words we use can have a major impact on the way we view animals and therefore on the animals themselves. Words we use without even thinking about them can color the way we perceive non-humans.

An example is the word "owner" versus the word "guardian." We must stop thinking of ourselves as owners of our animals, and begin thinking of ourselves as their guardians. We must start thinking of them as companions, not as property. A study done by FIREPAW shows that people who refer to themselves as their animals’ guardians rather than as their owners were more likely to treat their animals well. In Defense of Animals has a program called the Guardian Campaign, the goal of which is to have the word "owner" replaced with "guardian" in official language, and it has succeeded in doing so in areas ranging from law codes to shelter and vet forms to signs in public areas–even the entire State of Rhode Island now uses the word "guardian" officially.

Of course, it wasn't too long ago that humans "owned" other humans. We have done away with that, and I eagerly await the day we will regard the owning of any creature as abhorrent. We can start by choosing to use the term "guardian."

Something I hear quite often, even among many animal advocates–people one would think would know better–is the habit of referring to non-human animals as "it," with its concomitant "that" or "which" instead of "who" or "whom." This seems to come so naturally to some people, but whenever I hear it, it is so obviously discordant, it affects me the same way as hearing someone use terribly bad grammar. Many people give the excuse that they don't know the gender of the animal, and therefore can't say "he" or "she." But it is better to be wrong about an animal's gender than it is to treat that animals like an inanimate object. If you didn’t know the gender of a human, would you call that human it? I doubt it. Referring to non-human animals as "it" helps people to think of them as objects, not the living beings they are, and therefore gives permission to exploit them, to treat them any way we please without regard for their feelings.

There is another type of word usage, or mis-usage that has a slightly different background. The use of the word "shelter" to denote a place where animals are taken in and killed, and the use of the word "euthanasia" to describe that killing must also be done away with, but the impulse here is slightly different. These words have come about as euphemisms, a way to make the pounds seem like places that are protecting animals, and the killing that occurs in them seem like a favor to the animals. The use of such words intentionally hides what these places actually are and what actually happens in them. And this, too, has a disastrous effect on the animals. When the public thinks of pounds as "shelters," they are lulled into thinking that animals are cared for and protected there. 

They are more likely to abandon their animals at these places, and are more likely to buy puppies or kittens from breeders or pet shops rather than adopt to save a life. They are also less likely to be outraged at the killing that goes on and to want to do what it takes to stop it. Often those who are working to help animals will continue to use these terms, especially when dealing with members of the pound system, even though they know how inaccurate and misleading the words are, simply because they don’t want to be seen as too radical, or to alienate the people affiliated with the system. I admit I have on occasion fallen into this trap in the past. But I will no longer do so. Therefore, I hereby vow I will no longer use inaccurate terms when talking about animals. I will no longer use the word "shelter" when talking about a place that executes animals, and I will no longer refer to that execution as "euthanasia," even when talking to "animal services" people. I will call a pound a pound, and I will call killing killing. I encourage others to do the same. This is important. We must stop using euphemisms that hide the truth and begin using accurate words for things, so that the truth will be brought to light, and the killing stopped.

A word that is perhaps even worse than euthanasia is destroy, as in "the animal was destroyed." No. The animal was killed. You kill living beings. You destroy inanimate objects. While "euthanasia" simply gives the impression that the killer is performing an act of mercy, saying that one "destroys" an animal actually makes the animal sound as if he were some inanimate object.

The way we talk about animals in the wild also affects the way we think of them and consequently the way we treat them. When they are no longer seen as feeling individuals, but rather "natural resources," well, aren't resources just things we use for our own benefit? When we kill them and refer to it as "harvesting," we turn them into something like wheat or oranges. Then, when some animals who haven’t been targeted for killing are accidentally killed in the massacre, they become "trash animals" (the non-human equivalent of "collateral damage").

Then there's meat--oh, the euphemisms we use to distance ourselves from the fact we are eating someone's dead body. It has been sanitized so entirely that we don't have to think about it–to even connect the meal with the individual we are consuming. We don't eat pigs and cows and calves; we eat pork and beef and veal. If you eat pork, well, pork is not an animal, it’s food, and you don't have to even think about a pig. If we called it what it really was, I think more people would hesitate before they dug into that piece of meat, and many would finally make the connection and perhaps give up meat altogether. This is why those of us who are advocates for animals must start calling dead flesh what it is. And it's funny, but when you call meat what it is in front of someone who's about to eat it, they can become quite irate. Believe me, I know from whence I speak.

Unfortunately, our everyday language is filled not only with thoughtless references to non-human animals, but also with downright derogatory ones. To merely call someone an animal is considered an insult, as are, more specifically, the terms "pig," "rat," and so many others. We talk about "killing two birds with one stone" as if that were a good thing to do. These references are deeply ingrained in our culture, and we who care about animals must be vigilant, not only removing them from our own language, but also bringing it politely to the attention of others who use these terms and phrases.

The words we choose to talk about anything or anyone color the way we view that thing or being. In the case of non-human animals, this can give us an unspoken permission to treat them in harmful ways. After all, wouldn't it be easier for you to "harvest" a "resource" than to murder a fellow being? And doesn’t it seem perfectly permissible–even the right thing to do–to "euthanize" someone rather than kill him?

We must not merely make the change in our language, we must make the change in our hearts as well. Until it becomes second nature for us to say he or she rather than it, who or whom rather than that or which, etc., we are not truly respecting animals. As long as we have to catch ourselves, we are not there yet. Our old outmoded, speciesist view of animals dictates the words we have long used with regard to them, and these words perpetuate that mindset. But it also works in reverse: we begin realizing that animals deserve our respect and real protection, and we begin using words that reflect that, and those words help change the way all of us view non-human animals.

Further Allegations of Animal Cruelty With Video

Ady Gil put it up in his site. He posted this on his wall. 

Amanda Lollar of Bat World Sanctuary performed surgery on this bat. The bat had no pain relief. Lollar is not a veterinarian. She accidentally cut the bat's vagina too deeply. Then she yanked the baby out. She accidentally yanked the umbilicus out. Then the bat's vagina and uterus prolapsed. The bat later died. Baby was born dead but was pink which means he'd just died
The Video, "AmandaLollarBatWorldSanctuary.mp4"
can be downloaded from:
Please, politely email the regulatory agencies who are investigating this animal cruelty. Tell them you want her prosecuted to the full extent of the law. There is another video of her yanking the molars out of a bat with no pain relief. The bat is seen kicking and fighting her then bleeding. This woman should not be operating on bats. Thanks.

Allegations of Animal Abuse

Amanda Lollar commits animal cruelty at Bat World Sanctuary
by Say NO to animal cruelty
Sunday May 1st, 2011 9:47 AM
Videos and photos (see links below) have surfaced of Amanda Lollar performing illegal surgery on conscious bats. The bats can be seen kicking and trying to bite her. In one video she performs an episiotomy on a bat. Lollar accidentally pulls out the bat's vagina and uterus because she cut too much. The bat passes out in shock. She later dies along with her baby. Let authorities know you want Lollar prosecuted for animal cruelty and abuse.

Video of Lollar performing illegal episiotomy surgery on a bat. GRAPHIC!!! Mom and baby die.

Amanda Lollar is a "wildlife rehabilitator" who treats bats in Mineral Wells, Texas. She is not a veterinarian yet she illegally performs surgery. She illegally possesses and uses controlled substances such as Isoflurane. Her illegal acts were reported to the Texas Veterinary Board. They stated, "she committed animal cruelty and should be reported to the police."

Amanda Lollar purchases, possesses, and administers rabies vaccinations to bats. Only veterinarians may possess and administer rabies vaccinations to animals because they can cause an animal to die if not administered properly. Lollar does not report rabid bats to the Texas Health Department. Instead, she euthanizes them illegally with controlled substances, then dumps their bodies into the regular trash. Her illegal acts were reported to the Texas Health Department. They stated that "her acts are criminal and should be reported to the police."

Texas Parks & Recreation was contacted about Amanda Lollar's illegal activity as they control her wildlife rehabilitation permit. They stated, "wildlife rehabilitators cannot perform surgery, and they cannot have controlled substances." The USDA was also contacted because Lollar has a USDA exhibitor permit to exhibit her bats. Lollar violated the Animal Welfare Act by "not providing proper veterinary care." Texas Parks & Recreation and the USDA are currently investigating Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary.

In another video, Amanda Lollar can be seen using forceps to pull out the teeth of a conscious bat. The bat is clearly kicking and trying to bite Lollar. After Lollar yanks two of his teeth out the bat can be seen bleeding. Lollar uses this video as an example of "proper" dental surgery in her website http://www.batworld.org .

Video of Amanda Lollar pulling out the teeth of a conscious bat. GRAPHIC!!!

A visitor to the sanctuary last year found a one-winged dead bat under Amanda Lollar's desk. It had been dead for at least two days as insects were eating it. It appeared to have died from lack of food and water. When Lollar was shown the dead bat she said the bat "was one of my favorite bats." She obviously cannot care for the bats she has if her favorite bat could go missing for days and not be noticed.

The visitor also noted that Lollar has seven dogs even though she has no kennel permit. They are all debarked. Some of the dogs have medical and dental issues, as well as very long nails. They are never walked. One of the dogs cannot use its rear legs, so she's forced to drag herself around. Lollar's outdoor cats also need veterinary care as they appear to have fleas, worms, and dental issues.

A licensed veterinarian saw the videos and stated, "This is a nightmare! No one but a veterinarian should perform surgery. Report her to the state veterinary board. She should go to jail." A viewer of the episiotomy video stated, "That is horrific! They should arrest her immediately. She pulled out her vagina! She should never be allowed around animals ever again because she has a complete disregard for their feelings of pain."

It should be noted that Lollar used photos from this bat's botched episiotomy in her website and book to show "proper episiotomy procedures." What she claims happened in her book is not what happened in real life as evidenced by the video.

These violations were reported to the police as instructed by the Texas Health Department and Texas Veterinary Board. Make sure the Mineral Wells Police Department thoroughly investigates these acts of animal cruelty and abuse. Please, politely ask the Chief of Police Mike McAllester to take necessary action, policechief [at] mineralwellstx.gov. Also ask the USDA Robert.M.Gibbens [at] usda.gov and Texas Parks & Wildlife wpoffice [at] tpwd.state.tx.us to revoke Lollar's USDA and wildlife rehabilitation permits.

Photos of abuse, illegal surgery and controlled substances are here

Video of Amanda Lollar giving illegal rabies vaccination to a baby bat

Video of a skinny, shaking, dying pallid bat at Bat World Sanctuary

Video of Amanda Lollar holding a rabid bat in her hand without gloves. Afterwards she illegally euthanized it with Isoflurane pictured in the background then she dumped it in the regular trash