On June 1st, Vincent and Melaine received a so-called “cease and desist” letter via email. This was clearly intended to intimidate, rather than serve as a legitimate legal notice, which, if genuine, would have been delivered via certified mail with proof of both mailing and receipt. For the record, should Mickaboo choose to pursue legal action, we would welcome the opportunity to engage in discovery and conduct depositions. Perhaps under oath, the organization might finally be compelled to speak truthfully.

Below are our responses to the specific accusations contained in this letter. Sections from the letter are in bold.

“We represent Mickaboo Companion Bird Rescue (“Mickaboo”). Mickaboo’s investigation shows that you have misappropriated sensitive and confidential internal information through unauthorized access to Mickaboo’s computer systems. You then posted that information online along with multiple defamatory statements. It appears you have been planning to do this since at least January 2025, months before termination of your volunteer services from Mickaboo.”

We question the claim that a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization can possess “sensitive and confidential internal information” in the way a private corporation might. As a public charity, Mickaboo is accountable to its donors, volunteers and the public. It does not have the privilege of operating in secrecy.

There was no unauthorized access. We simply used the same databases and ticketing systems available to all Mickaboo coordinators in the course of their volunteer duties. And yes, we have been preparing this for nearly a year. It has taken that long to carefully gather evidence and compile it into the report that now forms the basis of this website. The catalyst was Melaine’s discovery of Max and other “permanently damaged” African greys, followed by documentation of the extraordinary sums of money spent at For the Birds

“You have recently ramped up your conduct after Mickaboo stopped collaborating with you as volunteers on May 16, 2025.”

We did not “ramp up” anything. As the letter itself acknowledges, we have been preparing this since “at least January.” Our efforts have been methodical and deliberate from the start. The Mark Riverside email address was established specifically to ensure continuity in the event we were removed from Mickaboo—an outcome we anticipated, given the nature of the concerns we were uncovering.

You level the following charges against us. Please provide examples and evidence of these accusations. We have provided documented evidence of all of our claims. You have not.

• You consistently ignored directives from management and the board.
• You put birds’ health at risk multiple times by cutting corners on placements and disregarding policies;
• You refused to collaborate, take feedback, or change any of your conduct;
• You directed foster homes to bring birds to vets of your choosing without authorization from our Medical Director
• You made public false claims with regard to Mickaboo’s Medical Director and veterinarians

Our responses to other allegations:

“You brought proprietary financial information belonging to Mickaboo to a veterinarian office to discuss with one of our veterinarian partners without consent or authorization, and with the intention to create criticism and concern about the organization’s conduct.”

Mickaboo is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, and as such, its financial records are not proprietary in the way they might be for a private company. Nonprofits have a legal and ethical obligation to operate transparently and be accountable to their donors, volunteers, and the public.

Yes, we did share financial data with one of Mickaboo’s veterinary partners, specifically to raise concerns about the organization’s conduct and spending. That is, in fact, the purpose of this entire site: to expose systemic issues and encourage long-overdue reforms that benefit both the birds and the broader Mickaboo community.

“You created your own alternative training class with dangerous advice about bird health and medication.”

This accusation is not only misleading but borders on absurd. The so-called “dangerous” advice referenced in our training materials was drawn directly from Dr. Brian Speer’s well-respected book, Birds for Dummies, a widely used resource authored by a board-certified avian veterinarian.

We welcome any veterinary professional, including Dr. Speer himself, to review the content in question. The real concern here may be less about the safety of the material and more about discomfort with transparency and independent education efforts.

“You lifted pieces of conversations from Mickaboo’s Slack and email, and changed the context to further your mission to disgrace the organization.”

We shared screenshots from Mickaboo’s Slack and email platforms with the surrounding context that was relevant to the specific concerns being raised. At no point were these materials altered or misrepresented.

If Mickaboo believes that additional context would clarify or change the meaning of what was shared, we invite them to publish it—either here or through the Discuss list—and we will gladly include it on this site for transparency. Our goal is to present a full and accurate picture, not to conceal it.

“Your recent conduct appears aimed at nothing more than destroying the organization.”

This accusation fundamentally misrepresents our purpose. We have no interest in “destroying” Mickaboo. On the contrary, our efforts are motivated by a desire to reform and preserve the organization by addressing serious structural, financial and ethical issues that have gone unacknowledged for too long.

We care deeply about Mickaboo’s mission and the birds in its care. Our goal is not destruction. It is accountability, transparency, and lasting improvement.

You have unfortunately crossed several lines that take your conduct beyond just disgruntled ex-volunteers and bring it to the level of unlawfulness. For instance:

“You conspired to access Mickaboo’s computer systems without authorization. Vincent did this using an email account that he was not authorized to access after his volunteer period ended. On information and belief, Vincent created the unauthorized email account for future use after his volunteer period ended. This violates multiple laws at the federal and state level, including the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and California Section 502. It is particularly egregious in that Vincent was volunteering to help with the IT systems of Mickaboo before the cessation of his volunteer services.”

This allegation is factually incorrect and legally unfounded. At no point did Vincent—or anyone else—“conspire” to access Mickaboo’s systems without authorization. All access occurred while Vincent was an active, authorized volunteer assisting with Mickaboo’s IT systems. He operated within the same platforms and permissions used by other coordinators and technical volunteers.

The email address in question was created during his tenure, as part of a contingency plan in the event we were removed from the organization—an outcome we anticipated due to the concerns we were uncovering. It was not used to access Mickaboo systems after his separation, nor did it serve as a vehicle for any unauthorized or malicious activity.

The legal citations offered—the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and California Penal Code § 502—do not apply to the facts at hand. Under current legal interpretations, including the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Van Buren v. United States, merely retaining or repurposing access after separation does not constitute a violation unless there was intentional, unauthorized access after permission was revoked, or actual damage or misuse of data. No such actions occurred here.

This claim appears to be a baseless attempt to intimidate rather than a legitimate legal argument.

“You misappropriated a slew of confidential and proprietary internal information from
Mickaboo.”

This is simply a repetition of earlier claims, which we have already addressed. As previously stated, Mickaboo is a nonprofit organization, and the information in question—much of which pertains to finances and internal operations—cannot reasonably be considered “confidential” or “proprietary” in the context of public accountability.

No information was misappropriated. It was gathered through standard access channels available to volunteers in the normal course of their duties.

“You posted confidential internal information online at the following website:
https://thetroublewithmickaboo.com/”

This is yet another restatement of the same claim, already addressed above. The website in question publishes information relevant to Mickaboo’s operations, finances, and decision-making—subjects that are not confidential under nonprofit governance standards.

As a public charity, Mickaboo has a responsibility to operate transparently. The materials we shared were obtained lawfully through volunteer access and were published to inform stakeholders and promote accountability—not to conceal or distort.

“You also made multiple defamatory statements on the site. Mickaboo welcomes feedback, criticism, and supports expression of opinion.”

If Mickaboo truly welcomes feedback, criticism and open expression of opinion, it raises a serious question: Why are dissenting voices routinely silenced or dismissed? Why are concerns deflected rather than addressed directly, and why are legitimate questions so often met with defensiveness or misdirection?

Labeling critical observations as “defamatory” while claiming to support open dialogue is inherently contradictory. Transparency means more than just permitting questions—it means answering them honestly and taking accountability when concerns are raised.

“You have made multiple statements on this site that you know are false.”

If Mickaboo claims we have made false statements, we invite them to specifically identify which statements are untrue and provide evidence to the contrary. Below are several of the statements cited, along with our continued position:

• “Data is kept on personal computers, with no organizational oversight or shared access.”
  This is based on direct observations and statements from current and former volunteers, including leadership’s own admissions regarding record-keeping practices that lack centralized oversight.
• “The $40,000–$50,000 we spend each month on boarding.”
  This figure is based on documented financial records and veterinarian invoices that reflect monthly expenditures for long-term bird boarding, primarily at FTB.
• “Medical decisions often rely on personal opinion rather than current, peer-reviewed veterinary science.”
  This reflects concerns from multiple volunteers and fosters who have witnessed inconsistent medical decisions—many made by individuals without formal veterinary credentials or in disregard of evidence-based practices.
• “Preventive care is routinely neglected.”
  This is supported by a pattern of delayed or denied wellness exams, grooming, and early interventions—particularly for long-term boarded birds—despite requests from fosters or concerns from external veterinarians.

We stand by these statements and would welcome a transparent, evidence-based discussion if Mickaboo can provide documentation that proves otherwise.

“An inaccurate, automatically generated transcript (https://thetroublewithmickaboo.com/mickaboo-5-24-zoom-meeting-transcript/) that misrepresents statements made by Mickaboo Leadership in multiple places.”

The transcript in question was not automatically generated, nor was it presented as a verbatim record. It was compiled by a Mickaboo volunteer who attended the May 24 meeting and took detailed notes in real time. Where the notetaker was uncertain or missed part of the discussion, those gaps were explicitly marked.

All volunteer names were removed to protect individual privacy. The transcript was created in good faith to document the meeting’s substance and make it accessible to those concerned about transparency and leadership accountability. If Mickaboo believes any portion of the transcript is inaccurate, we welcome specific corrections and will include them here.

“Our investigation also shows you may have wiretapped a Zoom call on May 24, 2025 after volunteers on the call explicitly declined to consent for recording. This violates federal and California law as well.”

We did not record the May 24 Zoom call, nor did we authorize or facilitate any recording of it. In fact, our own investigation suggests that Mickaboo leadership may have recorded the call, despite volunteers “explicitly declining to consent to recording.”

If Mickaboo believes a recording exists, we encourage them to clarify who made it and under what authority—particularly in light of their stated concern for compliance with federal and California recording laws.

“Mickaboo has tried and is continuing to try to de-escalate the situation. Please stop your unlawful
conduct.”

If Mickaboo is genuinely seeking to de-escalate the situation, the appropriate course of action is to respond directly and substantively to the issues we have raised. This includes providing documented evidence that refutes our assertions, rather than issuing vague accusations.

De-escalation begins with transparency. We urge Mickaboo to make its financial records and internal decision-making processes fully accessible to the public, as is expected of any responsible 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.

They asked us to “please also do the following within five (5) days of receiving this letter:”

“Cease and desist all unauthorized access, misappropriation and defamation of Mickaboo.”
We note the grammatical ambiguity of this statement, but more importantly, we request that you provide evidence supporting your claims of unauthorized access, misappropriation or defamation. To date, none has been offered.

“Inform Mickaboo of all the information you took from its computer systems.”

All information referenced or cited was accessed through standard coordinator tools and systems during our time as volunteers. Much of it is publicly available or was collected in the normal course of performing our duties. The relevant materials have been compiled into the website https://thetroublewithmickaboo.com, which we encourage you to explore.

“Provide a written confirmation that no further accounts have been created for unauthorized communication with members of Mickaboo’s Discuss List.”

As whistleblowers, we reserve the right to take appropriate measures to expose misconduct, including facilitating communication amongst concerned volunteers. This does not constitute unauthorized access or misrepresentation.

“Return all confidential internal Mickaboo information that you have misappropriated.”

As previously stated, we reject the claim that the information shared constitutes confidential or proprietary material. Mickaboo is a public nonprofit organization, subject to transparency and accountability. If you believe otherwise, please cite the legal basis for your claim and identify the specific materials at issue.

“Cease contacting Mickaboo volunteers with direct criticisms and commentary on internal Mickaboo meetings.”

We are still volunteers and remain in regular contact with our peers. Discussing internal matters amongst fellow volunteers is not misconduct—it is community.

“Cease contacting surrenderers who relinquished their birds to Mickaboo to allege abuse of their birds.”

We speak from direct experience. We would not place our own birds with Mickaboo under current conditions. We will continue to warn surrenderers and the public when we believe surrendered birds may be at risk.

“Name the parties to whom you have sent Mickaboo confidential internal information.”

We have not distributed confidential internal information. It appears your real objective is to identify other contributors to this report. We will not comply with that request.

“We understand that Mr. Hrovat has four foster birds and has not communicated whether he intends to adopt them or not.”

If you are unclear on Mr. Hrovat’s foster status, we encourage you to review your own foster records. If you are requesting the return of those birds, please clarify where you intend to place them—FTB, the “Bird Hotel,” or one of the already overcrowded private homes currently housing dozens of birds.

“You both must stop any activity that constitutes you representing that you have authority to speak on behalf of Mickaboo, including with respect to placement of any birds.”

Please provide evidence that either Melaine or Vincent have claimed to speak on behalf of Mickaboo or have acted with unauthorized placement authority since they were dismissed. This appears to be a fabricated concern.

“Again, Mickaboo only wishes to move on and attempt to rebuild its community; Mickaboo does not wish to escalate this situation. But you must stop your unlawful conduct.”

If Mickaboo truly wishes to move forward, we encourage leadership to begin by acknowledging the issues we have documented and responding with transparency. If you have evidence of any “unlawful conduct,” we ask that you provide it specifically and in writing.

“Mickaboo will not allow you to continue your attempts to destroy it.”

Mickaboo continues to repeat the accusation that we are attempting to “destroy” the organization. We ask again: why would we want to do that? What possible benefit would we gain from dismantling a rescue we’ve dedicated so much time and care to?

Our goal has always been to save Mickaboo—by demanding the transparency, accountability, and ethical leadership that are currently lacking. We are advocating for reforms that would strengthen the organization and better serve both its volunteers and the birds in its care.

It is the current leadership that appears invested in maintaining a flawed status quo—one that we have documented extensively in this report. So we ask again, and publicly: what is it that you’re trying so hard to keep hidden?