tagged w/ Animal Rights - Not Welfare
-
Los Angeles Times...
U.S. Supreme Court takes up treatment of pigs
The National Meat Assn. challenges a California law that says slaughterhouses must remove and 'humanely euthanize' animals unable to walk.
.
By David G. Savage, Washington Bureau
October 29, 2011, 6:17 p.m.
Reporting from Washington—
.
The Supreme Court has decided plenty of cases concerning cruelty, inhumane treatment and executions, but until now, none was about pigs.
The case of the "nonambulatory pigs" involves a dispute between California and the pork industry over how to handle pigs unwilling or unable to walk when they arrive at a slaughterhouse.
The issue, which the justices will take up next week, has already gotten the Obama administration in trouble with the Humane Society of the United States, which faulted government lawyers for joining the case on the side of the pork producers.
Under a 3-year-old California law, a slaughterhouse operator must immediately remove a "nonambulatory animal" from a herd and "humanely euthanize" it.
Federal law says animals that are lying down must be removed and inspected, but most need not be kept from the slaughterhouse.
"Sometimes the pigs are stressed or fatigued from the trip, or they're just stubborn. Usually, they recover, and if they're fine, they go into the food supply," said Minneapolis lawyer Steven Wells, who represents the National Meat Assn.
"We're not concerned about a pig who is taking a nap," said California Deputy Atty. Gen. Susan K. Smith in Los Angeles. "Our definition of a nonambulatory pig is one who is unable to stand and walk without assistance." She said the state's law, which is on hold pending the legal challenge, would protect the human food supply and prevent animal cruelty.
The lawyers concede there is no happy end for the pigs regardless of which side prevails. The pigs are either euthanized separately or sent into a slaughterhouse.
Wells, of the meat association, said there would be a "severe financial impact" on the pork industry if a typical slaughterhouse were forced to cull 200 to 300 pigs a day because they were lying down.
He is urging the high court to strike down the California law on the grounds that it is preempted, or trumped, by the federal law.
Under California's approach, the sick pigs "will be euthanized, but it ends their suffering," Smith said.
Though the case before the court is all about pigs, it began with shocking scenes of weak and wobbly cows being prodded, dragged and bulldozed into a slaughterhouse in San Bernardino County. A secret surveillance video showing the abuse was released by the Humane Society in January 2008.
The revelations triggered the largest meat recall in American history. They also prompted President Obama to issue an order in 2009 that forbids "downer" cows from being sent to slaughter. Because mad cow disease can be transmitted to humans in rare instances, all sick cattle must be kept from slaughterhouses, federal officials said. However, no such ban was imposed for pigs and other farm animals.
That disparity set the stage for the legal dispute over California's broader ban on downer animals at slaughterhouses.
The National Meat Assn. sued on behalf of the pork producers and argued that California did not have the authority to impose its rules on slaughterhouses. Their lawyers insisted the federal regulation was better because it required inspections of sick animals rather than automatically killing them. These inspections of live pigs are crucial for detecting swine diseases, such as foot-and-mouth disease, that can devastate a herd, they said.
A federal judge in Fresno agreed with the industry and barred the state from enforcing its law, ruling California lawmakers had overstepped their bounds.
"Hogwash," wrote Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 3-0 decision siding with California. He said states have always had the authority to say that certain animals, such as horses, may not be slaughtered for food.
Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States, said the major pork producers "have a history of mistreating downer pigs, often while USDA inspectors are present." He cited reports of "conscious pigs being dragged from trailers" at a slaughterhouse in Los Angeles County.
.
PHOTO: California's deputy attorney general says the new law, which is on hold pending the legal challenge, would protect the human food supply and prevent animal cruelty. Above, pigs at an Oklahoma farm.
J. Pat Carter, Associated Press
.Los Angeles Times...
U.S. Supreme Court takes up treatment of pigs
The National... more
-
-
http://jonathanturley.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/article-0-07af1e86000005dc-547_634x387.jpg
.
Federal Appeals Court Upholds Dismissal of Animal Rights Activism Lawsuit Against Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hiBq32WYajbxiTSP-kaKE4Z4zzOw?docId=deda6c3aa956465db3fb5cb0be82b3cb
AP | The Associated Press...
.
Appeals court upholds dismissal of elephant suit
By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press – 15 hours ago
.
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court on Friday upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by animal rights activists that claims the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus abuses its elephants.
The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington agreed with a lower court judge that the Animal Protection Institute and a former Ringling employee Tom Ryder did not have the legal standing to sue the circus. The lower court found that Ryder was "essentially a paid plaintiff" because he received at least $190,000 from the animal rights activists pursuing the case.
The lawsuit claimed the circus is violating the elephants' protection under the Endangered Species Act with the use of bullhooks for training and prolonged chaining during train rides between shows.
Feld Entertainment Inc. argued the elephants are not hurt and that the instruments are necessary to keep the animals under control and protect public safety. The Vienna, Va.-based company runs the circus and has an elephant sanctuary in Florida.
Feld attorney John Simpson said the appellate ruling supports the company's $20 million racketeering lawsuit against Ryder, animal rights groups and their attorneys that claims they committed bribery, obstruction of justice and other illegal acts in filing the elephant suit. Simpson said the purpose of the company's suit is to keep animal rights groups from using the federal court system to pursue "radical agendas."
"Feld Entertainment is the target today and some other businesses are going to be targets tomorrow," Simpson said in a telephone interview. "And at some point it has to stop."
The Animal Protection Institute declined to comment on the ongoing litigation. But they are asking a judge to dismiss Feld's racketeering suit, calling it "a transparent effort to stifle any criticism of FEI's elephant treatment practices" and to bankrupt and punish the animal rights groups.http://jonathanturley.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/article-0-07af1e86000005dc-547_634x38... more
-
-
treehugger...
.
"Why Love One But Eat the Other?" Billboards Stir Controversy in Toronto Subway System
.
They are pretty careful about who gets to put ads up in the Toronto subway system, and animal rights activists usually don't make the cut. But through September and October, subway riders have come face to face with a powerful campaign to convince people that if they like cute kittens and puppies, then they shouldn't be eating chickens and pigs. Kimberly Caroll, an organizer of the campaign says:
Pigs, cows and chickens are remarkable beings," says campaign spokesperson Kimberly Carroll. "Cows will walk for miles to reunite with a calf after being sold at auction. Pigs have intelligence beyond that of a 3 year-old human. Chickens mourn the loss of their loved ones. We hope that in connecting with these animals and the grievous suffering that is behind every burger, omelette, and hot dog, people will be motivated to make more compassionate food choices.
I was surprised that the campaign got approved at all; Kimberly explained:
We ran a similar campaign back in 2009 on the TTC at about a quarter of the size of the current one. At that point the ad had to go through various levels of approval while we waited on pins and needles, but it was approved! This time around, it seems there were no concerns. We've been very impressed with the TTC for this. We believe this is the first animal rights campaign to run on the TTC.
While the puppy and pig comparison is probably not a stretch for most people, the kitten and chicken one is probably a bit more difficult. But they make a case that chickens are "inquisitive, affectionate and personable."
It is not a new message, that animals are animals and it is crazy to treat one kind so differently from another; the British Vegetarian Society did it decades ago. But it is new, seeing it in Toronto plastered all over the subway, where the TTC says it will be seen by 5.7 million people every week. Kimberly says that it is effective; she is getting "several emails, posts, and twitters a day from folks saying they're going veg after seeing the ads."
.treehugger...
.
"Why Love One But Eat the Other?" Billboards Stir... more
-
-
Los Angeles Times...
.
Editorial
Elephant rides should be a thing of the past
Elephant rides are a tradition at the L.A. County Fair, but it's one tradition the fair should abandon, both for the animals' and the public's sake.
PHOTO: Rosie, an Asian elephant, cooled herself off with water during a break from giving rides at the Los Angeles County Fair. (Los Angeles Times)
.
September 7, 2011
The Los Angeles County Fair is steeped in traditions, from its Ferris wheel to fried everything. But elephant rides are one tradition the fair should do without.
The Humane Society of the U.S., the country's most influential animal welfare organization, is against them, saying that elephants are typically trained for rides and other performance activities through the use of bullhooks and electric prods. The Assn. of Zoos and Aquariums "strongly encourages" its member organizations to discontinue rides in the interest of safety.
The elephants at the fair are supplied by the Perris, Calif.-based outfitter Have Trunk Will Travel, a member in good standing of the association. But its founders, Kari and Gary Johnson, are accustomed to controversy following in their elephants' footsteps. Officials of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, who asked the fair to cancel the rides, circulated a video from Animal Defenders International that purportedly shows trainers from Have Trunk Will Travel using bullhooks and electric prods to get elephants to perform.
In a statement, the Johnsons said the video was six years old and heavily edited. "We stand by our care and training methods," said the statement. Kari Johnson confirmed that the trainers use bullhooks — "the pointed end is to push them away, the curved end is to pull them toward you." But she defended the company's care of its six Asian elephants, saying they are well treated on a 10-acre ranch and noting that the outfitter is involved in research on and conservation of the endangered species.
What's more, the company has supplied Asian elephants to the fair off and on for 20 years without incident or evidence of inhumane treatment on the grounds, according to fair spokesperson Leslie Galerne-Smith.
In our view, the video is beside the point here. Zoos, including the L.A. Zoo, are spending millions to create elaborate habitats for elephants, which are the world's largest land mammals. Some zoos have reevaluated whether their facilities can sufficiently accommodate the needs of pachyderms. Some are also instituting a policy of almost no unprotected contact between keepers and elephants, which is considered more humane and safer for all. At a time when the management of captive elephants is focusing on conservation and the animals' well-being, hoisting people onto their backs seems out of step.
The animal welfare groups, the elephant supplier and the fair officials all say they care deeply about elephant conservation. If that's true, there ought to be a way to allow people — including fairgoers — a chance to see and learn about these stately creatures of the wild without riding them.
.Los Angeles Times...
.
Editorial
Elephant rides should be a thing of the... more
-
-
The Sun...
Caught on film: Shocking moment a ‘surplus’ baby calf is slaughtered at farm supplying milk for chocolate
By JOHN COLES and DAN SALES
Published: 27 Jul 2011
A CALF is coldly shot in the head — at a dairy farm supplying milk to the chocolate industry.
The unwanted young bull had been taken from its mother and led to a trailer where other animals already lay dead.
A man believed to be a licensed slaughterman from a fox-hunting kennels killed it with a pistol.
The footage was secretly recorded by animal welfare activists who infiltrated 15 farms producing milk to be used in choc bars.
Members of campaign group Viva! said their film exposed the "bloody secrets" behind the sweets — while stressing that nothing they uncovered was illegal.
Viva! acted after figures revealed 100,000 male calves a year are deemed a surplus by-product on Britain's dairy farms because they cannot give birth or produce milk.
Some die at birth or go for pet food.
Disturbing
But others are shot like the one filmed at Harwood Gate Farm near Bristol, which displays a sign showing it supplies milk to chocolate giant Cadbury.
Viva! spokesman Justin Kerswell said: "I thought it was shocking. Customers might find it very disturbing."
Cadbury, which produces 250 million bars of its famous Dairy Milk each year, is owned by US food giant Kraft.
A spokesman said calves were normally sent to a dealer.
But the one which was filmed had a deformed leg so it was disposed of "humanely".
Kraft Foods said in a statement: "Consumers can be reassured we take animal welfare standards seriously.
"Creating a market for bull calves is a challenge for the dairy industry.
We have been working with our suppliers to encourage humane solutions."The Sun...
Caught on film: Shocking moment a ‘surplus’ baby calf is... more
-
-
L.A. considers putting zoo operations in private hands
Officials say the change would save nearly $20 million over five years and prevent possible closure. Critics question the savings and say the move could mean less transparency in animal welfare.
Los Angeles Zoo
Photo: Zoo patrons view a pair of Masai giraffes at the Los Angeles Zoo. Two potential private operators have expressed interest in running the zoo. (Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
By Kate Linthicum, Los Angeles Times
July 28, 2011
.
Someone else may soon be tending to the misty artificial rain forest at the Los Angeles Zoo where Bruno, a 300-pound orangutan with a wispy orange beard and a hulking frame, makes his home.
The city opened the zoo and botanical gardens in 1966, but officials are now considering a proposal to turn over management to a private operator. That means the gardeners, plumbers and other city employees who help run the zoo could be transferred to other departments and replaced with private workers.
Like any issue involving labor — or animals — the fight over the fate of the zoo has caused a considerable stir.
City officials say the change would save nearly $20 million over the next five years and rescue the zoo from possible budget reductions or even closure. But opponents of the plan question the savings and warn that privatization could mean steeper ticket prices for the zoo's 1.5 million annual visitors and less transparency when it comes to animal welfare.
The zoo plan is only the latest example of a shift in how budget-strapped officials think about "core services" and City Hall's basic obligations to taxpayers. They are also considering proposals to privatize the Los Angeles Convention Center, an animal shelter in the San Fernando Valley and several arts facilities.
Such public-private partnerships are common in Los Angeles County. The Los Angeles County Museum of Art and the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History are two county facilities operated by nonprofit organizations.
"It's not a revolutionary idea," said Miguel Santana, L.A.'s chief administrative officer, who came to City Hall from the county in 2009. "This model has worked across the country as a way of ensuring services are maintained in an era of declining revenues."
According to a draft proposal for the zoo plan, which the City Council's Arts, Parks, Health and Aging Committee will consider Thursday, Bruno and the rest of the animals would remain the property of the city, along with the zoo's Griffith Park grounds.
All current staff would remain employees of the city, but those who do not hold zoo-specific jobs might be transferred to other city departments. Future hires would be employees of the new operator.
Two potential operators have already stepped forward.
One is the Greater Los Angeles Zoo Assn., or GLAZA, a nonprofit headquartered on the zoo's campus that raises money for the institution, manages its memberships and operates its concessions. In 2010-11, it raised about $13 million for the zoo, according to GLAZA President Connie Morgan
The other party is Parques Reunidos, a Madrid-based theme park operator that runs 70 amusement parks, water parks and zoos worldwide.
Dave Towne, a former consultant for the L.A. Zoo, said that if a private company takes over, the face of the zoo may change. "Any private, for-profit operation is going to Disney-fy it," he said. "That's just what they do."
Towne, former director of the Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle, oversaw the transition of that zoo's management to a nonprofit 10 years ago. He said private operators run the majority of the nation's major zoos and are often more successful at marketing and fundraising than cities, in part because they are less encumbered by bureaucracy.
Animal activists fear that could result in a lack of transparency. Catherine Doyle, of In Defense of Animals, said that if the zoo is privatized, "it will become even more secretive and insular."
She and others have long accused the zoo's management of not being forthcoming about animal care, and have asked that the operator be required to answer to a city-appointed animal welfare commission.
Adriana Hawkins, a zoo gardener for six years, says everyone will suffer if longtime employees are reassigned. The zoo will lose expertise, she said, and the employees will lose jobs they love.
"I don't want to go down to the harbor; I don't want to spend my life on the freeway," Hawkins said. "I have a passion for the zoo."
Santana and others have said that privatizing the zoo will allow it to flourish. A report he commissioned said that under private management, the zoo would be able to reap up to $3.8 million more each year in revenue, thanks to new opportunities for corporate sponsorship, fundraising and special events.
But City Councilman Richard Alarcon said that's all the more reason to keep control of the zoo. "If a private corporation can make it profitable, why can't we?" he said.
It costs $26 million a year to run the zoo and pay the salaries, benefits and pensions of more than 200 employees. The city contributes about $14.6 million; the rest of the budget comes from ticket sales and donations.
Officials say if the city does not privatize management, that figure could grow as high as $19.4 million by 2015. But even if it does complete a deal, the city will still contribute about $13.8 million to the zoo in 2015, according to the proposal.
The savings may be small in the short term, but Santana insists that it adds up. Next year, he and other officials will have to find a way to close a $200-million budget deficit.
.L.A. considers putting zoo operations in private hands
Officials say the change... more
-
-
Animal Aid (Great Britain)...
Revealed: cigarettes stubbed out on slaughter pigs' faces
Posted 28 July 2011
But Defra refuses to prosecute!
Cigarettes stubbed out on pigs’ faces; one animal punched in the head; another goaded in the face; regular blows and kicks; seriously injured pigs forced to drag themselves to slaughter… All these abuses in one UK slaughterhouse and Defra still won’t prosecute.
Today, Animal Aid has released footage shot secretly at Elmkirk Ltd (Cheale Meats), an Essex-based, family-run slaughterhouse that kills up to 6,000 pigs a week and whose website proclaims: ‘Be proud of higher welfare, buy British pork.’
The film – which was recorded on a number of secretly installed cameras over a period of four days – shows three different workers stubbing their cigarettes out on the faces of pigs, while one of the men landed a violent punch on the face of a pig who was walking by.
In addition, three seriously injured pigs were forced to crawl from the lairage, through the race and into the stun pen. Animal Aid’s cameras followed them as they were pushed, dragged by their ears and kicked along. Such treatment breaches the welfare laws multiple times.*
Animal Aid filmed many examples of incompetence. Pigs are stunned using electrified tongs, which should span their brains and render them immediately insensible. However, three of the four workers filmed stunning pigs showed a callous indifference to the suffering of the animals, many of whom were not stunned correctly. Some were subjected to painful electric shocks from the tongs, and fell to the ground screaming.
It is legal to use electric goads on the muscles of the hindquarters of pigs, but only for brief periods and only when there is space ahead of the animal in which to move. At Cheale Meats, the electric goad was used in the face of one pig and on the anus of another.
An additional worrying episode showed an apparently dead pig being dragged into the stun pen by a pole in her mouth. She was not stunned but she was shackled, hoisted and had her throat cut on the slaughter line. How this animal died, what she had been suffering from and where her meat ended up remain unknown.
Cheale Meats is the ninth UK slaughterhouse to be secretly filmed by Animal Aid in the past two-and-a-half years. The national campaign group has identified legal breaches in seven of the previous eight – some of them so serious that one slaughterhouse was forced to close down. Cases were built for the prosecution of nine men and four slaughterhouse operators before a change of government brought a change of heart, and all the cases were dropped. Defra, under the coalition government, said that, unlike its Labour predecessor, it could not proceed because the evidence was obtained without the permission of the slaughterhouses. Animal Aid believes that this is a politically motivated excuse and cites the recent Panorama programme, which secretly filmed care home workers without the permission of the owners, and whose film is being used to prosecute.
Animal Aid sent the Cheale Meats evidence to the Food Standards Agency (FSA). This is the body that supplies vets to slaughterhouses and investigates breaches of the welfare and hygiene law before passing the cases to Defra, which is the prosecuting body. The FSA replied on 14 June saying: ‘Defra is not prepared to commence prosecution proceedings where the initial allegation is based on CCTV footage gained without the consent of the relevant Food Business Operator.’
Kate Fowler, Head of Campaigns at Animal Aid says:
‘Since we first began investigating English slaughterhouses, we have been pressing everyone involved – regulators, industry bodies and the government – to act decisively to end the cruelty. At first, they appeared contrite and promised action but now their words ring hollow. If Defra won’t prosecute these flagrant breaches of the law; if the vets can’t or won’t act to stop the cruelties; and if the slaughterhouse owners look the other way, who is there to stop animals from being abused at the most vulnerable time of their lives? It seems that all involved are content to keep quiet and to allow these cruelties to continue. So much for the UK having the best welfare standards in the world!’
.
Additional information
Animal Aid has secretly filmed inside eight other slaughterhouses from January 2009 until the present. Previous investigations can be seen here: http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/n/CAMPAIGNS/slaughter//2419//
While the government has so far failed to take action to curb the cruelties, the supermarkets have responded to Animal Aid’s campaign for CCTV to be installed in the slaughterhouses that supply them. Ten major supermarkets Morrisons, Waitrose, the Co-op, Sainsbury’s, Aldi, Tesco, Lidl, Asda, Marks & Spencer and Iceland, along with wholesalers Booker, have now agreed to make CCTV mandatory.
* The treatment of the injured pigs breaches the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations in a number of ways:
The occupier of a slaughterhouse or knacker’s yard and any person engaged in the movement or lairaging of animals shall ensure that pending the slaughter or killing of any sick or disabled animal in the slaughterhouse or knacker’s yard, it is kept apart from any animal which is not sick or disabled. (Schedule 3, Part II 2 (e)) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995/731/schedule/3/made
The occupier of a slaughterhouse or knacker’s yard and any person engaged in the movement or lairaging of any animal shall ensure that any animal which has experienced pain or suffering during transport or following its arrival at the slaughterhouse or knacker’s yard is slaughtered or killed immediately. (Schedule 3, Part II, paragraph 4 (a)) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995/731/schedule/3/made
The occupier of a slaughterhouse or knacker’s yard and any person engaged in the movement or lairaging of any animal shall ensure that any animal which is unable to walk is not dragged to its place of slaughter or killing but is slaughtered or killed where it lies; or if it is possible and to do so would not cause any unnecessary pain or suffering, is transported on a trolley or movable platform to a place of emergency slaughter or killing where it is then immediately slaughtered or killed. (Schedule 3, Part II, paragraph 5 (a,b)) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995/731/schedule/3/made
The occupier of a slaughterhouse or knacker’s yard and any person engaged in the movement of any animals shall ensure that every animal is moved with care and, when necessary, that animals are led individually. (Schedule 3, Part II, paragraph 9) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995/731/schedule/3/made
No person shall inflict any blow or kick to any animal. (Schedule 3, Part II, paragraph 12) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995/731/schedule/3/made
No person shall lift or drag, or cause or permit to be lifted or dragged, any animal by the head, horns, ears, feet, tail, fleece or any other part of its body in such a way as to cause it unnecessary pain or suffering. (Schedule 3, Part II, paragraph 7) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995/731/schedule/3/madeAnimal Aid (Great Britain)...
Revealed: cigarettes stubbed out on slaughter... more
-
-
From The Veganomaly...
5 Smart[ass] Answers to 5 Dumb[ass] Questions About Veganism
13 May 2011
PART ONE...
This is the first installment of ’5 Smart[ass] Answers to 5 Dumb[ass] Questions About Veganism’, a Q&A written by me and my partner Joseph (vegan for 22 years!) in the hopes of offering some catharsis to vegans everywhere, as well as practical answers to those often loaded questions that can come out of nowhere and leave you unsure of what to say. And because the people asking them tend to either be genuinely curious or openly antagonistic, we’ve created separate responses for each. The ‘Smart’ answers are designed for the well-intentioned omnivore, while the ‘Smart-Ass‘ answers are reserved for the pseudo-curious interrogator who really only wants to get under your skin.
This will be a regular feature on my blog, and here’s the exciting part– YOU can send in any question/comment you want addressed. Got an uncle who likes hunting and insists on rubbing it in your face? How about a coworker who stares at your quinoa salad like you’re from a different planet? Or what about the 100′s of good-hearted people who seem to ask the same dumb-ass questions over and over again? Send them to us! We’ll do our best to craft a clever response and hopefully make you laugh while we’re at it! Just fill out the form at the bottom of this post, with the question or comment you want answered.
-
Question One: Where do you get your protein?
The Smart Answer: Lots of places! Whole grains, legumes, nuts, tofu, soy milk, hummus, falafels, veggie burgers, bean burritos, pad thai – just to name a few. It shouldn’t be that surprising to learn that plants offer up lots of protein; if they’re good enough for big, strong herbivores like gorillas, elephants and rhinos, why wouldn’t they be good enough for us?
The Smart-Ass Answer: Where do you get your nutritional propaganda? Kwashiorkor, also known as protein deficiency, is all but non-existent in the developed world; it’s unlikely you’ll ever meet anyone who has suffered from it, vegetarians and vegans included. The real issue at hand is where YOU get YOUR protein, as it’s most likely from the body of a sick, suffering animal raised for the sole purpose of selling cheap, unhealthy food.
-
Question Two: But I’ve been to family farms and seen animals that have a pretty good life. What’s wrong with that?
The Smart Answer: I don’t blame you for thinking that the farms you’ve seen are fair to the animals while reflecting an industry norm. After all, the animal foods industry spends tens of millions of dollars a year trying to convince you that modern animal farms are happy-go-lucky places where kind, old farmers attend to their animals’ every need. The sad reality is that 99% of the animals raised for food in this country are raised in factory farms, most confined their entire lives to tiny cages or stalls where the vast majority of their most basic needs (comfort, freedom of movement, foraging, socialization, access to fresh air and sunlight, and so on) are never met.
People want cheap animal products from healthy, happy animals, but few realize that the two are mutually exclusive. Over 10 billion animals are killed and eaten each year in North America; numbers like that simply cannot be sustained without treating animals like machines. That is why at the end of the day, it’s not really the meat or milk or eggs that need to be marketed, but the myth about how they were produced. This is why it is relatively common to be offered a free tour of a ‘friendly’ farm showcasing a handful of ‘happy’ animals, but completely impossible to get a tour of a factory farm. The industry doesn’t want you to know the truth, because the truth would bankrupt them.
The Smart-Ass Answer: People said the same thing about human slavery. That didn’t make it right, and the fact that some farmers are ‘nice’ enough to give their animals food and room to walk around doesn’t make their exploitation right, either. The bottom line is that in 99% of all cases, farmed animals are raised for the sole purpose of marketing their flesh, milk, eggs, skin or hair at a profit, and if anything gets in the way of that (vet bills, high quality food, spacious housing), it will always be the animals who suffer. That is why even on the most ‘humane’ farms, practices like castration, dehorning and tail-docking are performed without anaesthetic; unwanted baby males are discarded or butchered; unproductive (read: not productive enough) animals are sent to slaughter; and so on.
If it was really about the animals’ comfort and wellbeing, the animals we’ve selectively bred to maximize productivity (at the expense of their physical and emotional health) would cease to be bred (read: artificially inseminated), and those that remained would be allowed to live out the rest of their lives in peace at places like Farm Sanctuary. Anything less than this is exploitation and abuse in the name of profit, pure and simple.
CONTINUED...From The Veganomaly...
5 Smart[ass] Answers to 5 Dumb[ass] Questions About... more
-
-
This author is NOT funny... or kind.
Getting to the Meat of the Issue
By Ryan Pike
Special to The Hoya
Published: Friday, March 25, 2011
Updated: Friday, March 25, 2011 04:03
A big-name PETA representative sparred with the Philodemic Society over the ethics of eating meat in Lohrfink Auditorium Tuesday evening.
A vegan since 1987, Bruce Friedrich, vice president of policy and government affairs for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, has engaged in debates at nearly 35 schools across the country. Aiming to bring the organization's vision — PETA holds that animals are not for eating, clothes, experiments or human amusement — to Georgetown students, Friedrich faced off against Philodemic member Stephano Medina (SFS '12).Friedrich's resolution, the eating of meat is unethical, was not affirmed after it failed to achieve a majority of the 75 voting philodemic members. Overall there were 37 affirming, 34 negating and four abstaining votes.
Friedrich's opening address cited the resource inefficiencies and the environmental toll of sustaining a meat-based diet.
"It takes about 20 calories [in feeding] a chicken, a pig or a cow to get one calorie back out in the form of meat," Friedrich said.
He also emphasized the cruel treatment that animals are subjected to in order to produce meat.
"The things that happen to farm animals both on factory farms, and on organic farms and on free-range farms, a range of things happen to animals that would warrant felony cruelty charges were dogs and cats similarly abused," Friedrich said.
He asked if anyone would eat the gray cat pictured on the screen behind him.
"OK, four or five people are willing to eat Gracie, she's my cat," Friedrich quipped.
Medina countered that while humans do share some similarities with animals, the differences are far greater, diminishing humans' abilities to wholly understand and fully empathize with the experience of animals raised to produce meat.
"Although we can measure serotonin levels and we can measure stress levels, I ask you to have a little bit more respect for the spectrum of human emotion and say ‘I know what pain is to me, and I can't understand fundamentally what pain is to any other organism,'" Medina said.
Medina also emphasized the distinction between animals and humans.
"Are we obligated to treat animals with respect and compassion because of rights the animals have? No. If that were true, then every single time a lion ate a zebra in the wilderness, some immoral action would be occurring," Medina said.
After opening statements, Philodemic Society President Nicholas Iacono (COL '12) opened the floor to approximately 90 minutes of dialogue. The debate was dominated by members of the society, although a few nonmembers also had the opportunity to express their reasoning.
However, both keynotes failed to bring up an important topic according to Sam Dulik (SFS '13), the vice president of Philodemic Society.
"A quote is missing from this debate, and that is one that says ‘there is room for all of Alaska's animals out there right next to the mashed potatoes,'" he joked.This author is NOT funny... or kind.
Getting to the Meat of the Issue
By... more
-
-
From March 21 - March 25, 2011, Vegan Mainstream takes a look at the different kinds of vegan bullies, from those who criticize veganism on the outside of the community, to those who point fingers from within.From March 21 - March 25, 2011, Vegan Mainstream takes a look at the different kinds... more
-
-
45 Australian Species Face Extinction in 20 Years
by David DeFranza, Washington, DC on 03.24.11
wild donkeys photo
Photo credit: asibiri/Creative Commons
For decades, the remote Kimberley region of Northern Australia has stood as a stronghold for dozens of rare native species of mammals, birds, lizards and other vertebrates. Now, these species are under serious threat from encroaching invasive species and a series of fires.
The pressure is so severe, researchers believe, that as many as 45 species could face extinction within 20 years.
"We're in the midst of a massive extinction event in Australia and the north has really been the last stronghold for many species of birds and mammals and reptiles," Tara Martin, a researcher with the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, said, "the Kimberley is really their last chance on Earth."
SLIDESHOW: The World's Most Lovable Invasive Species [Click on link above.]
The threat, a new report explains, comes from feral cats, wild donkeys, and a series of forest fires. The cats, researchers found, are opportunistic hunters devastating native populations. Donkeys and goats compete for the scarce food and water resources in the region.
The simplest means of defense, conservationists say, is to reduce the population of goats and donkeys. Educating the public on the impact stray house cats have on local ecosystems is also critical.45 Australian Species Face Extinction in 20 Years
by David DeFranza, Washington, DC... more
-
-
__________________________________________
Please click on the above link, so you can see for yourselves their bullshit ratings charts for what they think of as animal welfare. These poor animals are still killed, and that makes this an issue for animal RIGHTS.
Don't buy into Whole Foods Market's approach. Killing is killing. Exaggeration is exaggeration. Selling is selling. Slaughterhouses are slaughterhouses.
WARNING! There are four graphic photos following WFM's grandiose 5+ steps.
__________________________________________
From their website........
"The more you know about our meat, the better"
At Whole Foods Market, we're dedicated to helping you make informed choices about the food you eat. It's often easy to forget that the burger, steak or drumstick on your plate was once an animal. How was that animal raised? How was it treated? Where did it come from? What about added hormones and antibiotics? Was its growth artificially accelerated to get to market sooner and reduce feed cost? We are committed to answering these questions.
The 5-Step™ Animal Welfare Rating Standards
Global Animal Partnership
We've chosen to partner with Global Animal Partnership to certify our producers' animal welfare practices. We're rolling out their 5-Step™ Animal Welfare Rating Standards in every Whole Foods Market store in the United States.
Global Animal Partnership is a non-profit organization dedicated to continually improving the lives of farm animals. They have developed the 5-Step Animal Welfare Rating Standards that rate how pigs, chickens and cattle are raised for meat. Standards for other species (turkeys, lambs and others) are in development, so stay tuned and be sure to look for Global Animal Partnership 5-Step ratings the next time you stop by our meat department.
It's important to note that getting to Step 1 is a great accomplishment! Step 1 requires more from our farmers and ranchers than we have ever asked before. The Step ratings are assigned by independent third-party certifiers using auditors trained by Global Animal Partnership.
Look for this rating system when you choose our beef, pork or chicken. It's your way of knowing how the animals were raised for the meat you are buying.__________________________________________
Please click on the above link, so you... more
-
-
Woman charged with animal cruelty after air-mailing a dog, then demands a refund
Bev on 2/08/2011 11:20:00 AM |
The clerk at the post office asked Stacy Champion from Minneapolis all the usual questions on receiving the parcel, “Any perishables, liquids or hazardous materials?” Champion said no, but asked the workers to be careful with the box because it “was so delicate.” She further added that if staff heard any noises, not to worry as it contained a toy robot. The box was to be delivered to Champions’ son in Atlanta, and on the outside of the parcel she had written, “This is for your 11th birthday. It’s what you wanted.”
Workers called a postal inspector after the box moved and began making noises, who gave permission for the box to be opened. To their surprise a 4 month old puppy rushed out, panting heavily.
“It’s just crazy,” said Minneapolis Police Sgt. Angela Dodge. “It was supposed to be a birthday gift for a family member. It would have been kind of traumatizing to get a dead puppy.”
Dodge said that the air holes on the box had been covered in packing tape, and that the parcel would take two days to reach its destination. The journey would include being in the cargo hold on a plane where temperatures reach -40 degrees. “And there was no food and water,” added Dodge. “Puppies can’t go for long periods without food and water.”
In a bizarre twist, Champion returned to the post office and demanded a refund for the $22 postal charges for the parcel. Postal workers refused.
Champion has since stated that she wants the puppy, named Guess, to be returned to her, and went before the appeal board yesterday (Monday) morning. At the appeal, Champion admitted to putting Guess in a box with no food and water, and as the parcel was not sent she said, “I was deprived of my son not receiving his gift for his birthday. I felt really, really bad as a mom.”
The hearing officer has ruled that Champion cannot have Guess returned to her, and he must stay in the shelter for at least another week. Champion does still own the puppy, and must pay a bond for his care until Feb. 28th when she returns to court on two counts of misdemeanor animal cruelty. If she does not post the bond, she will lose ownership and he will be available for adoption. But if the bond is paid, then ownership will be determined by the outcome of the court case.
Meanwhile, against all the odds, Guess has recovered well from his ordeal. Sgt. Dodge said, “Despite the trauma he endured, he appears to be a healthy and happy puppy who likes to play and receive attention from staff.”
Source: Star TribuneWoman charged with animal cruelty after air-mailing a dog, then demands a refund
Bev... more
-
-
Suits filed over dog shootings highlight growing field of animal law
A Maryland couple sues the sheriff's office after their Labrador is shot by deputies. Legal experts say such cases are on the rise as pets are coming to be viewed as more than property — at home and in court.
By Lorraine Mirabella, Baltimore Sun
January 2, 2011
Reporting from Baltimore —
Sheriff's deputies knocked on Roger and Sandra Jenkins' front door early one Saturday to serve a court paper to the couple's teenage son. Within minutes, a chaotic scene unfolded, and the family's chocolate Labrador retriever had been shot by one of the deputies and had collapsed bleeding in the snow.
The dog survived, but its owners say it is permanently disabled. The couple sued the Frederick County Sheriff's Office in October, alleging reckless endangerment and infliction of emotional distress.
The case highlights the rapidly evolving field of animal law, which is growing as people insist that pets are not property, but part of the family.
"The common law is that a dog is just chattel — a piece of property that's easily replaced," said Rebekah Lusk, an associate attorney with the Thienel Law Firm in Columbia, Md., who handles animal law cases and represents Roger and Sandra Jenkins. "People focusing on animal law are saying the courts need to see animals as not just a replacement piece of property."
Maryland lawmakers approved a measure in 2009 allowing pet owners to set up trusts for their animals. An owner can designate a trustee to oversee the care of the animal upon the owner's death in the same way that a parent would create a trust for children.
Custody cases involving pets have been filed too. In July, a Calvert County Circuit Court judge ordered a divorcing couple to share custody of their dog.
And law schools are seeing greater interest in the animal law field. Seminars address animal welfare, pet trusts, veterinary malpractice, endangered species protections, 1st Amendment issues, pet-custody disputes, the link between animal cruelty and violent behavior, and animals' legal standing.
"Judges are no longer laughing these issues out of court," said Alan Nemeth, an adjunct professor at the University of Baltimore who teaches a seminar in animal law. "It's become more legitimate, even in divorce cases. That's a big change, and it has been happening across the country."
Courts in some jurisdictions have begun to make a link between domestic violence and cruelty to animals, said Susan Hankin, an associate professor at the University of Maryland School of Law. "If someone goes to court to get a protective order, it includes not just the victim and her children, but her pets can be included."
Hankin, who teaches an animal-law seminar that includes estate planning, custody and service animals, said interest in the topic was growing.
"There's an increasing recognition that animals play a role in our life that's different from property," she said. "It really includes a wide range of legal territory.... You can learn a lot of the areas of law by looking at the relationship between people and their companion animals."
In the Jenkins' case, according to the lawsuit filed in Frederick County Circuit Court, two deputy sheriffs went to the family's home in Taneytown, Md., in January to serve a court paper on their 18-year-old son, who no longer lived with his parents and was facing a drug-possession charge.
Roger Jenkins says he told a deputy that he needed to put the family's dogs away before he allowed him in the house. The lawsuit says that while Jenkins was letting the dogs outside to put them in a kennel, his Labrador, Brandi, noticed the unfamiliar vehicles in the driveway and began barking.
That prompted an officer to shoot the dog in the leg and chest without warning, according to the lawsuit. "Characteristic of the Labrador retriever breed of dog, Brandi is very friendly, not aggressive, and posed no threat to the deputies," the lawsuit states. "Her natural instinct, as is any dog's instinct, is to announce the presence of unfamiliar people on her property by barking."
The Frederick County Sheriff's Office denies liability and says the actions were legally justified, according to a document filed with the court in December.
The incident followed the July 2008 shooting deaths of two Labrador retrievers in Prince George's County, Md., during a raid by a police SWAT team and county narcotics officers at the home of Berwyn Heights Mayor Cheye Calvo. Police mistakenly thought his wife was involved in drug trafficking.
A lawsuit filed by Calvo against the state of Maryland is pending.Suits filed over dog shootings highlight growing field of animal law
A Maryland... more
-
-
From: Grey2K.................
For over 60 years, the public has been prevented from seeing the terrible way dogs are treated at Tucson Greyhound Park. Last summer, our team of professional investigators finally got into the kennel compound to learn the truth.
This groundbreaking investigation was covered last night by KOLD-TV Channel 13 TV News. Click here to see the story:
http://grey2kusa.c.topica.com/maaosgKab1ZITaUfVdUeaeQyhC/
Last year, GREY2K USA released a report documenting that a dog was injured every 3 to 4 days at Tucson Greyhound Park in 2008. Greyhounds suffered broken legs, fractured skulls, dislocations, and muscle tears. Now, our investigators have proven that dogs at Tucson Greyhound Park also endure lives of terrible confinement.
* The kennel compound consists of a series of warehouses surrounded by a barbed wire fence and blocked by a guard shack.
*
*
* Greyhounds are kept inside these warehouse-style kennels in small, stacked cages which are barely large enough for them to stand up or turn around.
*
*
* Greyhounds at Tucson racing kennels are kept in complete darkness.
*
*
* Greyhounds at Tucson racing kennels are fed raw, untreated 4-D meat.
*
*
* The majority of dogs our investigators observed were muzzled right inside their cages.
This is no way to treat a dog!From: Grey2K.................
For over 60 years, the public has been prevented... more
-
-
Dog gives birth to 17 puppies
December 21, 2010
A dog in Germany has given birth to 17 puppies, leaving their owner thrilled but fatigued after having to feed them with a bottle for several weeks because their mother couldn't cope with the demand.
Owner Ramona Wegemann said she barely slept for more than a couple of minutes without interruption during about four weeks in an "exhausting" struggle to make sure all of the purebred Rhodesian Ridgeback puppies would survive.
She said when she was "finished feeding the last puppy, the first was hungry again".
Wegemann's dog Etana gave birth to eight female and nine male puppies on September 28 in Ebereschenhof, which is near Berlin.
At least five times a day, Wegemann gave the dogs a bottle with special milk because their mother's nipples could never have coped with the demand, and when the puppies were not hungry, they wanted to be entertained, she said.
Wegemann said when dogs give birth to so many puppies several of them die within the first week. "But all of our puppies survived. This is incredible and wonderful," the 32-year-old added.
It was the second time that Etana gave birth. She gave birth to eight puppies in her first pregnancy, not uncommon for the dog's breed, Wegemann said.
"The birth of the puppies was very special. All puppies were born naturally, no caesarean was necessary," she added. It took Etana a full 26 hours to give birth to all of the puppies - and Wegemann was as baffled as amazed.
But caring for 17 puppies turned out to be a full-time job: Wegemann put her work as an independent animal psychiatrist on hold and her husband took as much holiday as he could.
Their lives have been turned upside down by the puppies, and their living room is now occupied by a giant box that houses the puppies.
But even Wegemann still struggles to recognize them: The females puppies are called Bahati, Binta, Bahya, Bashima, Batouuli, Binki, Bora, Bisa and the male ones are Baakir, Banjoku, Belay, Bruk, Bundu, Bayo, Bukekayo, Biton and Bulus.
Wegemann gave them all African names because the Rhodesian Ridgeback is an African hunting dog.
AP
Nine Rhodesian Ridgeback puppies from a litter of 17 look out of their box Photo: APDog gives birth to 17 puppies
December 21, 2010
A dog in Germany has given... more
-
-
The New York Times
December 19, 2010
As Incomes Rise, So Does Animal Trade
By BETTINA WASSENER
HONG KONG — Four suitcases full of ivory, intercepted by customs at Suvarnabhumi International Airport near Bangkok. Rare tortoises, openly for sale at a fair in Jakarta, the Indonesian capital. More than 2,000 frozen pangolins — scaly anteaters — seized from a fishing vessel off China.
Oh, and a 2-month-old tiger cub, alive but sedated, found inside a suitcase, also at the Bangkok airport.
If you think all of this sounds like old news — didn’t we see this in the 1970s and ’80s? — think again.
Every one of these incidents, documented by Traffic, the wildlife trade monitoring network, took place within the past few months. They provide just a glimpse of the massive trade in endangered animals — and their bones, skins and other organs — that is taking place across Asia.
And they illustrate that half a century’s worth of efforts by governments, international organizations and conservationists have failed to stem wildlife trade and the extinction of numerous animals and plants.
Yes, conservation projects have helped preserve individual species, but over all the trade in rare creatures has grown, not shrunk — thanks largely to rising demand from an increasingly affluent Asia.
“I’ve been doing this job for close to 20 years,” said Chris R. Shepherd, who helps oversee Traffic’s Southeast Asia operations, “and I can say it’s never been anywhere near as bad as it is now.”
In the 1970s, when international conservation efforts began to take off, the issue was one of largely niche demand from wealthy consumers in the West. Now, however, the picture has changed radically.
Rapid growth across developing Asia over the past decade or two has caused wealth to increase quickly across much of the region. Credit Suisse, in a recent study, estimated that parts of Asia, including China, India and Indonesia, have seen the average wealth per adult soar between 100 percent and 400 percent since 2000.
Along with many of its neighbors, China is now a giant consumer of items like machinery, cars, washing powder, clothes and — yes — python-skin handbags and tiger penises, bear bile and other ingredients for traditional medicines or meals that once belonged to the aristocracy.
“Over the past 20 years, the nature of the demand has changed, thanks to a rising middle class in Asia,” said Colman O’Criodain, a wildlife trade policy analyst in Switzerland for the environmental group W.W.F. International.
James Compton, senior program director for Asia at Traffic, said from Beijing, “Whether it’s high-end luxury stores or the man on the street corner selling dried sea horses — you can see animals and animal parts being sold quite openly. Wildlife trade is now quite pervasive in Asia.”
The problem, experts say, is often not a lack of top-level political will. Many Asian countries, like those elsewhere, ban the trade of rare plants and animals. Rather, the problem is enforcement on the ground and growing demand from populations that are often simply not fully aware of just how endangered the creatures they are consuming are.
Wildlife species with high commercial value have declined drastically, and many are now rare, endangered or even locally extinct, Traffic wrote in a report about Southeast Asia in late 2008.
Figures are hard to come by, as only select species can be closely monitored. But here are a couple of examples to illustrate the scale of some the population declines:
•Some species of sharks are thought to have declined 90 percent. Considered a status symbol in Chinese culture, the soup made from pricey shark fins is now within the reach of many, many more people than it once was.
• There are now thought to be as few as 3,200 tigers left in the wild globally, down from 100,000 a century ago. Despite their acute rarity and international bans on tiger trade, officials throughout most of the tiger range countries, which span Russia and much of Asia, are intercepting the claws, skins or bones of about 100 tigers every year, a report published by Traffic last month found.
On the upside, attitudes are starting to change. Shark’s fin soup, for example, is becoming a decidedly uncool meal to serve in Hong Kong, the main hub for trade in the fins.
And in mainland China, where there was barely any coverage of animal welfare and related topics a decade ago, the media are now engaged, said Jill Robinson, founder of the Animals Asia Foundation, which campaigns for animal welfare and the conservation of endangered animals.
The sale of bear bile — often harvested from animals kept in tiny cages, and used in traditional medicine to cure ailments as varied as headaches and hemorrhoids — is legal in China, and demand is booming. But many doctors are starting to turn away from its use, not least because of a growing realization that bile from bears farmed in such conditions is often diseased, Ms. Robinson said.
Unfortunately, these efforts, commendable though they are, make only a small dent. Unlike in the West, where generations of children have grown up with nature programs, populations in Asia are not yet sensitized to issues like conservation, said Mr. O’Criodain of the W.W.F.
And while some countries have pretty advanced projects for preserving terrestrial species, “most consider the resources of the high seas — including overfished species of fish — as up for grabs,” he added.
Often, said Mr. Compton of Traffic, it is actually the rarity of the animal that makes it attractive to consumers, driving up its price.
For example, in Vietnam, where it is illegal to sell bear bile, a milliliter, or one-fifth of a teaspoon, of fresh, liquid bear bile can fetch as much as $30 on the black market, Animals Asia said.
Such prices mean fines and other penalties are an insufficient deterrent to often impoverished local populations.
“Wildlife crime is becoming more and more organized and sophisticated, and enforcement capacities are not managing to keep up,” said Mr. Shepherd of Traffic.
“The political will is changing; we’re seeing a lot of high-level commitments. But we need to see that translate into action on the ground. Otherwise, it will just be business as usual.”
For some species, even the welcome change in awareness may already simply be too little, too late.The New York Times
December 19, 2010
As Incomes Rise, So Does Animal Trade
By... more
-
-
Orphaned gorillas find a safe haven
From Jessica Ellis, CNN
December 17, 2010 5:19 a.m. EST
Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo (CNN) --
In a remote, rural area of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund has opened the country's first rehabilitation center for Grauer's gorillas.
Called GRACE (Gorilla Rehabilitation and Conservation Education), the center's goal is to teach orphaned gorillas how to survive in the wild as a new, self-sufficient "family," with the longer-term goal to release them into a natural habitat in a neighboring forest in the Congo Basin.
These young gorillas are physically and emotionally fragile, most having suffered from extremely traumatic conditions and experiences. Many have been violently taken from the forest by poachers, intent on selling them either as bush meat or for the animal trafficking trade.
CNN's Jessica Ellis and Ferre Dollar recently followed the first group of gorillas to be transported to the forested area from a temporary facility in Goma, in eastern DRC.
The pioneering young orphans were airlifted to GRACE by a helicopter donated by MONUC, the United Nations peacekeeping force in the DRC -- a first for a U.N. mission. Traveling by road would have been almost impossible due to poor infrastructure and potential trauma to the animals.
Mapendo, Amani, Kighoma and Ndjingala were all originally snatched from the forest and their families by poachers. They are all Grauer's gorillas, a subspecies related to the Mountain gorilla, but live exclusively in eastern DRC.
Sandy Jones is the confiscated gorilla rehabilitation manager for the Dian Fossey Fund and now the manager of GRACE. "All of the gorilla species are endangered because Congo is so unexplored they have not done a real census on how many Grauer's gorillas there are," she says.
"But at the rate at which we know they are being killed and the forest is being destroyed we are really concerned that if things aren't stopped and changed now they can be wiped out very soon."
This freshman class of GRACE gorillas range in age from between one and five years old. Mapendo, whose name means "love," was rescued in December 2007. She was confiscated along with a male gorilla but he only survived for two days.
When Amani -- which means "peace" -- was rescued a year ago she had a large wound on her leg. "It seemed obvious that her mother was shot and she was caught in the crossfire," Jones explains. "It took many weeks to heal but now she is walking perfectly normal."
Kighoma -- "drums" -- is the only male in the group. He arrived in May 2009, and Ndjingala was rescued earlier this year. She is only a year old and was named after the place from which she was taken.
"A lot of primates, when they are taken by poachers, they have ropes around their hips and it digs in and so they have bad wounds and Ndjingala suffered from that," Jones says.
The Dian Fossey gorilla fund and the Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project have been caring for rescued gorillas in temporary quarters in Kinigi, in Rwanda, and in Goma.
Now they (the gorillas) are in the real forest and they are climbing and getting some forest food, so they are happy.
"What I know is that many of them have died," says Dr. Eddie Kambale of the Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project. "We may have, I can say, about 20% that have been taken from the forest."
The GRACE center is the first facility of its kind in east Central Africa. It has room for up to 30 young gorillas to live in species-typical groups and roam through 350 acres of natural habitat.
Kambale helped bring the four orphans from Goma to GRACE. "The gorillas are enjoying this place compared to where they were," he says.
"In Goma there was too much noise and dust from the road; here is less pollution so this will be good for their health. Now they are in the real forest and they are climbing and getting some forest food, so they are happy."
The remaining rescued Grauer's gorillas currently cared for by the Dian Fossey Fund and Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project will leave Kinigi on a second airlift scheduled for early next year.
"Having the gorillas here will help give the people a glimpse of the world of gorillas," says Debby Cox, of the Pan African Sanctuary Alliance.
Cox worked with the local community to build the infrastructure for GRACE. "When the local people see gorillas as so much like us -- they live in families, the infants need their mothers, they hug each other -- you immediately get an empathy coming," she says.
"So we need to work with the people in this area, and that helps create stability and that creates confidence too."
While for decades the world has only heard bad news from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, conservation is striking an increasingly important chord of awareness among the people.Orphaned gorillas find a safe haven
From Jessica Ellis, CNN
December 17, 2010 5:19... more
-
-
Musk Oxen Live to Tell a Survivors’ Tale - The New York Times
Photo: A holdover from the Pleistocene era, the musk ox has managed to hang on while most of its brethren disappeared at the end of the last ice age.
December 13, 2010
Musk Oxen Live to Tell a Survivors’ Tale
By NATALIE ANGIER
Among the various large, charismatic and visibly winterized mammals that one might choose as a mascot for life in the Arctic belt, polar bears are, let’s face it, too hackneyed, reindeer too Rudolph, caribou too Sarah Palin’s target practice, and woolly mammoths too extinct.
There’s a better choice, though few may have heard of it. According to Arctic biologists, the quintessential example of megafaunal fortitude in the face of really bad weather is the musk ox, or Ovibos moschatus, a blocky, short-legged, highly social ungulate with distinctively curved horns and long hair that looks like shag carpeting circa 1975.
Ovibos’s common name is only partly justified. The males do emit a musky cologne during mating season, but the animal is not an ox. Nor, despite its back-of-the-nickel silhouette, is it a type of buffalo either. Its closest living relations are thought to be goats and sheep, but taxonomically and metaphorically, the musk ox is in an icy cubicle of its own. Once abundant throughout the northern latitudes worldwide, today they are found only in Arctic North America, Greenland and pockets of Siberia and Scandinavia. The musk ox is a holdover from the Pleistocene, the age of the giant mammals memorialized in natural history murals everywhere — the mammoths and mastodons, the saber-toothed cats, the giant ground sloths, the 400-pound beavers. Yet while a vast majority of the frost-fitted bigfoots disappeared at the end of the last ice age, 10,000 years ago, Ovibos hung on, as stubbornly as the ox it is not.
Scientists are now seeking to understand how, exactly, the animal has managed to persist through repeated climate shifts and habitat upheavals. Researchers see in the musk ox’s story clues to help guide efforts to conserve other large land mammals now at risk of extinction. They also hope to raise the profile of a species they consider magnificent, at once stalwart and supple, a page of living prehistory whose social and behavioral complexities they have just begun to decode.
“There’s evidence that they have an elephantlike social structure, and even some form of culture,” said Joel Berger, a researcher with the Wildlife Conservation Society and a professor at the University of Montana. So why is everybody flying to Africa to see elephants when we’ve got this marvelous species living in our own backyard?
In a presentation last week at the Bronx Zoo, where the wildlife society is based, Dr. Berger described preliminary results from field studies of the musk ox that he has performed with Layne Adams of the U.S. Geological Survey and other collaborators. He talked about the challenges of catching animals to weigh and measure them, check their teeth, take their blood and furnish them with G.P.S. collars. One group of musk ox in Cape Krusenstern National Monument in Alaska had such bad, broken teeth you’d think they were subsisting on a diet of Pepsi and Snickers bars, said Dr. Berger, and the researchers worried that the population was unhealthy and on its way out.
Yet after suffering several seasons of declining numbers, the brown-toothers rebounded this year to match in fecundity and offspring survival a group living in the Bering Land Bridge National Preserve that had exemplary teeth. The cause of their rotten dentition remains a mystery, but the Krusenstern clan clearly was not biting the dust.
For all their storied past as co-prancers with mastodons, musk oxen are not huge animals. Adult males stand about four feet high and weigh around 600 to 700 pounds, less than half the weight of the average draft horse. Yet they look hulky as a result of their spectacular double-layered fur coat. The long, shaggy outer layer they keep year round, not only to help shield them against the brutal cold of an Arctic winter, when temperatures can plunge 40 degrees or more below zero, but also to deter the insect pests of an Arctic summer.
“You’ll see caribou in summertime trotting across the countryside trying to get away from all the mosquitoes and biting flies,” said Jim Lawler, a biologist with the National Park Service’s Arctic Network in Fairbanks. “But the musk ox just stand there with clouds of mosquitoes hovering above them. It’s hard to penetrate that fur.” For added insulation, musk oxen grow a second fur layer each winter, an undercoat called qiviut that is said to be many times warmer than wool and softer than cashmere — and how obliging of the animals to shed that qiviut in spring for use in scarves.
With their stubby legs, musk oxen are not migratory like caribou or great dashers like reindeer. Their basic approach to winter management is: Don’t just do something — stand there. “You’ll see them in a big storm, drifted over, covered with snow,” said Dr. Lawler. “They’re almost part of the scenery.” They lapse into a state of what might be called hibernation al fresco, as their oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production drop and their metabolic rate slows by about a third. “They’re basically shutting down some of their machinery so they can survive on less food,” said Dr. Lawler, who has studied musk ox energetics.
Whatever their occasional resemblance to the scenery, musk oxen are by no means as dumb as a post. “They live in loosely knit family-bonded societies,” said Dr. Berger, and they keep track of who’s who. The group is, after all, essential to their survival. When confronted with predators like wolves, a herd of musk oxen will famously circle the wagons, the adults forming a wall of horns facing outward, the vulnerable young safely shielded behind them. They also seem to have a keen memory for where the best foraging grounds may be found in the spring, the optimal mix of grasses and willow twigs to maximize the performance of the microbes at work in their ruminant gut. Musk oxen turn out to be very efficient at extracting calories to put on the fat they need to survive the long winter fast.
Historical records and genetic evidence alike suggest that the musk ox is a Rasputin, “the comeback kid of the Quaternary,” said Ross MacPhee, curator of vertebrate zoology at the American Museum of Natural History. “They undergo periods where they really bolster their numbers for a few years, then they go down to an almost complete collapse, then later they come back like gangbusters.”
As a result of passing through repeated population bottlenecks, in which only a handful of individuals survived to spawn subsequent generations, today’s 100,000 musk oxen are thought to be notably homogenous, lacking in the sort of genetic diversity once thought critical to a species’ long-term prospects. “It would be hard to argue that musk ox are on their way out the door,” said Dr. MacPhee. “They are not weak sisters.”
Just ask that saber-toothed cat fossilized under the floor.
_____
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/12/14/science/14ANGI1/14ANGI1-articleLarge.jpgMusk Oxen Live to Tell a Survivors’ Tale - The New York Times
Photo: A... more
-
-
December 7, 2010
Bob Barker Honored by Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics
By Nathan Runkle
3221b92918111010.jpg.jpg
Bob Barker is perhaps best known as the host of the popular TV game show The Price is Right, which he turned into a forum for encouraging millions of Americans to help control the pet population by having their companion animals spayed or neutered. This many-time Emmy-award-winning television personality and much-beloved animal rights advocate has since been named an Honorary Fellow by the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics for his groundbreaking contribution to the establishment of animal studies within academia.
By generously endowing America's top law schools, including Harvard, Stanford, UCLA, Northwestern, Duke, Georgetown, Columbia and the University of Virginia, and by endowing a chair in animal rights at Drury University (his own alma mater), Barker has pioneered the teaching of animal law in the United States. These endowments have enabled, for the first time, hundreds of university students to study animal law and ethics.
"We cannot change the world for animals without also changing people's ideas about animals. Almost single-handedly in little more than a decade, Bob's sagacity and generosity have propelled animal ethics from a marginal issue into the academic mainstream. This is a colossal achievement," says Professor Andrew Linzey of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics.
Earlier this year, Barker helped expose the routine abuses that calves raised for veal are forced to endure by narrating hidden-camera video footage secretly shot by an MFA investigator at one of the nation's top veal producers. Pleading for baby calves who are chained inside 2-feet wide wooden stalls - so narrow they cannot turn around, walk, run, play, socialize with other animals, or engage in other basic natural behaviors, Barker encouraged consumers to withdraw their support for this needless cruelty by boycotting both dairy and veal.
From the work that he has done to bring animal studies programs into universities across the country to consistently speaking up for the most defenseless among us, Bob Barker is a true hero for animals. MFA commends Mr. Barker for his decades of outspoken animal advocacy and congratulates him for this prestigious and well-deserved honor.December 7, 2010
Bob Barker Honored by Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics
By Nathan... more
-
