A great writing. I encourage all to read it and pass it on. Really shows the true connection between the two issues.
Article:
Animal Rights - the Beating Heart of Eco Action
http://www.arkangelweb.org/features/20070919beatingheart.php
A Discussion on How We in the Animal Rights Movement are at the Centre of Political Change
There is an expression, though not one an Animal Rights activist would tend to use, that describes something so large as to evade notice as the “Elephant in the room.” However, there is now an issue so large, so vital, that it might be better described as the very room itself. That issue is of course Climate Change. What started as the relatively innocuous sounding Global Warming is well on the way to acquiring its more rightful status as likely Climate Catastrophe. Over the last few years this issue has gone from being the preserve of a few scientists and commentators, largely dismissed as cranks, to the front page of every newspaper and the top of most political agendas.
More importantly, this realisation has led to the flowering of a new Eco Action movement, committed to Direct Action in defence of the Earth, and against all those who put greed and material self gratification before the common interest and a sustainable future for all. This Summer saw the second annual Climate Camp take place at Heathrow airport, to protest at the exponential increase in aviation, one of the fastest growing causes of human induced Climate Change. It is absolutely vital that this grassroots movement continues to grow and to succeed. For whilst they might pay lip service to the idea of change, there is no real sign as yet of politicians having the courage necessary to take the necessary decisions.
Over the last year I have made a point of becoming more involved in this movement. For we know that even if we in Animal Rights achieve our goal of eliminating the abuse and exploitation of all Animal Lives, the onset of Climate Catastrophe will render this utterly pointless. The potential consequences of such dramatic change to the weather systems of the Earth, beggar belief. The very ability of the Planet to continue to sustain life may well be compromised.In the face of this possibility it is incumbent on those of us in the Animal Rights movement to take this on board and adapt our strategies accordingly.
It is my belief that it is not possible to separate that which is truly sustainable from that which is properly ethical. As I like to put it, there can be no Life Rights without Earth Awareness. It is possible to argue, and most politicians would, that Climate Change can be tackled without recourse to fundamental change, both in the way in which we view ourselves, and our relationship to the Earth that is home to us all. However, it is the Earth which is the only properly holistic context in which we can come to informed decisions about the way in which we should live. Politicians would argue that we can continue to found ourselves, and our aspirations, on the politics of permanent economic growth. The lie must be put to the madness of this conceit. Money has never made good motivation, and the evidence of this is now made stark for all to see. We need a new ethic on which to base our idea of what it is we are, and it is we in the Animal Rights movement who can provide that ethic.
Throughout the Summer months, and to a lesser extent the rest of the year, there are an ever increasing number of green gatherings and festivals where people from all backgrounds come together to celebrate and discuss our relationship with the Earth. Some are more overtly political than others, and as Climate Change comes to dominate our thoughts, political activism is bound to seem more relevant than celebration. So what is it that links celebration with political activism, be it Eco Action or Animal Rights? What is it also that is the single most important change an individual can make to their lives in order to reduce their carbon footprint? It is to be Vegan, and it is this which is the indissoluble link between Animal Rights and Eco Action.
For those in the Animal Rights movement it is pretty much unthinkable to be deeply concerned with the equality of all Lives, and yet to kill and eat other animals. Granted, vegetarianism is often a stepping stone on the way to being Vegan, but Vegan is where most people end up as the only rational, reasonable and responsible choice. It is the only ethical way. For those in the Eco Action movement, to be Vegan is coming to be seen as the only sustainable way, given the effect it has on one’s carbon footprint. All food at this year’s Climate Camp was Vegan, as it is at most green or Eco gatherings. So it is that to be ethical is to be sustainable, and to be sustainable is to be ethical. As I presume that all of us who wish to see an ethical and sustainable future believe that it is better to be kind than to be cruel, we are, from our differing starting points, coming to the same conclusions and heading toward the same position. That position must be that it is wrong to exploit any Life, human or otherwise.
Although it would now seem that the many and disparate groups and individuals involved in Eco Action or Animal Rights are, in effect, fighting the same fight, that is not yet the way it appears to those we oppose. To them we either seem, or can be portrayed as, a collection of minor, single issue groups, easily dismissed as anything from cranks to crazed extremists. I know this to be a matter of much frustration and annoyance to the many good and decent people acting in defence of the Earth and all life. I would like to suggest that there is something that we can do about this, which will immeasurably increase our influence, without losing the intensity that a small but committed group can bring to a particular issue.
Why is it that the state so dislikes those groups and individuals who make up the Animal Rights movement, and is now showing the same reaction toward Climate Change campaigners? Why is it that the state brings so many resources to bear against us, and is even prepared to compromise its stated, if not realised, democratic ideals, in order to silence us? Could it just be that in their quieter moments or at least somewhere in their being, that they fear us? Not because we pose a physical threat to them, (after all it is they who are the people of violence, not us, it is they who have the guns and the bombs, and who do not shirk from using them), but because they know that we are right! And in being right we threaten not just their power and wealth, but their very idea of who they are.
Without compromising the integrity of these groups, or of those who prefer to work as individuals, I do feel that we need to operate under a collective, recognisable banner. I say this whilst realising that it is already happening in all except name, and has been for some time. For instance, as someone who has centered themselves in the Animal Rights movement, I chose to work under the banner of Earth First! a name more associated with Eco Action. Earth First! is an idea not an organisation. As such it is available to all of us working toward ethical and sustainable living in whatever field. Evidence of how the movement is operating under this banner can be seen from the self posting website Earth First! Action Reports. This website is ever more widely used by both Eco Action and Animal Rights groups to post details of Actions or for information purposes. I feel it would help to raise the profile and effectiveness of all that we do, to use the Earth First! Name in conjunction with whatever other names we are already using. After all, what better expresses our ethos than to state that what we do, is not done for ourselves, but for the Earth and all Lives. However we choose to operate, as individuals we are all Earth Firsters!
As a visible and tangible demonstration of how Eco Action and Animal Rights are coming together as an Earth First! Movement, the following suggestion has been made. For organisational purposes, the Climate Camp, both in its planning and for the actual event, is made up of a number of neighbourhoods representing different regions. Animal Rights, however, in its various groups and individuals, is a nationwide movement. We feel, therefore that it would show our understanding of the vital importance of Eco Action, and our solidarity with those already involved, to have an Animal Rights neighbourhood at next year’s Climate Camp. Having met a number of people involved in the planning and implementation of this year’s Camp, I am hoping to put forward this suggestion as soon as appropriate, and to help with the necessary planning. In this way, it will become increasingly obvious to those in power who seek only to protect vested financial interest, no matter what the real cost, that they are facing serious opposition. Cogent, coherent and organised opposition working, by way of consensus based non hierarchical systems, toward properly ethical and truly sustainable solutions to the problems we face. We who have decided to care, who have chosen to change, will not sit idly back and watch the Earth and all life being ground into money. As a movement our numbers will grow, and so must the Actions that we take. The future depends on it.
Written by Matt Clowes
To see more of Matt’s writing go to: http://www.earthfirstmanifesto.org/
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
The Case Made Once Again for the Positive Environmental Effects of Vegetarianism
It’s been made clear once again: undeniably, vegetarianism is the number one act for attempting to address the environmental problems of today.
Article:
Nuggets and Hummers and fish sticks, oh my!
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/9/17/16200/7809
PETA VP argues vegetarianism is the best way to help the planet
Posted by Grist at 11:35 AM on 18 Sep 2007
This is a guest essay from Bruce Friedrich, vice president for campaigns at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). It was written in response to Alex Roth's essay "PETA's dogma is all bark and no bite." Friedrich has been an environmental activist for more than 20 years.
In 1987, I read Diet for a Small Planet by Frances Moore Lappé and -- primarily for human rights and environmental reasons -- went vegan. Two decades later, I still believe that -- even leaving aside all the animal welfare issues -- a vegan diet is the only reasonable diet for people in the developed world who care about the environment or global poverty.
Over the past 20 years, the environmental argument against growing crops to be fed to animals -- so that humans can eat the animals -- has grown substantially. Just this past November, the environmental problems associated with eating chickens, pigs, and other animals were the subject of a 408-page United Nations scientific report titled Livestock's Long Shadow.
The U.N. report found that the meat industry contributes to "problems of land degradation, climate change and air pollution, water shortage and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity." The report concludes that the meat industry is "one of the ... most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global."
Eating Meat Is the No. 1 Consumer Cause of Global Warming
Al Gore, Leonardo DiCaprio, and others have brought the possibility of global cataclysm into sharp relief. What they have not been talking about, however, is the fact that all cars, trucks, planes, and other types of transportation combined account for about 13 percent of global warming emissions, whereas raising chickens, pigs, cattle, and other animals contributes to 18 percent, according to U.N. scientists. Yes, eating animal products contributes to global warming 40 percent more than all SUVs, 18-wheelers, jumbo jets, and other types of travel combined.
Al and Leo might not be talking about the connection between meat and global warming, but the Live Earth concert that Al inspired is: The recently published Live Earth Global Warming Survival Handbook recommends, "Don't be a chicken. Stop being a pig. And don't have a cow. Be the first on your block to cut back on meat." The Handbook further explains that "refusing meat" is "the single most effective thing you can do to reduce your carbon footprint" [emphasis in original].
And Environmental Defense, on its website, notes, "If every American skipped one meal of chicken per week and substituted vegetables and grains ... the carbon dioxide savings would be the same as taking more than half a million cars off of U.S. roads." Imagine if we stopped eating animal products altogether.
Eating Meat Wastes Resources
If I lie in bed and never get up, I will burn almost 2,500 calories each day; that is what's required to keep my body alive. The same physiological reality applies to all animals: The vast majority of the calories consumed by a chicken, a pig, a cow, or another animal goes into keeping that animal alive, and once you add to that the calories required to create the parts of the animal that we don't eat (e.g., bones, feathers, and blood), you find that it takes more than 10 times as many calories of feed given to an animal to get one calorie back in the form of edible fat or muscle. In other words, it's exponentially more efficient to eat grains, soy, or oats directly rather than feed them to farmed animals so that humans can eat those animals. It's like tossing more than 10 plates of spaghetti into the trash for every one plate you eat.
And that's just the pure "calories in, calories out" equation. When you factor in everything else, the situation gets much worse. Think about the extra stages of production that are required to get dead chickens, pigs, or other animals from the farm to the table:
1. Grow more than 10 times as much corn, grain, and soy (with all the required tilling, irrigation, crop dusters, and so on), as would be required if we ate the plants directly.
2. Transport -- in gas-guzzling, pollution-spewing 18-wheelers -- all that grain and soy to feed manufacturers.
3. Operate the feed mill (again, using massive amounts of resources).
4. Truck the feed to the factory farms.
5. Operate the factory farms.
6. Truck the animals many miles to slaughterhouses.
7. Operate the slaughterhouses.
8. Truck the meat to processing plants.
9. Operate the meat processing plants.
10. Truck the meat to grocery stores (in refrigerated trucks).
11. Keep the meat in refrigerators or freezers at the stores.
With every stage comes massive amounts of extra energy usage -- and with that comes heavy pollution and massive amounts of greenhouse gases, of course. Obviously, vegan foods require some of these stages, too, but vegan foods cut out the factory farms, the slaughterhouses, and multiple stages of heavily polluting tractor-trailer trucks, as well as all the resources (and pollution) involved in each of those stages. And as was already noted, vegan foods require less than one-tenth as many calories from crops, since they are turned directly into food rather than funneled through animals first.
Eating Meat Wastes and Pollutes Water
All food requires water, but animal foods are exponentially more wasteful of water than vegan foods are. Enormous quantities of water are used to irrigate the corn, soy, and oat fields that are dedicated to feeding farmed animals -- and massive amounts of water are used in factory farms and slaughterhouses. According to the National Audubon Society, raising animals for food requires about as much water as all other water uses combined. Environmental author John Robbins estimates that it takes about 300 gallons of water to feed a vegan for a day, four times as much water to feed an ovo-lacto vegetarian, and about 14 times as much water to feed a meat-eater.
Raising animals for food is also a water-polluting process. According to a report prepared by U.S. Senate researchers, animals raised for food in the U.S. produce 86,000 pounds of excrement per second -- that's 130 times more than the amount of excrement that the entire human population of the U.S. produces! Farmed animals' excrement is more concentrated than human excrement, and is often contaminated with herbicides, pesticides, toxic chemicals, hormones, antibiotics, and other harmful substances. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the runoff from factory farms pollutes our rivers and lakes more than all other industrial sources combined.
Eating Meat Destroys the Rain Forest
The World Bank recently reported that 90 percent of all Amazon rainforest land cleared since 1970 is used for meat production. It's not just that we're destroying the rainforest to make grazing land for cows -- we're also destroying it to grow feed for them and other animals. Last year, Greenpeace targeted KFC for the destruction of rainforests because the Amazon is being razed to grow feed for chickens that end up in KFC's buckets. Of course, the rainforest is being used to grow feed for other chickens, pigs, and cows, too (i.e., KFC isn't the only culprit).
What About Eating Fish?
Anyone who reads the news knows that commercial fishing fleets are plundering the oceans and destroying sensitive aquatic ecosystems at an incomprehensible rate. One super-trawler is the length of a football field, and can take in 800,000 pounds of fish in a single netting. These trawlers scrape along the ocean floor, clear-cutting coral reefs and everything else in their path. Hydraulic dredges scoop up huge chunks of the ocean floor to sift out scallops, clams, and oysters. Most of what the fishing fleets pull in isn't even eaten by human beings; half is fed to animals raised for food, and about 30 million tons each year are just tossed back into the ocean, dead, with disastrous and irreversible consequences for the natural biological balance.
Then there is aquaculture (fish farming), which is increasing at a rate of more than 10 percent annually. Aquaculture is even worse than commercial fishing because, for starters, it takes about four pounds of wild-caught fish to reap just one pound of farmed fish, which eat fish caught by commercial trawlers. Farmed fish are often raised in the same water that wild fish swim in, but fish farmers dump antibiotics into the water and use genetic breeding to create "Frankenstein fish." The antibiotics contaminate the oceans and seas, and the genetically engineered fish sometimes escape and breed with wild fish, throwing delicate aquatic balances off-kilter. Researchers at the University of Stockholm demonstrated that the horrible environmental impact of fish farms can extend to an area 50,000 times larger than the farm itself.
Eating Meat Supports Cruelty
Caring for the environment means protecting all of our planet's inhabitants, not just the human ones. Chickens, pigs, turkeys, fish, and cows are intelligent, social animals who feel pain, just as humans, dogs, and cats do. Chickens and pigs do better on animal behavior cognition tests than dogs or cats, and are interesting individuals in the same way. Fish form strong social bonds, and some even use tools. Yet these animals suffer extreme pain and deprivation in today's factory farms. Chickens have their sensitive beaks cut off with a hot blade, pigs have their tails chopped off and their teeth removed with pliers, and cattle and pigs are castrated -- all without any pain relief. The animals are crowded together and given steady doses of hormones and antibiotics in order to make them grow so quickly that their hearts and limbs often cannot keep up, causing crippling and heart attacks. At the slaughterhouse, they are hung upside-down and bled to death, often while they are still conscious.
What About Eating Meat That Isn't From Factory-Farmed Animals?
Is meat better if it doesn't come from factory-farmed animals? Of course, but its production still wastes resources and pollutes the environment. Shouldn't we environmentalists challenge ourselves to do the best we can, not just to make choices that are a bit less bad?
The U.N. report looks at meat at a global level and indicts the inefficiency and waste that are inherent in meat production. No matter where meat comes from, raising animals for food will require that exponentially more calories be fed to animals than they can produce in their flesh, and it will require all those extra stages of CO2-intensive production as well. Only grass-fed cows eat food from land that could not otherwise be used to grow food for human beings, and even grass-fed cows require much more water and create much more pollution than vegan foods do.
Conclusion
The case against eating animal products is ironclad; it's not a new argument, and it goes way beyond just global warming. Animals will not grow or produce flesh, milk, or eggs without food and water; they won't do it without producing excrement; and the stages of meat, dairy, and egg production will always cause pollution and be resource-intensive.
If the past is any guide, this essay will generate much hand-wringing from my meat-eating environmentalist colleagues and, sadly, some anger. They will prefer half-measures (e.g., meat that is "not as bad" as other meat). They may accuse PETA of being judgmental -- simply for presenting the evidence. They will make various arguments that are beside the point. They will ignore the overwhelming argument against eating animal products and try to find a loophole. Some will just call the argument absurd, presenting no evidence at all.
But as Leonardo DiCaprio has noted, this is the 11th hour for the environment. Where something as basic as eating animals is concerned, the choice could not be any clearer: Every time we sit down to eat, we can choose to eat a product that is, according to U.N. scientists, "one of the ... most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global," or we can choose vegan -- and preferably organic -- foods. It's bad for the environment to eat animals. It's time to stop looking for loopholes.
Considering the proven health benefits of a vegetarian diet -- the American Dietetic Association states that vegetarians have a reduced risk of obesity, heart disease, and various types of cancer --- there's no need or excuse to eat chickens, pigs, eggs, and other animal products. And vegan foods are available everywhere and taste great; as with all foods -- vegan or not -- you just need to find the ones you like.
You can find out more at GoVeg.com and get great-tasting recipes, meal plans, cookbook recommendations, and more at VegCooking.com.
For story: Nuggets and Hummers and fish sticks, oh my!
15 Comments | Post a Comment
Don't Taser Me, Bro'
Eating meat is not the problem.
Eating a lot of putrified animal particle board that parades as meat is the problem.
Hunting a wild boar once every two weeks in Tuscany is living.
Wolfing down Presto! burgers is suicide.
Let's separate the wheat from the chafe -- and please, PETA, don't taser me!
John Bailo
Sutext:
by jabailo at 12:14 PM on 18 Sep 2007
John
What does that have to do with the issue? How much wild boar have you hunted this year?
by Matt G at 12:20 PM on 18 Sep 2007
I wonder what prompted this article?
Read "damage control."
The ad says, "Meat is the #1 Cause of Global Warming," which some fool pointed out is not true ("Uh, he doesn't have any clothes on.."), so here they try to do damage control by rewording it to say "Eating Meat Is the No. 1 Consumer Cause of Global Warming" which unfortunately is even less true. Power generation, industrial processes, and just about every other source of CO2 is paid for by consumers.
The divisive stance they have taken is a dead end strategy. They refuse to simply acknowledge that eating less meat, and less environmentally destructive forms of it is an adequate goal. That is because their real agenda is animal rights. They have jumped on the global warming environment bandwagon to promote their cause. They insist that you become one of them. They have a clearly defined group of people, Vegans and Vegetarians. There does not appear to be any other group allowed. That is why I created the 50-percent Vegan group of which I am a proud member. I also formally challenge Bruce to a carbon footprint pissing contest!
I'll work on a formal rebuttal if I have time. Gawd.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Article:
Nuggets and Hummers and fish sticks, oh my!
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/9/17/16200/7809
PETA VP argues vegetarianism is the best way to help the planet
Posted by Grist at 11:35 AM on 18 Sep 2007
This is a guest essay from Bruce Friedrich, vice president for campaigns at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). It was written in response to Alex Roth's essay "PETA's dogma is all bark and no bite." Friedrich has been an environmental activist for more than 20 years.
In 1987, I read Diet for a Small Planet by Frances Moore Lappé and -- primarily for human rights and environmental reasons -- went vegan. Two decades later, I still believe that -- even leaving aside all the animal welfare issues -- a vegan diet is the only reasonable diet for people in the developed world who care about the environment or global poverty.
Over the past 20 years, the environmental argument against growing crops to be fed to animals -- so that humans can eat the animals -- has grown substantially. Just this past November, the environmental problems associated with eating chickens, pigs, and other animals were the subject of a 408-page United Nations scientific report titled Livestock's Long Shadow.
The U.N. report found that the meat industry contributes to "problems of land degradation, climate change and air pollution, water shortage and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity." The report concludes that the meat industry is "one of the ... most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global."
Eating Meat Is the No. 1 Consumer Cause of Global Warming
Al Gore, Leonardo DiCaprio, and others have brought the possibility of global cataclysm into sharp relief. What they have not been talking about, however, is the fact that all cars, trucks, planes, and other types of transportation combined account for about 13 percent of global warming emissions, whereas raising chickens, pigs, cattle, and other animals contributes to 18 percent, according to U.N. scientists. Yes, eating animal products contributes to global warming 40 percent more than all SUVs, 18-wheelers, jumbo jets, and other types of travel combined.
Al and Leo might not be talking about the connection between meat and global warming, but the Live Earth concert that Al inspired is: The recently published Live Earth Global Warming Survival Handbook recommends, "Don't be a chicken. Stop being a pig. And don't have a cow. Be the first on your block to cut back on meat." The Handbook further explains that "refusing meat" is "the single most effective thing you can do to reduce your carbon footprint" [emphasis in original].
And Environmental Defense, on its website, notes, "If every American skipped one meal of chicken per week and substituted vegetables and grains ... the carbon dioxide savings would be the same as taking more than half a million cars off of U.S. roads." Imagine if we stopped eating animal products altogether.
Eating Meat Wastes Resources
If I lie in bed and never get up, I will burn almost 2,500 calories each day; that is what's required to keep my body alive. The same physiological reality applies to all animals: The vast majority of the calories consumed by a chicken, a pig, a cow, or another animal goes into keeping that animal alive, and once you add to that the calories required to create the parts of the animal that we don't eat (e.g., bones, feathers, and blood), you find that it takes more than 10 times as many calories of feed given to an animal to get one calorie back in the form of edible fat or muscle. In other words, it's exponentially more efficient to eat grains, soy, or oats directly rather than feed them to farmed animals so that humans can eat those animals. It's like tossing more than 10 plates of spaghetti into the trash for every one plate you eat.
And that's just the pure "calories in, calories out" equation. When you factor in everything else, the situation gets much worse. Think about the extra stages of production that are required to get dead chickens, pigs, or other animals from the farm to the table:
1. Grow more than 10 times as much corn, grain, and soy (with all the required tilling, irrigation, crop dusters, and so on), as would be required if we ate the plants directly.
2. Transport -- in gas-guzzling, pollution-spewing 18-wheelers -- all that grain and soy to feed manufacturers.
3. Operate the feed mill (again, using massive amounts of resources).
4. Truck the feed to the factory farms.
5. Operate the factory farms.
6. Truck the animals many miles to slaughterhouses.
7. Operate the slaughterhouses.
8. Truck the meat to processing plants.
9. Operate the meat processing plants.
10. Truck the meat to grocery stores (in refrigerated trucks).
11. Keep the meat in refrigerators or freezers at the stores.
With every stage comes massive amounts of extra energy usage -- and with that comes heavy pollution and massive amounts of greenhouse gases, of course. Obviously, vegan foods require some of these stages, too, but vegan foods cut out the factory farms, the slaughterhouses, and multiple stages of heavily polluting tractor-trailer trucks, as well as all the resources (and pollution) involved in each of those stages. And as was already noted, vegan foods require less than one-tenth as many calories from crops, since they are turned directly into food rather than funneled through animals first.
Eating Meat Wastes and Pollutes Water
All food requires water, but animal foods are exponentially more wasteful of water than vegan foods are. Enormous quantities of water are used to irrigate the corn, soy, and oat fields that are dedicated to feeding farmed animals -- and massive amounts of water are used in factory farms and slaughterhouses. According to the National Audubon Society, raising animals for food requires about as much water as all other water uses combined. Environmental author John Robbins estimates that it takes about 300 gallons of water to feed a vegan for a day, four times as much water to feed an ovo-lacto vegetarian, and about 14 times as much water to feed a meat-eater.
Raising animals for food is also a water-polluting process. According to a report prepared by U.S. Senate researchers, animals raised for food in the U.S. produce 86,000 pounds of excrement per second -- that's 130 times more than the amount of excrement that the entire human population of the U.S. produces! Farmed animals' excrement is more concentrated than human excrement, and is often contaminated with herbicides, pesticides, toxic chemicals, hormones, antibiotics, and other harmful substances. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the runoff from factory farms pollutes our rivers and lakes more than all other industrial sources combined.
Eating Meat Destroys the Rain Forest
The World Bank recently reported that 90 percent of all Amazon rainforest land cleared since 1970 is used for meat production. It's not just that we're destroying the rainforest to make grazing land for cows -- we're also destroying it to grow feed for them and other animals. Last year, Greenpeace targeted KFC for the destruction of rainforests because the Amazon is being razed to grow feed for chickens that end up in KFC's buckets. Of course, the rainforest is being used to grow feed for other chickens, pigs, and cows, too (i.e., KFC isn't the only culprit).
What About Eating Fish?
Anyone who reads the news knows that commercial fishing fleets are plundering the oceans and destroying sensitive aquatic ecosystems at an incomprehensible rate. One super-trawler is the length of a football field, and can take in 800,000 pounds of fish in a single netting. These trawlers scrape along the ocean floor, clear-cutting coral reefs and everything else in their path. Hydraulic dredges scoop up huge chunks of the ocean floor to sift out scallops, clams, and oysters. Most of what the fishing fleets pull in isn't even eaten by human beings; half is fed to animals raised for food, and about 30 million tons each year are just tossed back into the ocean, dead, with disastrous and irreversible consequences for the natural biological balance.
Then there is aquaculture (fish farming), which is increasing at a rate of more than 10 percent annually. Aquaculture is even worse than commercial fishing because, for starters, it takes about four pounds of wild-caught fish to reap just one pound of farmed fish, which eat fish caught by commercial trawlers. Farmed fish are often raised in the same water that wild fish swim in, but fish farmers dump antibiotics into the water and use genetic breeding to create "Frankenstein fish." The antibiotics contaminate the oceans and seas, and the genetically engineered fish sometimes escape and breed with wild fish, throwing delicate aquatic balances off-kilter. Researchers at the University of Stockholm demonstrated that the horrible environmental impact of fish farms can extend to an area 50,000 times larger than the farm itself.
Eating Meat Supports Cruelty
Caring for the environment means protecting all of our planet's inhabitants, not just the human ones. Chickens, pigs, turkeys, fish, and cows are intelligent, social animals who feel pain, just as humans, dogs, and cats do. Chickens and pigs do better on animal behavior cognition tests than dogs or cats, and are interesting individuals in the same way. Fish form strong social bonds, and some even use tools. Yet these animals suffer extreme pain and deprivation in today's factory farms. Chickens have their sensitive beaks cut off with a hot blade, pigs have their tails chopped off and their teeth removed with pliers, and cattle and pigs are castrated -- all without any pain relief. The animals are crowded together and given steady doses of hormones and antibiotics in order to make them grow so quickly that their hearts and limbs often cannot keep up, causing crippling and heart attacks. At the slaughterhouse, they are hung upside-down and bled to death, often while they are still conscious.
What About Eating Meat That Isn't From Factory-Farmed Animals?
Is meat better if it doesn't come from factory-farmed animals? Of course, but its production still wastes resources and pollutes the environment. Shouldn't we environmentalists challenge ourselves to do the best we can, not just to make choices that are a bit less bad?
The U.N. report looks at meat at a global level and indicts the inefficiency and waste that are inherent in meat production. No matter where meat comes from, raising animals for food will require that exponentially more calories be fed to animals than they can produce in their flesh, and it will require all those extra stages of CO2-intensive production as well. Only grass-fed cows eat food from land that could not otherwise be used to grow food for human beings, and even grass-fed cows require much more water and create much more pollution than vegan foods do.
Conclusion
The case against eating animal products is ironclad; it's not a new argument, and it goes way beyond just global warming. Animals will not grow or produce flesh, milk, or eggs without food and water; they won't do it without producing excrement; and the stages of meat, dairy, and egg production will always cause pollution and be resource-intensive.
If the past is any guide, this essay will generate much hand-wringing from my meat-eating environmentalist colleagues and, sadly, some anger. They will prefer half-measures (e.g., meat that is "not as bad" as other meat). They may accuse PETA of being judgmental -- simply for presenting the evidence. They will make various arguments that are beside the point. They will ignore the overwhelming argument against eating animal products and try to find a loophole. Some will just call the argument absurd, presenting no evidence at all.
But as Leonardo DiCaprio has noted, this is the 11th hour for the environment. Where something as basic as eating animals is concerned, the choice could not be any clearer: Every time we sit down to eat, we can choose to eat a product that is, according to U.N. scientists, "one of the ... most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global," or we can choose vegan -- and preferably organic -- foods. It's bad for the environment to eat animals. It's time to stop looking for loopholes.
Considering the proven health benefits of a vegetarian diet -- the American Dietetic Association states that vegetarians have a reduced risk of obesity, heart disease, and various types of cancer --- there's no need or excuse to eat chickens, pigs, eggs, and other animal products. And vegan foods are available everywhere and taste great; as with all foods -- vegan or not -- you just need to find the ones you like.
You can find out more at GoVeg.com and get great-tasting recipes, meal plans, cookbook recommendations, and more at VegCooking.com.
For story: Nuggets and Hummers and fish sticks, oh my!
15 Comments | Post a Comment
Don't Taser Me, Bro'
Eating meat is not the problem.
Eating a lot of putrified animal particle board that parades as meat is the problem.
Hunting a wild boar once every two weeks in Tuscany is living.
Wolfing down Presto! burgers is suicide.
Let's separate the wheat from the chafe -- and please, PETA, don't taser me!
John Bailo
Sutext:
by jabailo at 12:14 PM on 18 Sep 2007
John
What does that have to do with the issue? How much wild boar have you hunted this year?
by Matt G at 12:20 PM on 18 Sep 2007
I wonder what prompted this article?
Read "damage control."
The ad says, "Meat is the #1 Cause of Global Warming," which some fool pointed out is not true ("Uh, he doesn't have any clothes on.."), so here they try to do damage control by rewording it to say "Eating Meat Is the No. 1 Consumer Cause of Global Warming" which unfortunately is even less true. Power generation, industrial processes, and just about every other source of CO2 is paid for by consumers.
The divisive stance they have taken is a dead end strategy. They refuse to simply acknowledge that eating less meat, and less environmentally destructive forms of it is an adequate goal. That is because their real agenda is animal rights. They have jumped on the global warming environment bandwagon to promote their cause. They insist that you become one of them. They have a clearly defined group of people, Vegans and Vegetarians. There does not appear to be any other group allowed. That is why I created the 50-percent Vegan group of which I am a proud member. I also formally challenge Bruce to a carbon footprint pissing contest!
I'll work on a formal rebuttal if I have time. Gawd.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Gorillas Head One Step Closer to Extinction
The tragedy of the loss of Gorillas would be incalculable.
Article:
Gorillas now 'critically endangered'
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070912/
ap_on_re_eu/endangered_gorillas
By ERICA BULMAN, Associated Press Writer Wed Sep 12, 4:10 PM ET
GENEVA - The most common type of gorilla is now "critically endangered," one step away from global extinction, according to the 2007 Red List of Threatened Species released Wednesday by the World Conservation Union.
The Ebola virus is depleting Western Gorilla populations to a point where it might become impossible for them to recover.
Commercial hunting, civil unrest and habitat loss due to logging and forest clearance for palm oil plantations are compounding the problem, said the Swiss-based group known by its acronym IUCN.
"Great apes are our closest living relatives and very special creatures," Russ Mittermeier, head of IUCN's Primate Specialist Group, told The Associated Press. "We could fit all the remaining great apes in the world into two or three large football stadiums. There just aren't very many left."
In all, 16,306 species are threatened with extinction, 188 more than last year, IUCN said. One in four mammals are in jeopardy, as are one in eight birds, a third of all amphibians and 70 percent of the plants that have been studied.
"Life on Earth is disappearing fast and will continue to do so unless urgent action is taken," the IUCN warned.
The Western Gorilla's main subspecies — the Western Lowland Gorilla — has been decimated by the Ebola virus, which has wiped out about a third of the gorillas found in protected areas over the last 15 years.
"In the last 10 years, Ebola is the single largest killer of apes. Poaching is a close second," said Peter Walsh, a member if IUCN's Primate Specialist Group, told the AP. "Ebola is knocking down populations to a level where they won't bounce back. The rate of decline is dizzying. If it continues, we'll lose them in 10-12 years."
Female gorillas only start reproducing at the age of 9 or 10 and only have one baby about every five years. Walsh said even in ideal conditions, it would take the gorillas decades to bounce back.
The World Conservation Union also said the Yangtze River dolphin is now "possibly extinct." There have been no documented sightings of the long-snouted cetacean since 2002. An intensive search of its habitat in November and December proved fruitless but more searches are needed as one was possibly spotted in late August.
The Redheaded Vulture soared from "near threatened" to "critically endangered." The birds' rapid decline over the last eight years is largely due to diclofenac, a painkiller given to ill or injured farm cattle so they can still work. But the substance poisons the vultures when they scavenge livestock carcasses.
Only 182 breeding adults of the Gharial crocodile remain, down almost 60 percent from a decade ago. India and Nepal's crocodile has become critically endangered because dams, irrigation projects and artificial embankments have reduced its habitat to just 2 percent of its former range.
The woolly-stalked begonia is the only species declared extinct this year. Extensive searches have failed to uncover any specimens of the Malaysian herb in the last century, IUCN said.
Only one species moved to a lesser category of threat. One of the world's rarest parrots 15 years ago, the Mauritius Echo parakeet, eased back from critically endangered to only endangered. That was a result of close monitoring of its nesting sites, and supplementary feeding combined with a captive breeding and release program.
IUCN says 785 species have disappeared over the last 500 years. A further 65 are found only in artificial settings such as zoos.
The Red List, produced by a worldwide network of thousands of experts, includes some 41,000 species and subspecies around the globe.
Article:
Gorillas now 'critically endangered'
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070912/
ap_on_re_eu/endangered_gorillas
By ERICA BULMAN, Associated Press Writer Wed Sep 12, 4:10 PM ET
GENEVA - The most common type of gorilla is now "critically endangered," one step away from global extinction, according to the 2007 Red List of Threatened Species released Wednesday by the World Conservation Union.
The Ebola virus is depleting Western Gorilla populations to a point where it might become impossible for them to recover.
Commercial hunting, civil unrest and habitat loss due to logging and forest clearance for palm oil plantations are compounding the problem, said the Swiss-based group known by its acronym IUCN.
"Great apes are our closest living relatives and very special creatures," Russ Mittermeier, head of IUCN's Primate Specialist Group, told The Associated Press. "We could fit all the remaining great apes in the world into two or three large football stadiums. There just aren't very many left."
In all, 16,306 species are threatened with extinction, 188 more than last year, IUCN said. One in four mammals are in jeopardy, as are one in eight birds, a third of all amphibians and 70 percent of the plants that have been studied.
"Life on Earth is disappearing fast and will continue to do so unless urgent action is taken," the IUCN warned.
The Western Gorilla's main subspecies — the Western Lowland Gorilla — has been decimated by the Ebola virus, which has wiped out about a third of the gorillas found in protected areas over the last 15 years.
"In the last 10 years, Ebola is the single largest killer of apes. Poaching is a close second," said Peter Walsh, a member if IUCN's Primate Specialist Group, told the AP. "Ebola is knocking down populations to a level where they won't bounce back. The rate of decline is dizzying. If it continues, we'll lose them in 10-12 years."
Female gorillas only start reproducing at the age of 9 or 10 and only have one baby about every five years. Walsh said even in ideal conditions, it would take the gorillas decades to bounce back.
The World Conservation Union also said the Yangtze River dolphin is now "possibly extinct." There have been no documented sightings of the long-snouted cetacean since 2002. An intensive search of its habitat in November and December proved fruitless but more searches are needed as one was possibly spotted in late August.
The Redheaded Vulture soared from "near threatened" to "critically endangered." The birds' rapid decline over the last eight years is largely due to diclofenac, a painkiller given to ill or injured farm cattle so they can still work. But the substance poisons the vultures when they scavenge livestock carcasses.
Only 182 breeding adults of the Gharial crocodile remain, down almost 60 percent from a decade ago. India and Nepal's crocodile has become critically endangered because dams, irrigation projects and artificial embankments have reduced its habitat to just 2 percent of its former range.
The woolly-stalked begonia is the only species declared extinct this year. Extensive searches have failed to uncover any specimens of the Malaysian herb in the last century, IUCN said.
Only one species moved to a lesser category of threat. One of the world's rarest parrots 15 years ago, the Mauritius Echo parakeet, eased back from critically endangered to only endangered. That was a result of close monitoring of its nesting sites, and supplementary feeding combined with a captive breeding and release program.
IUCN says 785 species have disappeared over the last 500 years. A further 65 are found only in artificial settings such as zoos.
The Red List, produced by a worldwide network of thousands of experts, includes some 41,000 species and subspecies around the globe.
Six Flags Discovery Kingdom Kills Another Animal: Death of Giraffe Leads to In Defense Of Animals Has Filing Complaint With USDA
What in the world is Six Flags doing keeping live animals at an amusement park? How in the world does the USDA allow this?
Article:
VALLEJO: ANIMAL RIGHTS GROUP FILES COMPLAINT AGAINST SIX FLAGS
09/07/07 10:40 PDT
VALLEJO (BCN)
http://cbs5.com/localwire/localfsnews/bcn/2007/09/07/n/
HeadlineNews/COMPLAINT-FILED/resources_bcn_html
In Defense of Animals has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Agriculture asking them to investigate the death of a giraffe at Six Flags Discovery Kingdom on Wednesday.
Makonnen the 2-year-old giraffe died when a one-alarm fire broke out in the giraffe barn at the amusement park, according to Six Flags. IDA is asking the USDA to investigate whether the animal's death was caused by lack of proper facility maintenance. An electrical outlet in the barn malfunctioned and started the fire.
The USDA approves exhibitors' licenses for people or venues that are going to be exhibiting wild or exotic animals, said Les Schilbert, a consultant for IDA, so they will conduct an investigation to see if the license should be revoked.
According to the IDA the federal Animal Welfare Act requires exhibitors to maintain housing facilities in good repair so that animals are protected from injury. In the filed complaint IDA also cited concerns about the lack of overnight monitoring of park animals.
The fire broke out just after 2 a.m. Wednesday night, according to a park spokeswoman. Two giraffes in an outside corral were led away from the flames, but Makonnen was inside the giraffe barn and perished.
Article:
VALLEJO: ANIMAL RIGHTS GROUP FILES COMPLAINT AGAINST SIX FLAGS
09/07/07 10:40 PDT
VALLEJO (BCN)
http://cbs5.com/localwire/localfsnews/bcn/2007/09/07/n/
HeadlineNews/COMPLAINT-FILED/resources_bcn_html
In Defense of Animals has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Agriculture asking them to investigate the death of a giraffe at Six Flags Discovery Kingdom on Wednesday.
Makonnen the 2-year-old giraffe died when a one-alarm fire broke out in the giraffe barn at the amusement park, according to Six Flags. IDA is asking the USDA to investigate whether the animal's death was caused by lack of proper facility maintenance. An electrical outlet in the barn malfunctioned and started the fire.
The USDA approves exhibitors' licenses for people or venues that are going to be exhibiting wild or exotic animals, said Les Schilbert, a consultant for IDA, so they will conduct an investigation to see if the license should be revoked.
According to the IDA the federal Animal Welfare Act requires exhibitors to maintain housing facilities in good repair so that animals are protected from injury. In the filed complaint IDA also cited concerns about the lack of overnight monitoring of park animals.
The fire broke out just after 2 a.m. Wednesday night, according to a park spokeswoman. Two giraffes in an outside corral were led away from the flames, but Makonnen was inside the giraffe barn and perished.
Louisiana State University Buys Another Live Tiger as Mascot: Ridiculous Move Exposes Lack of Concern in General for Endangered Animals
Absolutely ridiculous that a university is allowed to have a rare, live animal. How could they possibly care for such an animal?
Those tempted to be fooled by the foolish words of the LSU chancellor below, think again.
Article:
Animal rights groups: LSU tiger must go
http://www.postchronicle.com/news/strange/
article_212102553.shtml
Published: 8, 2007 at 8:49 PM
BATON ROUGE, La., 8 (UPI) -- Louisiana State University’s decision to acquire another live tiger mascot has outraged some animal rights activists.
Mike VI, a 2-year-old male from an animal rescue organization in Indiana, is a Bengal-Siberian mix. The university’s previous mascot died in May of kidney failure.
The mascot’s housing is luxurious compared to many zoos, with air-conditioning, a wading pool and a waterfall. Mike’s medical care comes from the LSU School of Veterinary Medicine.
“He probably gets better medical treatment than most of us,” LSU Chancellor Sean O’Keefe told The New York Times. “He’s one charmed cat.”
But the university is coping with a growing sensitivity to animal treatment. Louisiana recently banned cockfighting, joining the other 49 states, and some in the state legislature say LSU should give up its tiger.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals agrees.
“As grandiose as Mike’s expensive habitat may look, it is inadequate for a tiger,” Lisa Wathne, a PETA captive exotic animal specialist, told the Times. “The whole idea of carting this animal to a sporting event with screaming people is stressful to any wild animal.”
Those tempted to be fooled by the foolish words of the LSU chancellor below, think again.
Article:
Animal rights groups: LSU tiger must go
http://www.postchronicle.com/news/strange/
article_212102553.shtml
Published: 8, 2007 at 8:49 PM
BATON ROUGE, La., 8 (UPI) -- Louisiana State University’s decision to acquire another live tiger mascot has outraged some animal rights activists.
Mike VI, a 2-year-old male from an animal rescue organization in Indiana, is a Bengal-Siberian mix. The university’s previous mascot died in May of kidney failure.
The mascot’s housing is luxurious compared to many zoos, with air-conditioning, a wading pool and a waterfall. Mike’s medical care comes from the LSU School of Veterinary Medicine.
“He probably gets better medical treatment than most of us,” LSU Chancellor Sean O’Keefe told The New York Times. “He’s one charmed cat.”
But the university is coping with a growing sensitivity to animal treatment. Louisiana recently banned cockfighting, joining the other 49 states, and some in the state legislature say LSU should give up its tiger.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals agrees.
“As grandiose as Mike’s expensive habitat may look, it is inadequate for a tiger,” Lisa Wathne, a PETA captive exotic animal specialist, told the Times. “The whole idea of carting this animal to a sporting event with screaming people is stressful to any wild animal.”
Three Former Circus Employees Join Federal Lawsuit Against Ringling Brothers And Barnum & Bailey Circus Under The Endangered Species Act
Once again, this suit “…alleges that Ringling Bros. mistreats and abuses the Asian elephants it uses in shows all across the country.”
An excellent move.
For more on the cruel truth behind the cruelty of the circus see http://www.circuses.com/
Article:
Elephants Beaten with Bull Hooks in the Name of Entertainment
Posted by: Liz in Animal Rights, Peace
http://willienelsonpri.com/peace/365/elephants-
beaten-with-bull-hooks-in-the-name-of-entertainment.html
Former Ringling Brothers Employees Bolster Federal Lawsuit Against Circus
Washington, D.C. (Aug. 29, 2007) – The Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) and others seek permission for three former circus employees to join in their federal lawsuit against Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus under the Endangered Species Act. The suit alleges that Ringling Bros. mistreats and abuses the Asian elephants it uses in shows all across the country.
Former Ringling Bros. employees Archele Hundley, Margaret Tom and Robert Tom Jr. witnessed elephant cruelty before leaving the circus last summer. Their observations reaffirm evidence previously described by existing plaintiff and former Ringling Bros. employee Tom Rider, which includes the routine striking of elephants with bull hooks, and chaining of the animals for long periods of time.
Hundley, who quit the circus because she found the mistreatment of the animals too upsetting, recalled an incident where notorious animal trainer, Sacha Houcke used a bull hook in an attempt to force an elephant named Baby to lie down.
After smacking her with the bull hook repeatedly with no success, Houcke inserted the bull hook into Baby’s ear canal, and while holding the bull hook’s handle with both hands, he pulled down on Baby’s ear with all of his weight, causing her to bleed profusely and squeal in pain.
In describing an episode that happened earlier this year when an elephant named Asia defecated on one of the dancers during her routine, Margaret Tom stated that she “witnessed two guys beat Asia the minute she left the stage, hitting her at least 10 times with bull hooks, making her scream.”
Margaret Tom’s husband, Robert Tom Jr., reported that elephants are hit with bull hooks daily. He described an elephant who bled from the back and screamed in pain from a beating that lasted approximately 30 minutes. The trainer exerted so much energy that “he would periodically sit in a chair to take a break, then return to the elephant and start hooking again.”
“These witnesses reinforce what we know Ringling Bros. is anxious to hide,” said Tracy Silverman, General Counsel for AWI. “We are pleased that these former employees have come forward to reveal what goes on behind the scenes of the big tent, and we are eager to present this evidence in court.”
The Washington, D.C. law firm Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal is representing AWI and its co-plaintiffs, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Fund for Animals, the Animal Protection Institute and another former Ringling employee, Tom Rider.
Trial is expected to commence sometime next year.
Contact: Tracy Silverman, Esq.: (703) 836-4300/tracy@awionline.org
The Animal Welfare Institute has worked for over 56 years to reduce the unnecessary pain and suffering inflicted on animals by humans.
An excellent move.
For more on the cruel truth behind the cruelty of the circus see http://www.circuses.com/
Article:
Elephants Beaten with Bull Hooks in the Name of Entertainment
Posted by: Liz in Animal Rights, Peace
http://willienelsonpri.com/peace/365/elephants-
beaten-with-bull-hooks-in-the-name-of-entertainment.html
Former Ringling Brothers Employees Bolster Federal Lawsuit Against Circus
Washington, D.C. (Aug. 29, 2007) – The Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) and others seek permission for three former circus employees to join in their federal lawsuit against Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus under the Endangered Species Act. The suit alleges that Ringling Bros. mistreats and abuses the Asian elephants it uses in shows all across the country.
Former Ringling Bros. employees Archele Hundley, Margaret Tom and Robert Tom Jr. witnessed elephant cruelty before leaving the circus last summer. Their observations reaffirm evidence previously described by existing plaintiff and former Ringling Bros. employee Tom Rider, which includes the routine striking of elephants with bull hooks, and chaining of the animals for long periods of time.
Hundley, who quit the circus because she found the mistreatment of the animals too upsetting, recalled an incident where notorious animal trainer, Sacha Houcke used a bull hook in an attempt to force an elephant named Baby to lie down.
After smacking her with the bull hook repeatedly with no success, Houcke inserted the bull hook into Baby’s ear canal, and while holding the bull hook’s handle with both hands, he pulled down on Baby’s ear with all of his weight, causing her to bleed profusely and squeal in pain.
In describing an episode that happened earlier this year when an elephant named Asia defecated on one of the dancers during her routine, Margaret Tom stated that she “witnessed two guys beat Asia the minute she left the stage, hitting her at least 10 times with bull hooks, making her scream.”
Margaret Tom’s husband, Robert Tom Jr., reported that elephants are hit with bull hooks daily. He described an elephant who bled from the back and screamed in pain from a beating that lasted approximately 30 minutes. The trainer exerted so much energy that “he would periodically sit in a chair to take a break, then return to the elephant and start hooking again.”
“These witnesses reinforce what we know Ringling Bros. is anxious to hide,” said Tracy Silverman, General Counsel for AWI. “We are pleased that these former employees have come forward to reveal what goes on behind the scenes of the big tent, and we are eager to present this evidence in court.”
The Washington, D.C. law firm Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal is representing AWI and its co-plaintiffs, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Fund for Animals, the Animal Protection Institute and another former Ringling employee, Tom Rider.
Trial is expected to commence sometime next year.
Contact: Tracy Silverman, Esq.: (703) 836-4300/tracy@awionline.org
The Animal Welfare Institute has worked for over 56 years to reduce the unnecessary pain and suffering inflicted on animals by humans.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Michael Vick, Former Quarterback of Atlanta Falcons Gives In: Admits to Not only Gambling on Dog Fighting, but to Brutally Killing Dogs
This is probably old news to some, but in case any readers hadn't heard, here is the latest. What stands out is that he finally admits not only to gambling and to dog fighting, but also to actually taking part in brutally killing dogs. This included downing or hanging.
“According to the statement, Vick also was involved with the others in killing six to eight dogs that did not perform well in testing sessions last April. The dogs were executed by drowning or hanging.”
Even more telling: "Vick agrees and stipulates that these dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts" of Vick..."
Article:
"Vick agrees and stipulates that these dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts" of Vick, Phillips and Peace, the statement said.
NFL suspends Michael Vick indefinitely
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070824/
ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_michael_vick
By DAVE GOLDBERG and LARRY O'DELL, Associated Press Writers Fri Aug 24, 7:33 PM ET
No matter how nuanced his confession for involvement in dogfighting, Michael Vick got no leniency Friday from the NFL.
ADVERTISEMENT
Commissioner Roger Goodell suspended the Atlanta Falcons quarterback indefinitely without pay, just hours after Vick filed a plea agreement that portrayed him as less involved than three co-defendants and guilty mainly of poor judgment for associating with them.
Vick acknowledged bankrolling gambling on the dogfights, but denied placing bets himself or taking any of the winnings. He admitted that dogs not worthy of the pit were killed "as a result of the collective efforts" of himself and two co-defendants.
Goodell wasn't moved and didn't bother to wait until Monday, when U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson will formally accept the plea and set a sentencing date likely to land Vick in prison for one to five years.
The commissioner said Vick's admitted conduct was "not only illegal but also cruel and reprehensible." Even if he didn't personally placed bets, Goodell said, "your actions in funding the betting and your association with illegal gambling both violate the terms of your NFL player contract and expose you to corrupting influences in derogation of one of the most fundamental responsibilities of an NFL player."
Goodell freed the Falcons to "assert any claims or remedies" to recover $22 million of Vick's signing bonus from the 10-year, $130 million contract he signed in 2004.
The commissioner didn't speak to Vick but based his decision on the court filings. NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said Goodell may meet with Vick in the future, and Goodell said he would review the suspension after all the legal proceedings.
"You have engaged in conduct detrimental to the welfare of the NFL and have violated the league's personal conduct policy," Goodell told Vick in a letter after meeting in New York with Falcons president and general manager Rich McKay.
Falcons owner Arthur Blank supported Goodell's decision and said:
"We hope that Michael will use this time, not only to further address his legal matters, but to take positive steps to improve his personal life."
Earlier Friday in Richmond, Va., a "summary of facts" signed by Vick was filed along with his written plea agreement on a federal dogfighting conspiracy charge.
"While Mr. Vick is not personally charged with or responsible for committing all of the acts alleged in the indictment, as with any conspiracy charge, he is taking full responsibility for his actions and the actions of the others involved," the defense team said in a written statement after the plea agreement was filed.
"Mr. Vick apologizes for his poor judgment in associating himself with those involved in dog fighting and realizes he should never have been involved in this conduct," the statement said.
Vick and his lawyers said his involvement was limited when it came to the enterprise known as the Bad Newz Kennels.
"Our position has been that we are going to try to help Judge Hudson understand all the facts and Michael's role," Vick's defense attorney, Billy Martin, said in telephone interview. "Michael's role was different than others associated with this incident."
Vick's summary of facts said he provided most of the Bad Newz Kennels operation and gambling monies, echoing language in plea agreements by the three co-defendants — Tony Taylor, Purnell Peace and Quanis Phillips.
When the dogs won, the statement said, gambling proceeds were generally shared by Taylor, Peace and Phillips.
"Vick did not gamble by placing side bets on any of the fights. Vick did not receive any of the proceeds of the purses that were won by Bad Newz Kennels," the court document said.
According to the statement, Vick also was involved with the others in killing six to eight dogs that did not perform well in testing sessions last April. The dogs were executed by drowning or hanging.
"Vick agrees and stipulates that these dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts" of Vick, Phillips and Peace, the statement said.
In the plea agreement, the government committed to recommending a sentence on the low end of the federal sentencing guideline range of a year to 18 months. However, the conspiracy charge is punishable by up to five years in prison, and the judge is not bound by any recommendation or by the guidelines.
Hudson has a reputation for imposing stiff sentences, according to lawyers who have appeared in his court. The judge will set a sentencing date at Monday's hearing.
Martin said Vick will "speak to the public and explain his actions." Though he declined to say when and where, the Tom Joyner Morning Show, a syndicated program based in Dallas, said it will have a live interview with Vick on Tuesday.
The case began in April when authorities conducting a drug investigation of Vick's cousin raided a Surry County property owned by Vick and found dozens of dogs, some injured, and equipment commonly used in dogfighting.
A federal indictment issued in July charged Vick, Peace, Phillips and Taylor with an interstate dogfighting conspiracy. Vick initially denied any involvement, and all four men pleaded innocent. The three co-defendants later pleaded guilty and agreed to testify against Vick.
Taylor was the first to change his plea, saying Vick financed the dogfighting ring's gambling and operations. Peace and Phillips soon followed, alleging that Vick joined them in killing dogs that did not measure up in test fights.
The sickening details outlined in the indictment and other court papers prompted a public backlash against Vick, who had been one of the NFL's most popular players.
Animal-rights groups mobilized against Vick — even protesting at NFL headquarters in New York — and sponsors dropped him.
"It is fitting that the NFL has suspended him," said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of The Humane Society of the United States. "He's now a role model for something terrible, and it's not appropriate that he suit up in an NFL uniform."
“According to the statement, Vick also was involved with the others in killing six to eight dogs that did not perform well in testing sessions last April. The dogs were executed by drowning or hanging.”
Even more telling: "Vick agrees and stipulates that these dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts" of Vick..."
Article:
"Vick agrees and stipulates that these dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts" of Vick, Phillips and Peace, the statement said.
NFL suspends Michael Vick indefinitely
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070824/
ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_michael_vick
By DAVE GOLDBERG and LARRY O'DELL, Associated Press Writers Fri Aug 24, 7:33 PM ET
No matter how nuanced his confession for involvement in dogfighting, Michael Vick got no leniency Friday from the NFL.
ADVERTISEMENT
Commissioner Roger Goodell suspended the Atlanta Falcons quarterback indefinitely without pay, just hours after Vick filed a plea agreement that portrayed him as less involved than three co-defendants and guilty mainly of poor judgment for associating with them.
Vick acknowledged bankrolling gambling on the dogfights, but denied placing bets himself or taking any of the winnings. He admitted that dogs not worthy of the pit were killed "as a result of the collective efforts" of himself and two co-defendants.
Goodell wasn't moved and didn't bother to wait until Monday, when U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson will formally accept the plea and set a sentencing date likely to land Vick in prison for one to five years.
The commissioner said Vick's admitted conduct was "not only illegal but also cruel and reprehensible." Even if he didn't personally placed bets, Goodell said, "your actions in funding the betting and your association with illegal gambling both violate the terms of your NFL player contract and expose you to corrupting influences in derogation of one of the most fundamental responsibilities of an NFL player."
Goodell freed the Falcons to "assert any claims or remedies" to recover $22 million of Vick's signing bonus from the 10-year, $130 million contract he signed in 2004.
The commissioner didn't speak to Vick but based his decision on the court filings. NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said Goodell may meet with Vick in the future, and Goodell said he would review the suspension after all the legal proceedings.
"You have engaged in conduct detrimental to the welfare of the NFL and have violated the league's personal conduct policy," Goodell told Vick in a letter after meeting in New York with Falcons president and general manager Rich McKay.
Falcons owner Arthur Blank supported Goodell's decision and said:
"We hope that Michael will use this time, not only to further address his legal matters, but to take positive steps to improve his personal life."
Earlier Friday in Richmond, Va., a "summary of facts" signed by Vick was filed along with his written plea agreement on a federal dogfighting conspiracy charge.
"While Mr. Vick is not personally charged with or responsible for committing all of the acts alleged in the indictment, as with any conspiracy charge, he is taking full responsibility for his actions and the actions of the others involved," the defense team said in a written statement after the plea agreement was filed.
"Mr. Vick apologizes for his poor judgment in associating himself with those involved in dog fighting and realizes he should never have been involved in this conduct," the statement said.
Vick and his lawyers said his involvement was limited when it came to the enterprise known as the Bad Newz Kennels.
"Our position has been that we are going to try to help Judge Hudson understand all the facts and Michael's role," Vick's defense attorney, Billy Martin, said in telephone interview. "Michael's role was different than others associated with this incident."
Vick's summary of facts said he provided most of the Bad Newz Kennels operation and gambling monies, echoing language in plea agreements by the three co-defendants — Tony Taylor, Purnell Peace and Quanis Phillips.
When the dogs won, the statement said, gambling proceeds were generally shared by Taylor, Peace and Phillips.
"Vick did not gamble by placing side bets on any of the fights. Vick did not receive any of the proceeds of the purses that were won by Bad Newz Kennels," the court document said.
According to the statement, Vick also was involved with the others in killing six to eight dogs that did not perform well in testing sessions last April. The dogs were executed by drowning or hanging.
"Vick agrees and stipulates that these dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts" of Vick, Phillips and Peace, the statement said.
In the plea agreement, the government committed to recommending a sentence on the low end of the federal sentencing guideline range of a year to 18 months. However, the conspiracy charge is punishable by up to five years in prison, and the judge is not bound by any recommendation or by the guidelines.
Hudson has a reputation for imposing stiff sentences, according to lawyers who have appeared in his court. The judge will set a sentencing date at Monday's hearing.
Martin said Vick will "speak to the public and explain his actions." Though he declined to say when and where, the Tom Joyner Morning Show, a syndicated program based in Dallas, said it will have a live interview with Vick on Tuesday.
The case began in April when authorities conducting a drug investigation of Vick's cousin raided a Surry County property owned by Vick and found dozens of dogs, some injured, and equipment commonly used in dogfighting.
A federal indictment issued in July charged Vick, Peace, Phillips and Taylor with an interstate dogfighting conspiracy. Vick initially denied any involvement, and all four men pleaded innocent. The three co-defendants later pleaded guilty and agreed to testify against Vick.
Taylor was the first to change his plea, saying Vick financed the dogfighting ring's gambling and operations. Peace and Phillips soon followed, alleging that Vick joined them in killing dogs that did not measure up in test fights.
The sickening details outlined in the indictment and other court papers prompted a public backlash against Vick, who had been one of the NFL's most popular players.
Animal-rights groups mobilized against Vick — even protesting at NFL headquarters in New York — and sponsors dropped him.
"It is fitting that the NFL has suspended him," said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of The Humane Society of the United States. "He's now a role model for something terrible, and it's not appropriate that he suit up in an NFL uniform."
Monday, August 20, 2007
Michael Vick, Quarterback for Atlanta Falcons Finally Admits Truth: Will Plea Guilty to Charges of Supporting Grisly Dog Fighting Operation
Here are a couple paragraphs from the story below that serve as reminders to the reality of the cruelty of Michael Vick’s actions:
“The July 17 indictment said dogs that lost fights or fared poorly in test fights were sometimes executed by hanging, electrocution or other brutal means. The grisly details fueled public protests against Vick and cost him some of his lucrative endorsement deals.
The case began April 25 when investigators conducting a drug search at a massive home Vick built in Surry County found 66 dogs, some of them injured, and items typically used in dogfighting. They included a "rape stand" that holds aggressive dogs in place for mating and a "breakstick" used to pry open a dog's mouth.”
Article:
Falcons' Vick to plead guilty to charges
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070820/
ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_vick_plea
By LARRY O'DELL, Associated Press Writer Mon Aug 20, 7:25 PM ET
RICHMOND, Va. - Michael Vick agreed Monday to plead guilty to federal dogfighting conspiracy charges, a deal that leaves the Atlanta Falcons quarterback facing up to 18 months in prison and puts his NFL career in jeopardy.
ADVERTISEMENT
Under the plea agreement, prosecutors will recommend Vick be sentenced to between a year and 18 months in prison, according to a government official who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the terms have not yet been made final.
That would be a higher penalty than is usually recommended for first-time convicts, and reflects an attempt by the government to show that animal abusers will receive more than a slap on the wrist for their crimes, the official said.
The offense is punishable by up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson will have the final say on how much time Vick will ultimately spend in jail.
Vick's plea hearing is Aug. 27.
Defense attorney Billy Martin said Vick reached an agreement with federal prosecutors after consulting with his family during the weekend.
"Mr. Vick has agreed to enter a plea of guilty to those charges and to accept full responsibility for his actions and the mistakes he has made," Martin said in a statement. "Michael wishes to apologize again to everyone who has been hurt by this matter."
The NFL noted in a statement that Vick's admission wasn't in line with what he told commissioner Roger Goodell shortly after he was initially charged.
"We totally condemn the conduct outlined in the charges, which is inconsistent with what Michael Vick previously told both our office and the Falcons," the NFL said.
The league, which barred Vick from training camp, said it has asked the Falcons to withhold further action while the NFL's own investigation wraps up.
The Falcons said they were "certainly troubled" by news of the plea but would withhold further comment in compliance with Goodell's request.
In a telephone interview with the AP, Martin said Vick is paying a high price for allowing old friends to influence his behavior, but he emphasized that his client takes full responsibility.
"There were some judgment issues in terms of people he was associating with," Martin said. "He realized this is very serious, and he decided to plead so he can begin the healing process."
The lawyer said salvaging Vick's NFL career was never part of the discussions.
"Football is not the most important thing in Michael Vick's life," he said. "He wants to get his life back on track."
Vick is charged with conspiracy to travel in interstate commerce in aid of unlawful activities and conspiracy to sponsor a dog in an animal fighting venture. He had pleaded not guilty last month and vowed to clear his name at a November trial.
The plea deal was announced just a new grand jury began meeting. Prosecutors had said that a superseding indictment was in the works, but Vick's plea most likely means he will not face additional charges.
Three of Vick's original co-defendants already have pleaded guilty and agreed to testify against him if the case went to trial. Quanis Phillips of Atlanta and Purnell Peace of Virginia Beach signed statements saying the 27-year-old quarterback participated in executing at least eight underperforming dogs by various means, including drowning and hanging.
Phillips, Peace and Tony Taylor, who pleaded guilty last month, also said Vick provided virtually all of the gambling and operating funds for his "Bad Newz Kennels" operation in rural Virginia, not far from Vick's hometown of Newport News.
The gambling allegations alone could trigger a lifetime ban under the NFL's personal conduct policy.
Vick's Atlanta attorney, Daniel Meachum, told the AP that Vick is taking a chance with his guilty plea as far as his career is concerned because there have been no discussions with the league in recent days.
"There's no promise or even a request of the league to make a promise," Meachum said.
Meachum said the plea deal involves only the federal case. He said he doesn't know if there have been any discussions about resolving Virginia state charges that may be brought against Vick.
The case began April 25 when investigators conducting a drug search at a massive home Vick built in Surry County found 66 dogs, some of them injured, and items typically used in dogfighting. They included a "rape stand" that holds aggressive dogs in place for mating and a "breakstick" used to pry open a dog's mouth.
Vick contended he knew nothing about a dogfighting operation at the home, where one of his cousins lived, and said he rarely visited. The former Virginia Tech star also blamed friends and family members for taking advantage of his generosity and pledged to be more scrupulous.
The July 17 indictment said dogs that lost fights or fared poorly in test fights were sometimes executed by hanging, electrocution or other brutal means. The grisly details fueled public protests against Vick and cost him some of his lucrative endorsement deals.
“The July 17 indictment said dogs that lost fights or fared poorly in test fights were sometimes executed by hanging, electrocution or other brutal means. The grisly details fueled public protests against Vick and cost him some of his lucrative endorsement deals.
The case began April 25 when investigators conducting a drug search at a massive home Vick built in Surry County found 66 dogs, some of them injured, and items typically used in dogfighting. They included a "rape stand" that holds aggressive dogs in place for mating and a "breakstick" used to pry open a dog's mouth.”
Article:
Falcons' Vick to plead guilty to charges
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070820/
ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_vick_plea
By LARRY O'DELL, Associated Press Writer Mon Aug 20, 7:25 PM ET
RICHMOND, Va. - Michael Vick agreed Monday to plead guilty to federal dogfighting conspiracy charges, a deal that leaves the Atlanta Falcons quarterback facing up to 18 months in prison and puts his NFL career in jeopardy.
ADVERTISEMENT
Under the plea agreement, prosecutors will recommend Vick be sentenced to between a year and 18 months in prison, according to a government official who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the terms have not yet been made final.
That would be a higher penalty than is usually recommended for first-time convicts, and reflects an attempt by the government to show that animal abusers will receive more than a slap on the wrist for their crimes, the official said.
The offense is punishable by up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson will have the final say on how much time Vick will ultimately spend in jail.
Vick's plea hearing is Aug. 27.
Defense attorney Billy Martin said Vick reached an agreement with federal prosecutors after consulting with his family during the weekend.
"Mr. Vick has agreed to enter a plea of guilty to those charges and to accept full responsibility for his actions and the mistakes he has made," Martin said in a statement. "Michael wishes to apologize again to everyone who has been hurt by this matter."
The NFL noted in a statement that Vick's admission wasn't in line with what he told commissioner Roger Goodell shortly after he was initially charged.
"We totally condemn the conduct outlined in the charges, which is inconsistent with what Michael Vick previously told both our office and the Falcons," the NFL said.
The league, which barred Vick from training camp, said it has asked the Falcons to withhold further action while the NFL's own investigation wraps up.
The Falcons said they were "certainly troubled" by news of the plea but would withhold further comment in compliance with Goodell's request.
In a telephone interview with the AP, Martin said Vick is paying a high price for allowing old friends to influence his behavior, but he emphasized that his client takes full responsibility.
"There were some judgment issues in terms of people he was associating with," Martin said. "He realized this is very serious, and he decided to plead so he can begin the healing process."
The lawyer said salvaging Vick's NFL career was never part of the discussions.
"Football is not the most important thing in Michael Vick's life," he said. "He wants to get his life back on track."
Vick is charged with conspiracy to travel in interstate commerce in aid of unlawful activities and conspiracy to sponsor a dog in an animal fighting venture. He had pleaded not guilty last month and vowed to clear his name at a November trial.
The plea deal was announced just a new grand jury began meeting. Prosecutors had said that a superseding indictment was in the works, but Vick's plea most likely means he will not face additional charges.
Three of Vick's original co-defendants already have pleaded guilty and agreed to testify against him if the case went to trial. Quanis Phillips of Atlanta and Purnell Peace of Virginia Beach signed statements saying the 27-year-old quarterback participated in executing at least eight underperforming dogs by various means, including drowning and hanging.
Phillips, Peace and Tony Taylor, who pleaded guilty last month, also said Vick provided virtually all of the gambling and operating funds for his "Bad Newz Kennels" operation in rural Virginia, not far from Vick's hometown of Newport News.
The gambling allegations alone could trigger a lifetime ban under the NFL's personal conduct policy.
Vick's Atlanta attorney, Daniel Meachum, told the AP that Vick is taking a chance with his guilty plea as far as his career is concerned because there have been no discussions with the league in recent days.
"There's no promise or even a request of the league to make a promise," Meachum said.
Meachum said the plea deal involves only the federal case. He said he doesn't know if there have been any discussions about resolving Virginia state charges that may be brought against Vick.
The case began April 25 when investigators conducting a drug search at a massive home Vick built in Surry County found 66 dogs, some of them injured, and items typically used in dogfighting. They included a "rape stand" that holds aggressive dogs in place for mating and a "breakstick" used to pry open a dog's mouth.
Vick contended he knew nothing about a dogfighting operation at the home, where one of his cousins lived, and said he rarely visited. The former Virginia Tech star also blamed friends and family members for taking advantage of his generosity and pledged to be more scrupulous.
The July 17 indictment said dogs that lost fights or fared poorly in test fights were sometimes executed by hanging, electrocution or other brutal means. The grisly details fueled public protests against Vick and cost him some of his lucrative endorsement deals.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Accused Dog Torturer Quarterback Michael Vick of the Atlanta Falcons Faces Likely Suspension for the 2007 Season for Dog Fighting
It’s heartening to see the NFL finally get serious with the thugs it has in it’s midst. Sending this message is important to making the statement that the NFL will FINALLY take these issues serious.
Article:
By Jason Cole, Yahoo! Sports
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Aj9Qn
MeN.5Pj8_5gCOPRxARDubYF?slug=jc-vick081207
&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
August 12, 2007
Yahoo! Sports
"That's the direction it's going and has been from the time this started," one of the sources said this week.
In July, Goodell told Vick not to report to training camp in the aftermath of a federal indictment for his alleged involvement in dogfighting on a property he owned in
What is unclear is whether Vick will be allowed to return to the Falcons this season if he is acquitted. This offseason, Goodell suspended Tennessee Titans cornerback Adam "Pacman" Jones for the entire season but added stipulations that could allow Jones to return earlier if he clears his record.
From a public relations standpoint, the NFL would like the matter dealt with before the opening week of the season. The feeling is that if the league can resolve the matter now, any further news on Vick will not detract from the buildup to the season.
The NFL has examined the indictment against Vick at length and has conducted a quasi-investigation of its own. The league has not interviewed anyone associated with the case, but it has pored over as many public documents as it could find.
The most careful element of the suspension is how it will be worded. Under the league's new personal conduct policy, there is some belief that Vick could escape punishment because this is the first time he has been charged with a crime.
However, Goodell hinted last week that because Vick was charged with multiple counts, including gambling on dogfights, the league may have a way around that. In an interview with USA Today, Goodell said that while he was disturbed by the dogfighting accusations, the gambling aspect is just as meaningful.
"Listen, we're sickened by the allegations and the predicament Michael put himself in," Goodell said. "But there are a lot of things in the indictment that concern the NFL that may not be of a greater concern from a law enforcement standpoint."
The NFL's gambling policy, which was established long before the personal conduct policy, has resulted in the suspension of players in the past. Both Paul Hornung and Alex Karras were suspended for the entire 1963 season after admitting they placed bets on NFL games.
Players can be banned for life for illegal gambling.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
In Belgium, Number of Animals Used in Animal Testing Increases Considerably: A Total of 756,715 Animals Were Used in Tests in Belgium
How tragic. Shows that much work is yet to be done in ending vivisection. The number just in that one small country is staggering. Not surprisng though, as Belgium is also a country that loves to eat horses.
Sadly too, animal testing is not necessary.
For information on alternatives to animal testing, see
http://www.geari.org/alternatives-to-animal-testing.html
Article:
More animals used for tests
http://www.expatica.com/actual/article.asp?subchannel_id=24&story_id=426888
August 2007
BRUSSELS – A total of 756,715 animals were used in different types of tests in Belgium last year.
This signals a slight increase in the number of test animals compared to 2005, the animal welfare department of the federal ministry of public health, safety of the food chain and environment announced on Wednesday. Animal rights organisation GAIA says this is the fourth consecutive year showing an increase in animal testing.
The animals are primarily used in the development and quality control of medicines and medical material. Last year a total of 37,739 more animals were used in experiments, an increase of 5.2 percent compared to the year previous. There was an especially marked increase in the number of mice (up 28,023), rabbits (up 9,359), birds (up 2,861) and fish (up 5,099) that were used in experiments, GAIA points out.
The number of cats used in experiments also increased significantly – by 32 percent – from 81 in 2005 to 107 last year. That is unacceptable, says the animal rights organisation, which is sounding the alarm. GAIA blames the increase on a failing government policy.
Sadly too, animal testing is not necessary.
For information on alternatives to animal testing, see
http://www.geari.org/alternatives-to-animal-testing.html
Article:
More animals used for tests
http://www.expatica.com/actual/article.asp?subchannel_id=24&story_id=426888
August 2007
BRUSSELS – A total of 756,715 animals were used in different types of tests in Belgium last year.
This signals a slight increase in the number of test animals compared to 2005, the animal welfare department of the federal ministry of public health, safety of the food chain and environment announced on Wednesday. Animal rights organisation GAIA says this is the fourth consecutive year showing an increase in animal testing.
The animals are primarily used in the development and quality control of medicines and medical material. Last year a total of 37,739 more animals were used in experiments, an increase of 5.2 percent compared to the year previous. There was an especially marked increase in the number of mice (up 28,023), rabbits (up 9,359), birds (up 2,861) and fish (up 5,099) that were used in experiments, GAIA points out.
The number of cats used in experiments also increased significantly – by 32 percent – from 81 in 2005 to 107 last year. That is unacceptable, says the animal rights organisation, which is sounding the alarm. GAIA blames the increase on a failing government policy.
Three Animal Rights Groups Protest Abusive Treatment of Elephants by the Ringling Brothers And Barnum and Bailey Circus
Good to see the groups still raising awareness to the abuse suffered by elephants in circuses.
For more detailed information on the abuse of elephants in circuses see http://www.idausa.org/facts/circusfacts.html
Article:
Animal Rights Groups To Protest Treatment Of Circus Elephants
http://www.10news.com/news/13848316/detail.html
SAN DIEGO -- At least three animal rights groups will protest what they call abusive treatment of elephants by the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey circus Wednesday outside its opening night performance at the San Diego Sports Arena.
"These people treat them like the devil would," Florence Lambert of the Elephant Alliance said. "They've been abused."
Circus officials have long denied allegations of mistreatment, claiming it exceeds all federal animal welfare standards set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture under the Animal Welfare Act.
Lambert went to the circus' annual walk from the train to the Sports Arena Tuesday, checking on the condition of the elephants, but said she was forced to remain in her car because employees know her as the woman who unmasked them.
"Fourteen years ago, I took a lot of photos that were incriminating. They (circus employees) shout at me," she said.
Lambert said she watched from her car, making sure the elephants were all right, and to see if she could report any violations to Animal Control.
"They (circus employees) were shouting and punching them with the bull hook," Lambert said. "But they weren't using the hooks to break the skin."
Although Lambert was a witness to the walk where she said the animals "looked so sad and just so abused," Animal Control was parked nearby, and she said the trainers were doing nothing illegal.
Other animal advocates will be in attendance tomorrow to protest elephant training practices among other issues.
The San Diego Animal Advocates said they will pass out fliers in English and Spanish on Wednesday, as well as have banners in both languages, the group's Jane Cartmill said.
During the protest, a person dressed inside a flat screen television suit will be displaying videos of what Cartmill calls elephant training.
Circus official Andy Perez said Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey encourages the public to see the elephants and other animals for themselves.
"We don't have bad trainers," he said.
The circus has trainers available 90 minutes before the show. The audience can see trainers and the animals at that time, Perez said. The circus is especially proud of its Asian elephant breeding program, Perez said.
The Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey circus operates a 200-acre facility in Florida where the elephants can retire, breed and become a part of a research project to ensure their species' survival, Perez said.
Cartmill said her group will be protesting the circus for false statements of breeding elephants for conservation purposes.
"Captivity equals conservation is absurd," Cartmill said. "They should buy habitat in Asia where the elephants belong. Breeding them in a U.S. environment is not conservation."
For more detailed information on the abuse of elephants in circuses see http://www.idausa.org/facts/circusfacts.html
Article:
Animal Rights Groups To Protest Treatment Of Circus Elephants
http://www.10news.com/news/13848316/detail.html
SAN DIEGO -- At least three animal rights groups will protest what they call abusive treatment of elephants by the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey circus Wednesday outside its opening night performance at the San Diego Sports Arena.
"These people treat them like the devil would," Florence Lambert of the Elephant Alliance said. "They've been abused."
Circus officials have long denied allegations of mistreatment, claiming it exceeds all federal animal welfare standards set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture under the Animal Welfare Act.
Lambert went to the circus' annual walk from the train to the Sports Arena Tuesday, checking on the condition of the elephants, but said she was forced to remain in her car because employees know her as the woman who unmasked them.
"Fourteen years ago, I took a lot of photos that were incriminating. They (circus employees) shout at me," she said.
Lambert said she watched from her car, making sure the elephants were all right, and to see if she could report any violations to Animal Control.
"They (circus employees) were shouting and punching them with the bull hook," Lambert said. "But they weren't using the hooks to break the skin."
Although Lambert was a witness to the walk where she said the animals "looked so sad and just so abused," Animal Control was parked nearby, and she said the trainers were doing nothing illegal.
Other animal advocates will be in attendance tomorrow to protest elephant training practices among other issues.
The San Diego Animal Advocates said they will pass out fliers in English and Spanish on Wednesday, as well as have banners in both languages, the group's Jane Cartmill said.
During the protest, a person dressed inside a flat screen television suit will be displaying videos of what Cartmill calls elephant training.
Circus official Andy Perez said Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey encourages the public to see the elephants and other animals for themselves.
"We don't have bad trainers," he said.
The circus has trainers available 90 minutes before the show. The audience can see trainers and the animals at that time, Perez said. The circus is especially proud of its Asian elephant breeding program, Perez said.
The Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey circus operates a 200-acre facility in Florida where the elephants can retire, breed and become a part of a research project to ensure their species' survival, Perez said.
Cartmill said her group will be protesting the circus for false statements of breeding elephants for conservation purposes.
"Captivity equals conservation is absurd," Cartmill said. "They should buy habitat in Asia where the elephants belong. Breeding them in a U.S. environment is not conservation."
Attempt to End Private Ownership of Exotic Animals in North Carolina Shot Down
Sad, but predictable.
Article:
Exotic animal ban tamed
http://www.newsobserver.com/
news/story/663521.html
Ryan Teague Beck with, Staff Writers
In the rush of 11th-hour lawmaking last week, a bill that would have banned private ownership of exotic animals took a quiet second trip to legislative purgatory.
The bill's sponsor, Sen. Ed Jones, stuck the measure into an end-of-session study bill after the proposed ban drew intense criticism. State agriculture officials, agribusiness interests and a loose coalition of private zoo and sanctuary owners, reptile keepers and trainers who conduct animal education programs in schools, churches and other venues objected to the ban.
Backed by the Animal Protection Institute, a California-based animal rights group, the bill originally would have slapped a ban on a broad range of exotic animals for public health and safety reasons -- from lions and tigers to bats, pythons, monkeys and apes. Supporters said a ban is needed to protect people from disease and prevent tragedies such as the 2003 death of a Wilkes County fourth-grader who was mauled by a tiger kept in his aunt's backyard.
But critics of the bill said it reached well beyond the laudable goal of banning backyard ownership of tigers and other large carnivores by including restrictions that would have put small zoo owners and animal educators out of business. Opponents also lambasted an earlier study committee chaired by David Jones, head of the N.C. Zoological Park in Asheboro, saying it was stacked with animal rights activists and turned in a final report five months late -- after the Senate exotic animal ban legislation was introduced.
Jones, a Democrat from Halifax County, tucked his bill into a measure that charges the Legislative Research Commission to study the proposed ban after it ran into opposition in a Senate committee and special subcommittee.
At least one member of that subcommittee, Sen. Eddie Goodall, a Republican from suburban Charlotte, questions whether supporters of the ban have proven a broad public health and safety threat from exotic animals.
"There just didn't seem to be a need to do something drastic," Goodall said.
Article:
Exotic animal ban tamed
http://www.newsobserver.com/
news/story/663521.html
Ryan Teague Beck with, Staff Writers
In the rush of 11th-hour lawmaking last week, a bill that would have banned private ownership of exotic animals took a quiet second trip to legislative purgatory.
The bill's sponsor, Sen. Ed Jones, stuck the measure into an end-of-session study bill after the proposed ban drew intense criticism. State agriculture officials, agribusiness interests and a loose coalition of private zoo and sanctuary owners, reptile keepers and trainers who conduct animal education programs in schools, churches and other venues objected to the ban.
Backed by the Animal Protection Institute, a California-based animal rights group, the bill originally would have slapped a ban on a broad range of exotic animals for public health and safety reasons -- from lions and tigers to bats, pythons, monkeys and apes. Supporters said a ban is needed to protect people from disease and prevent tragedies such as the 2003 death of a Wilkes County fourth-grader who was mauled by a tiger kept in his aunt's backyard.
But critics of the bill said it reached well beyond the laudable goal of banning backyard ownership of tigers and other large carnivores by including restrictions that would have put small zoo owners and animal educators out of business. Opponents also lambasted an earlier study committee chaired by David Jones, head of the N.C. Zoological Park in Asheboro, saying it was stacked with animal rights activists and turned in a final report five months late -- after the Senate exotic animal ban legislation was introduced.
Jones, a Democrat from Halifax County, tucked his bill into a measure that charges the Legislative Research Commission to study the proposed ban after it ran into opposition in a Senate committee and special subcommittee.
At least one member of that subcommittee, Sen. Eddie Goodall, a Republican from suburban Charlotte, questions whether supporters of the ban have proven a broad public health and safety threat from exotic animals.
"There just didn't seem to be a need to do something drastic," Goodall said.
Finding and Convicting Poachers Being Made Easier with High –Tech Techniques
Very good news. Looks like at least one person is serious about this.
Article:
Poaching probes go high-tech
http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2007/
08/08/news/regional/40633927f89f60548725732f006f3029.txtBy
REBECCA BOONEAssociated Press writer
CALDWELL, Idaho -- A knife with traces of blood found in a suspect's truck. A few hairs picked up at the crime scene hundreds of miles away. Authorities feared the victim was dead, perhaps already dismembered and eaten.
Dr. Karen Rudolph didn't have much time: She had to see if DNA on the bloody knife matched the scattered hair found on a rock outcropping in the Idaho wilderness. Two days later, working quickly but carefully on delicate equipment in a state laboratory, she had an answer for investigators. The DNA was a match.
The suspect was arrested and charged -- with poaching.
"Idaho poachers, until recently, were kind of your average Joe Bad Guy out in the woods doing small-fry things," said Rudolph, a wildlife laboratory biologist for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. "But now many of them literally hunt every day and night -- looking for antlers to sell so some rich guy in Jackson Hole can have an antler chandelier, or ingredients to make some strange alternative medicine or to get a trophy for bragging rights. It's become commercial."
That means more high-stakes court cases, she said, with defendants hiring top-dollar attorneys and juries expecting high-tech evidence.
And that's where Rudolph comes in.
As the state's only wildlife DNA expert, the 44-year-old Horseshoe Bend resident handles evidence for many of Idaho's poaching cases. At its simplest, Rudolph's job requires her to forensically determine the species, gender and identity of any given hunk of tissue, wayward tuft of hair, bone chip or dried splatter of blood.
In many cases, her work has helped prosecutors win convictions and encouraged defendants to plead guilty without going to trial, officials said.
In one recent case, Gary Lehnherr of McFarland, Wis., and Ronnie Gardner of Jerome, Idaho both pleaded guilty in federal court to illegally killing a trophy mule deer in Lincoln County with a high-caliber center fire rifle. Rudolph matched DNA in blood and hair found at the kill site -- in an area where only muzzleloader hunting was allowed -- with DNA from the deer's antlers, found in Lehnherr's home.
When the two are sentenced Oct. 15, they face up to one year in prison and $100,000 fines for the federal misdemeanor. Assistant U.S. Attorney George Breitsameter, who prosecuted the case, said Rudolph's work was "an important investigative tool" in the case.
DNA also helped crack the case of a man who was suspected of trying to poison wolves in Wyoming and Idaho with pesticide-laced meatballs. No wolves were found dead, but the tainted meat was suspected in the death of more than 20 pet dogs.
First, DNA from some meatballs found at a crime scene near Salmon was matched to DNA found in blood in Tim Sundles' freezer. The former Salmon resident, who now lives in Montana, was headed for trial but pleaded guilty after more DNA evidence turned up.
Investigators had taken samples of yellow snow found at the crime scene that day, suspecting that the person who left the meatballs had relieved himself at the site. They were right, Breitsameter said -- DNA from human cells found in the urine was a perfect match for Sundles.
In February, Sundles was sentenced to six days in jail, banned from federal or public land for two years and ordered to pay more than $1,500 in fines for violating the Endangered Species Act.
The use of DNA evidence in wildlife investigations is fairly new, but it's being used more and more, Breitsameter said.
"I'm not sure if that's because of people's expectations, but DNA is the modern fingerprint that people can use to attach an individual to a crime," he said. "It's only come up in the last couple of years or so here, and as it's available, it's required because it can either exculpate somebody or has the potential to inculpate them."
At the tiny cinderblock Fish and Game lab where Rudolph works in Caldwell, the mail may bring a cardboard tube filled with bear bait or a wrapped hunk of meat taken from someone's freezer. Game wardens often stumble on suspected crime scenes while they're hiking in the wilderness, Rudolph said, so they have to collect the evidence with whatever makeshift container they can find in their backpacks.
Sometimes Rudolph finds herself living something like a countrified scene from the TV crime thriller CSI.
"I've been given a bone saw that had tissue from different animals stuck between the tiny teeth of the blade. Once, I had to pick through a shop vacuum for tissue. We mostly found hair," she said. "I spent hours examining a pontoon boat for moose blood, because the officer had a tip that the poacher had been fishing the same day he killed a moose, and both the boat and the moose were transported in the same truck."
Some suspects, apparently unaware that investigators use advanced forensic techniques, get a little cocky and unwittingly help investigators, Rudolph said.
"One guy had a folding knife that a warden thought had been used in a poaching case, and when the officer asked for it, the guy laughed and said, 'Go ahead and take it. I've already cleaned it and boiled it and you won't find anything."'
Back in the lab, Rudolph was undeterred. She put a layer of aluminum foil down on the lab counter and slowly opened the folding knife. As she ran a tiny brush over the hinge, the bristles dislodged a speck of dried blood.
The sample was minuscule. But it was enough to run a DNA test and connect the knife to the poached animal, she said.
Few states have their own wildlife DNA lab, said Ken Goddard, director of the National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Lab. So Goddard's Ashland, Ore. lab handles wildlife evidence from across the nation, as well as for some international cases.
"Maybe 8 or 9 states have one person, but have never been able to get the funding for a real lab," Goddard said. "The idea is to take what works in a human crime scene and transfer it to wildlife crime management. All labs -- human or wildlife -- try to link the suspect, the crime scene and the evidence together. But in wildlife, you have to figure out first if a crime was committed. That can depend on time of day, what side of the road someone was on and even the type of weapon used."
Ultimately, the use of DNA evidence helps keep game wardens safe by minimizing their initial contact with suspects, Goddard said.
"Before, you had to catch them with the deer or poached bear and they're generally armed at the time. That can be terribly dangerous," he said. "Now they don't have to catch people in the act -- they can just gather the evidence later."
Article:
Poaching probes go high-tech
http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2007/
08/08/news/regional/40633927f89f60548725732f006f3029.txtBy
REBECCA BOONEAssociated Press writer
CALDWELL, Idaho -- A knife with traces of blood found in a suspect's truck. A few hairs picked up at the crime scene hundreds of miles away. Authorities feared the victim was dead, perhaps already dismembered and eaten.
Dr. Karen Rudolph didn't have much time: She had to see if DNA on the bloody knife matched the scattered hair found on a rock outcropping in the Idaho wilderness. Two days later, working quickly but carefully on delicate equipment in a state laboratory, she had an answer for investigators. The DNA was a match.
The suspect was arrested and charged -- with poaching.
"Idaho poachers, until recently, were kind of your average Joe Bad Guy out in the woods doing small-fry things," said Rudolph, a wildlife laboratory biologist for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. "But now many of them literally hunt every day and night -- looking for antlers to sell so some rich guy in Jackson Hole can have an antler chandelier, or ingredients to make some strange alternative medicine or to get a trophy for bragging rights. It's become commercial."
That means more high-stakes court cases, she said, with defendants hiring top-dollar attorneys and juries expecting high-tech evidence.
And that's where Rudolph comes in.
As the state's only wildlife DNA expert, the 44-year-old Horseshoe Bend resident handles evidence for many of Idaho's poaching cases. At its simplest, Rudolph's job requires her to forensically determine the species, gender and identity of any given hunk of tissue, wayward tuft of hair, bone chip or dried splatter of blood.
In many cases, her work has helped prosecutors win convictions and encouraged defendants to plead guilty without going to trial, officials said.
In one recent case, Gary Lehnherr of McFarland, Wis., and Ronnie Gardner of Jerome, Idaho both pleaded guilty in federal court to illegally killing a trophy mule deer in Lincoln County with a high-caliber center fire rifle. Rudolph matched DNA in blood and hair found at the kill site -- in an area where only muzzleloader hunting was allowed -- with DNA from the deer's antlers, found in Lehnherr's home.
When the two are sentenced Oct. 15, they face up to one year in prison and $100,000 fines for the federal misdemeanor. Assistant U.S. Attorney George Breitsameter, who prosecuted the case, said Rudolph's work was "an important investigative tool" in the case.
DNA also helped crack the case of a man who was suspected of trying to poison wolves in Wyoming and Idaho with pesticide-laced meatballs. No wolves were found dead, but the tainted meat was suspected in the death of more than 20 pet dogs.
First, DNA from some meatballs found at a crime scene near Salmon was matched to DNA found in blood in Tim Sundles' freezer. The former Salmon resident, who now lives in Montana, was headed for trial but pleaded guilty after more DNA evidence turned up.
Investigators had taken samples of yellow snow found at the crime scene that day, suspecting that the person who left the meatballs had relieved himself at the site. They were right, Breitsameter said -- DNA from human cells found in the urine was a perfect match for Sundles.
In February, Sundles was sentenced to six days in jail, banned from federal or public land for two years and ordered to pay more than $1,500 in fines for violating the Endangered Species Act.
The use of DNA evidence in wildlife investigations is fairly new, but it's being used more and more, Breitsameter said.
"I'm not sure if that's because of people's expectations, but DNA is the modern fingerprint that people can use to attach an individual to a crime," he said. "It's only come up in the last couple of years or so here, and as it's available, it's required because it can either exculpate somebody or has the potential to inculpate them."
At the tiny cinderblock Fish and Game lab where Rudolph works in Caldwell, the mail may bring a cardboard tube filled with bear bait or a wrapped hunk of meat taken from someone's freezer. Game wardens often stumble on suspected crime scenes while they're hiking in the wilderness, Rudolph said, so they have to collect the evidence with whatever makeshift container they can find in their backpacks.
Sometimes Rudolph finds herself living something like a countrified scene from the TV crime thriller CSI.
"I've been given a bone saw that had tissue from different animals stuck between the tiny teeth of the blade. Once, I had to pick through a shop vacuum for tissue. We mostly found hair," she said. "I spent hours examining a pontoon boat for moose blood, because the officer had a tip that the poacher had been fishing the same day he killed a moose, and both the boat and the moose were transported in the same truck."
Some suspects, apparently unaware that investigators use advanced forensic techniques, get a little cocky and unwittingly help investigators, Rudolph said.
"One guy had a folding knife that a warden thought had been used in a poaching case, and when the officer asked for it, the guy laughed and said, 'Go ahead and take it. I've already cleaned it and boiled it and you won't find anything."'
Back in the lab, Rudolph was undeterred. She put a layer of aluminum foil down on the lab counter and slowly opened the folding knife. As she ran a tiny brush over the hinge, the bristles dislodged a speck of dried blood.
The sample was minuscule. But it was enough to run a DNA test and connect the knife to the poached animal, she said.
Few states have their own wildlife DNA lab, said Ken Goddard, director of the National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Lab. So Goddard's Ashland, Ore. lab handles wildlife evidence from across the nation, as well as for some international cases.
"Maybe 8 or 9 states have one person, but have never been able to get the funding for a real lab," Goddard said. "The idea is to take what works in a human crime scene and transfer it to wildlife crime management. All labs -- human or wildlife -- try to link the suspect, the crime scene and the evidence together. But in wildlife, you have to figure out first if a crime was committed. That can depend on time of day, what side of the road someone was on and even the type of weapon used."
Ultimately, the use of DNA evidence helps keep game wardens safe by minimizing their initial contact with suspects, Goddard said.
"Before, you had to catch them with the deer or poached bear and they're generally armed at the time. That can be terribly dangerous," he said. "Now they don't have to catch people in the act -- they can just gather the evidence later."
Sunday, July 29, 2007
As Details of the Cruelty Michael Vick Inflicted on Dogs Comes Forth, the Public Learns More about the Horrible Reality of Dog Fighting
Let’s just sum it up in one quote:
“In the indictment against Vick, he and his Bad Newz Kennels associates are accused of killing dogs that did not perform well by hanging, drowning and electrocution. At least one dog was killed when it was slammed to the ground.”
This is why Vick was indicted. If all is true, he is one sick person.
Article:
Michael Vick case resonating with the American public
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/
news/cityregion/s_519554.html
By Chris Togneri
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, July 29, 2007
The celebrity aspect, gruesome details and a public awakening to a vast bloodbath.
Such factors begin to explain Americans' horrified reaction to allegations that Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick raised dozens of dogs to battle other dogs to the death and murdered those who proved too docile to fight.
Though the illegal "sport" long has been part of the American landscape -- it was first outlawed in the 19th century and today is a felony in all but Idaho and Montana -- the Vick story has elicited a particularly emotional response throughout the country and beyond.
An Internet search Friday for "Michael Vick" and "dogfighting" netted 1.72 million hits -- with headlines from U.S. and foreign newspapers and media outlets such as ESPN, CNN and Sports Illustrated. It was a topic on many radio talk shows.
Hundreds of protesters jeered Vick on Thursday outside the U.S. District Court in Richmond, Va., where he pleaded not guilty. Others demonstrated in front of the Falcons' training facility in Georgia, NFL offices in New York and at other spots.
Sociologists and animal rights advocates say several aspects of the Vick case have contributed to the public's response.
Dan Santoro, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Pittsburgh's Johnstown campus, said nearly everyone in America is in somehow affected by the allegations, including sports fans, animal lovers and people fascinated by celebrity trials.
"It's another scandal involving an athlete, and a lot of people feel celebrities are over-privileged and spoiled and have a sense of entitlement," said Santoro. "And then throw doing something bad to dogs into the mix -- Americans love dogs."
Because of Vick's star power -- he is the cornerstone of the Falcons franchise and one of the most athletic and explosive players in NFL history -- the story will continue to grab headlines, and might even change societal values, Santoro said.
"What happens in sports has an effect on society," Santoro said. "We changed our understanding of race relations in America when Jackie Robinson broke in to the Major Leagues. People got interested in steroids even though maybe they had never heard of them until (former football player) Lyle Alzado died.
"One way to look at it is that a lot of big issues we're still fighting culturally show up in sports," Santoro said. "It's almost like a battleground when issues get played out. ... This is going to be hot for a while."
Race issues could be at play, Santoro said. Some people question whether Vick is being targeted because he is black.
"It touches everyone," he said. "It's pulling in different groups, different segments of society who aren't necessarily sports fans, not necessarily football fans."
The grisly details from the 18-page indictment against Vick and three other men contribute to the furor.
Eric Sakach, director of Western Operations for the Humane Society, spent 20 years investigating and infiltrating illegal dog- and cockfights. He said the average American knew dogfighting exists, but could not imagine its brutality -- until it grabbed headlines.
"When you hear about dogfighting, most people associate it with something they may have seen, like two dogs mixing it up in their neighborhood," Sakach said. "They don't have an idea of how brutal and how protracted these fights are. Some are hours long."
In the indictment against Vick, he and his Bad Newz Kennels associates are accused of killing dogs that did not perform well by hanging, drowning and electrocution. At least one dog was killed when it was slammed to the ground.
"Many people weren't aware those things were going on to the degree they are," Sakach said. "I've seen dogs with literally part of their faces torn off, broken jaws, broken legs. ... It's a pretty pathetic commentary on what passes for entertainment."
The Vick case has in some ways put a face on the activity, Sakach said.
"This is arousing public interest," he said. "When was the last time we saw ESPN or Sports Illustrated or other sports writers take an interest in this and help to expose it? It's clearly something the pubic is finding absolutely horrifying, and they want it stopped."
There are about 40,000 serious dogfighters -- people who breed dogs for fighting purposes and wager tens of thousands of dollars on fights -- in the United States, Sakach said. There are countless more "street level" dogfighters, he said.
Kathy Hecker, a humane investigations officer for Ohio Township-based Animal Friends, said dogfighting occurs everywhere in the country, including western Pennsylvania.
The Vick case, she said, might help those fighting to kill the brutal sport.
"In a perverted sort of way, it's good news for animal lovers," Hecker said. "This is a very covert undercover 'sport,' and he's very nationally known, so people are paying attention."
“In the indictment against Vick, he and his Bad Newz Kennels associates are accused of killing dogs that did not perform well by hanging, drowning and electrocution. At least one dog was killed when it was slammed to the ground.”
This is why Vick was indicted. If all is true, he is one sick person.
Article:
Michael Vick case resonating with the American public
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/
news/cityregion/s_519554.html
By Chris Togneri
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, July 29, 2007
The celebrity aspect, gruesome details and a public awakening to a vast bloodbath.
Such factors begin to explain Americans' horrified reaction to allegations that Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick raised dozens of dogs to battle other dogs to the death and murdered those who proved too docile to fight.
Though the illegal "sport" long has been part of the American landscape -- it was first outlawed in the 19th century and today is a felony in all but Idaho and Montana -- the Vick story has elicited a particularly emotional response throughout the country and beyond.
An Internet search Friday for "Michael Vick" and "dogfighting" netted 1.72 million hits -- with headlines from U.S. and foreign newspapers and media outlets such as ESPN, CNN and Sports Illustrated. It was a topic on many radio talk shows.
Hundreds of protesters jeered Vick on Thursday outside the U.S. District Court in Richmond, Va., where he pleaded not guilty. Others demonstrated in front of the Falcons' training facility in Georgia, NFL offices in New York and at other spots.
Sociologists and animal rights advocates say several aspects of the Vick case have contributed to the public's response.
Dan Santoro, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Pittsburgh's Johnstown campus, said nearly everyone in America is in somehow affected by the allegations, including sports fans, animal lovers and people fascinated by celebrity trials.
"It's another scandal involving an athlete, and a lot of people feel celebrities are over-privileged and spoiled and have a sense of entitlement," said Santoro. "And then throw doing something bad to dogs into the mix -- Americans love dogs."
Because of Vick's star power -- he is the cornerstone of the Falcons franchise and one of the most athletic and explosive players in NFL history -- the story will continue to grab headlines, and might even change societal values, Santoro said.
"What happens in sports has an effect on society," Santoro said. "We changed our understanding of race relations in America when Jackie Robinson broke in to the Major Leagues. People got interested in steroids even though maybe they had never heard of them until (former football player) Lyle Alzado died.
"One way to look at it is that a lot of big issues we're still fighting culturally show up in sports," Santoro said. "It's almost like a battleground when issues get played out. ... This is going to be hot for a while."
Race issues could be at play, Santoro said. Some people question whether Vick is being targeted because he is black.
"It touches everyone," he said. "It's pulling in different groups, different segments of society who aren't necessarily sports fans, not necessarily football fans."
The grisly details from the 18-page indictment against Vick and three other men contribute to the furor.
Eric Sakach, director of Western Operations for the Humane Society, spent 20 years investigating and infiltrating illegal dog- and cockfights. He said the average American knew dogfighting exists, but could not imagine its brutality -- until it grabbed headlines.
"When you hear about dogfighting, most people associate it with something they may have seen, like two dogs mixing it up in their neighborhood," Sakach said. "They don't have an idea of how brutal and how protracted these fights are. Some are hours long."
In the indictment against Vick, he and his Bad Newz Kennels associates are accused of killing dogs that did not perform well by hanging, drowning and electrocution. At least one dog was killed when it was slammed to the ground.
"Many people weren't aware those things were going on to the degree they are," Sakach said. "I've seen dogs with literally part of their faces torn off, broken jaws, broken legs. ... It's a pretty pathetic commentary on what passes for entertainment."
The Vick case has in some ways put a face on the activity, Sakach said.
"This is arousing public interest," he said. "When was the last time we saw ESPN or Sports Illustrated or other sports writers take an interest in this and help to expose it? It's clearly something the pubic is finding absolutely horrifying, and they want it stopped."
There are about 40,000 serious dogfighters -- people who breed dogs for fighting purposes and wager tens of thousands of dollars on fights -- in the United States, Sakach said. There are countless more "street level" dogfighters, he said.
Kathy Hecker, a humane investigations officer for Ohio Township-based Animal Friends, said dogfighting occurs everywhere in the country, including western Pennsylvania.
The Vick case, she said, might help those fighting to kill the brutal sport.
"In a perverted sort of way, it's good news for animal lovers," Hecker said. "This is a very covert undercover 'sport,' and he's very nationally known, so people are paying attention."
In Defense of Animals Threatens to Sue California City if Elephants go to Six Flags through Sale of Discovery Kingdom
Sad that we need to discuss living beings as part of a sale, but that’s the way it is.
Article:
Animal rights group wants elephants to go to sanctuary
http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_6488556
By J.M. BROWN/Times-Herald staff writer
Article Launched: 07/28/2007 08:58:15 AM PDT
A day before the city's sale of Discovery Kingdom to Six Flags, animal rights advocates will try to convince city officials not to sell four elephants they allege have suffered inhumane treatment at the theme park.
Because terms of the sale agreement were inked years ago, City Manager Joe Tanner said he is "skeptical" he can remove the elephants from the deal, which is set to be finalized Tuesday. But, on Monday, "we plan to listen to what they have to say, and if our attorney agrees, maybe we'll do something," Tanner said.
In Defense of Animals has threatened to file a federal lawsuit against the city, accusing it of violating the Endangered Species Act by allowing the alleged mistreatment of two Asian elephants. IDA has demanded the elephants - along with two African elephants also living at the park - be transferred to a sanctuary.
Six Flags will oppose taking the elephants out of the sale agreement, but the company's legal officials are still reviewing its options, spokeswoman Nancy Chan said. Park officials have long claimed the elephants are well taken care of and actually benefit from captivity through conservation of the species.
But IDA claims that recently obtained medical records show the pachyderms have
numerous health problems associated with confinement and could die if subjected to breeding programs that have caused previous elephant deaths at the park. IDA also said the animals suffer when performing entertainment tasks, such as riding and tug of war.
Chan said IDA has misinterpreted the medical reports with its own "spin."
"It basically comes down to, unfortunately, their word against ours," Chan said. "We are the ones that care for the elephants and we know exactly what is going on."
Suzanne Roy, program director for IDA, said the purchase agreement has several loopholes that could allow the city to retain the elephants before the sale is final, then send the animals to a rehabilitation facility.
Roy said lawyers working with IDA say the city could remove the elephants from the deal as a potential claim against the sale or could argue that the "city's property interest in the elephants has been called into question and the city cannot deliver clear title to the elephants until the issue is resolved."
In June, Six Flags announced it would exercise its option to buy the city's $55 million interest in the 135-acre park, which has been operated through a joint revenue sharing agreement since it moved from Redwood City in the mid 1980s. Vallejo will still receive a fee for hosting the park formerly known as Marine World.
Although IDA has long argued that using elephants for entertainment purposes is inhumane, Roy said the timing of the sale - plus medical evidence only recently made available through public records requests - made now the time to act.
The IDA claims that the alleged mistreatment of the animals constitutes an "illegal take" of an endangered species.
"We hope that we wouldn't have to resort to litigation," Roy said. "We will present the city with enough compelling evidence that (a sanctuary) will be a much better situation for the elephants, and the city has responsibility to do right by them."
IDA has found a sympathetic ear in Councilwoman Stephanie Gomes, who visited the elephants last weekend in response to recent concerns from citizens about their treatment.
While she said she felt the elephants were well fed and taken care of, Gomes said she did not believe "elephants belong in small enclosures with roller coasters all around them and children sitting on their backs, playing tug of war was an appropriate use."
But, Gomes said, "the sale has already been concluded, so it doesn't matter what I think. Our hands have been tied."
IDA was successful at encouraging zoos in San Francisco and Los Angeles to move elephants to sanctuaries without invoking the Endangered Species Act, Roy said. "We're hoping (Vallejo) will realize its responsibility to these elephants," she added.
IDA has to wait 60 days from the date of its July 25 letter to the city before filing legal action using the Endangered Species Act. The law can only be used to seize the Asian elephants at Discovery Kingdom - Liz and Taj - because its African elephants - Malaika and Tava - are listed as a "threatened species."
Article:
Animal rights group wants elephants to go to sanctuary
http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_6488556
By J.M. BROWN/Times-Herald staff writer
Article Launched: 07/28/2007 08:58:15 AM PDT
A day before the city's sale of Discovery Kingdom to Six Flags, animal rights advocates will try to convince city officials not to sell four elephants they allege have suffered inhumane treatment at the theme park.
Because terms of the sale agreement were inked years ago, City Manager Joe Tanner said he is "skeptical" he can remove the elephants from the deal, which is set to be finalized Tuesday. But, on Monday, "we plan to listen to what they have to say, and if our attorney agrees, maybe we'll do something," Tanner said.
In Defense of Animals has threatened to file a federal lawsuit against the city, accusing it of violating the Endangered Species Act by allowing the alleged mistreatment of two Asian elephants. IDA has demanded the elephants - along with two African elephants also living at the park - be transferred to a sanctuary.
Six Flags will oppose taking the elephants out of the sale agreement, but the company's legal officials are still reviewing its options, spokeswoman Nancy Chan said. Park officials have long claimed the elephants are well taken care of and actually benefit from captivity through conservation of the species.
But IDA claims that recently obtained medical records show the pachyderms have
numerous health problems associated with confinement and could die if subjected to breeding programs that have caused previous elephant deaths at the park. IDA also said the animals suffer when performing entertainment tasks, such as riding and tug of war.
Chan said IDA has misinterpreted the medical reports with its own "spin."
"It basically comes down to, unfortunately, their word against ours," Chan said. "We are the ones that care for the elephants and we know exactly what is going on."
Suzanne Roy, program director for IDA, said the purchase agreement has several loopholes that could allow the city to retain the elephants before the sale is final, then send the animals to a rehabilitation facility.
Roy said lawyers working with IDA say the city could remove the elephants from the deal as a potential claim against the sale or could argue that the "city's property interest in the elephants has been called into question and the city cannot deliver clear title to the elephants until the issue is resolved."
In June, Six Flags announced it would exercise its option to buy the city's $55 million interest in the 135-acre park, which has been operated through a joint revenue sharing agreement since it moved from Redwood City in the mid 1980s. Vallejo will still receive a fee for hosting the park formerly known as Marine World.
Although IDA has long argued that using elephants for entertainment purposes is inhumane, Roy said the timing of the sale - plus medical evidence only recently made available through public records requests - made now the time to act.
The IDA claims that the alleged mistreatment of the animals constitutes an "illegal take" of an endangered species.
"We hope that we wouldn't have to resort to litigation," Roy said. "We will present the city with enough compelling evidence that (a sanctuary) will be a much better situation for the elephants, and the city has responsibility to do right by them."
IDA has found a sympathetic ear in Councilwoman Stephanie Gomes, who visited the elephants last weekend in response to recent concerns from citizens about their treatment.
While she said she felt the elephants were well fed and taken care of, Gomes said she did not believe "elephants belong in small enclosures with roller coasters all around them and children sitting on their backs, playing tug of war was an appropriate use."
But, Gomes said, "the sale has already been concluded, so it doesn't matter what I think. Our hands have been tied."
IDA was successful at encouraging zoos in San Francisco and Los Angeles to move elephants to sanctuaries without invoking the Endangered Species Act, Roy said. "We're hoping (Vallejo) will realize its responsibility to these elephants," she added.
IDA has to wait 60 days from the date of its July 25 letter to the city before filing legal action using the Endangered Species Act. The law can only be used to seize the Asian elephants at Discovery Kingdom - Liz and Taj - because its African elephants - Malaika and Tava - are listed as a "threatened species."
Monday, July 23, 2007
Adidas Uses Kangaroo Skin for Soccer Shoes: As a Result, California Decides that Adidas Cannot Sell Soccer Shoes Made from Slaughtered Kangaroos
Incredible action that hopefully will lead to a national ban. Sick that Adidas uses the skin of slaughtered kangaroos.
Article:
State Supreme Court nixes sales of shoes made with kangaroo hide
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/
2007/07/23/BAGV2R5B795.DTL&tsp=1
Demian Bulwa, Chronicle Staff Writer
Monday, July 23, 2007
(07-23) 11:56 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- Sportswear giant Adidas cannot sell popular soccer shoes fashioned from kangaroo hide in California despite the company's contention that federal law preempts a state ban on products made from the marsupials, the Supreme Court of California ruled today in a unanimous decision.
The ruling could have a major impact on the state's soccer retailers and players. Australian kangaroo skin, beloved by many players for its softness, has long been used in a variety of higher-priced shoes made by a number of brands -- including Adidas' famous Copa Mundial cleats.
The justices ruled in favor of an animal-rights group, Viva International Voice for Animals, a British nonprofit with its U.S. office in Davis. The group challenged Adidas in 2003, arguing that the California ban was valid because states have the power to enact stronger protections for wildlife than the federal government.
The state prohibited the import and commercial sale of kangaroo products in 1971, a year after banning products made from 23 other animals.
But a San Francisco Superior Court judge and the state Court of Appeal in San Francisco said the law conflicted with federal policy that resumed imports of kangaroo-skin products after Australia implemented a conservation program. The Supreme Court today reversed the appellate decision.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service banned imports of products made from three kangaroo species in 1974 after their population had dwindled in Australia. The agency allowed those imports to resume in 1995. Adidas now sells athletic shoes in California made from the hides of the red kangaroo, the eastern grey kangaroo and the western grey kangaroo.
Animal rights groups remain in a tense battle with soccer teams and retailers over the controversial leather. The California Senate voted in May to legalize the import and sale of kangaroo skins unless a particular species is considered endangered. The bill is now in the Assembly.
The Supreme Court said today that the kangaroo case was analogous to another high-profile court battle pitting Napa vintners against the maker of popular Two Buck Chuck wines. The court in that case said wine bottles labeled with the "Napa" name must be filled primarily with the juice of Napa-grown grapes, as state law mandated. Federal rules had an exception for brands established before 1986.
The case is Viva International vs. Adidas, S140064. The opinion is available at www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions.
Article:
State Supreme Court nixes sales of shoes made with kangaroo hide
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/
2007/07/23/BAGV2R5B795.DTL&tsp=1
Demian Bulwa, Chronicle Staff Writer
Monday, July 23, 2007
(07-23) 11:56 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- Sportswear giant Adidas cannot sell popular soccer shoes fashioned from kangaroo hide in California despite the company's contention that federal law preempts a state ban on products made from the marsupials, the Supreme Court of California ruled today in a unanimous decision.
The ruling could have a major impact on the state's soccer retailers and players. Australian kangaroo skin, beloved by many players for its softness, has long been used in a variety of higher-priced shoes made by a number of brands -- including Adidas' famous Copa Mundial cleats.
The justices ruled in favor of an animal-rights group, Viva International Voice for Animals, a British nonprofit with its U.S. office in Davis. The group challenged Adidas in 2003, arguing that the California ban was valid because states have the power to enact stronger protections for wildlife than the federal government.
The state prohibited the import and commercial sale of kangaroo products in 1971, a year after banning products made from 23 other animals.
But a San Francisco Superior Court judge and the state Court of Appeal in San Francisco said the law conflicted with federal policy that resumed imports of kangaroo-skin products after Australia implemented a conservation program. The Supreme Court today reversed the appellate decision.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service banned imports of products made from three kangaroo species in 1974 after their population had dwindled in Australia. The agency allowed those imports to resume in 1995. Adidas now sells athletic shoes in California made from the hides of the red kangaroo, the eastern grey kangaroo and the western grey kangaroo.
Animal rights groups remain in a tense battle with soccer teams and retailers over the controversial leather. The California Senate voted in May to legalize the import and sale of kangaroo skins unless a particular species is considered endangered. The bill is now in the Assembly.
The Supreme Court said today that the kangaroo case was analogous to another high-profile court battle pitting Napa vintners against the maker of popular Two Buck Chuck wines. The court in that case said wine bottles labeled with the "Napa" name must be filled primarily with the juice of Napa-grown grapes, as state law mandated. Federal rules had an exception for brands established before 1986.
The case is Viva International vs. Adidas, S140064. The opinion is available at www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions.
New Website Launched Exposes Cruelty of Foie Gras
Shocking footage of what really goes on to create foie gras. The new site can be found at http://www.nofoiegras.com
Article:
Farm Sanctuary Launches New 'No Foie Gras' Website, Releases Shocking Video
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/
news_press_release,143980.shtml
Farm Animal Protection Organization Leads the Fight to End Sale and
Production of Foie Gras
WATKINS GLEN, N.Y., July 23 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Farm Sanctuary,
the nation's leading farm animal protection organization, has launched a
new website with expanded and updated information on the production of the
cruelly produced delicacy known as "foie gras." The web address,
http://www.nofoiegras.com, will remain the same. Farm Sanctuary web
administrator Tim McGlynn, working in conjunction with Boston Web Design,
has created a site that is visually compelling, simple to navigate and
provides expanded information to meet the needs of activists, citizens,
educators, researchers and journalists.
"We are extremely pleased with the launch," said Farm Sanctuary
President Gene Baur, "and happy to be able to offer this comprehensive
information on such a critical issue. When people understand and actually
see how foie gras is produced they reject it as completely out of step with
a society that values compassion. This new site will go a long way in
bringing out the truth about the gratuitous violence involved in this
archaic and unacceptable practice."
Foie gras (translated from French as "fatty liver") is produced by
force- feeding ducks and geese two or three times each day through a pipe
shoved down their throats. The force-feeding can cause painful bruising,
lacerations, sores, and even organ rupture. Due to this unhealthy and
unnatural diet, the birds' livers become diseased and swell up to 10 times
their normal size, making it difficult for them to walk or even breathe.
Foie gras production is banned in more than a dozen countries; as well as
California and Chicago.
The launch of the site coincides with the release of a new video, Foie
Gras: Culinary Cruelty, a compelling and informative DVD revealing the
truth about the elitist "delicacy" available by direct order from the site.
Part of an ongoing campaign by Farm Sanctuary to end the production and
sale of foie gras, the 12-minute film features commentary by Wildlife
Pathologist Dr. Ward B. Stone, from the NY Department of Conservation, Dr.
Holly Cheever, DVM, and Farm Sanctuary President Gene Baur. Veterinarians
and other animal experts, along with religious leaders, businesses and
legal scholars, have called for an end to the production of foie gras for
reasons that will be manifestly clear to anyone who views the heart
wrenching footage captured in Culinary Cruelty.
"I urge everyone to see this sobering portrait of institutionalized
torture endured by ducks on the foie gras assembly line," said Farm
Sanctuary President Gene Baur. "People have a right to know how a product
gets to their plate, and once learning about the cruelties involved in
producing foie gras, members of the public have consistently cast their
votes for compassion."
Foie Gras: Culinary Cruelty can be ordered directly from Farm
Sanctuary's website. For more information about how you can help end foie
gras production, go to http://www.nofoiegras.com
About Farm Sanctuary
Farm Sanctuary is the nation's leading farm animal protection
organization. Since incorporating in 1986, Farm Sanctuary has worked to
expose and stop cruel practices of the "food animal" industry through
research and investigations, legal and institutional reforms, public
awareness projects, youth education, and direct rescue and refuge efforts.
Farm Sanctuary shelters in Watkins Glen, N.Y., and Orland, Calif. provide
lifelong care for hundreds of rescued animals, who have become ambassadors
for farm animals everywhere by educating visitors about the realities of
factory farming. Additional information can be found at
http://www.farmsanctuary.org or by calling 607-583-2225.
Article:
Farm Sanctuary Launches New 'No Foie Gras' Website, Releases Shocking Video
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/
news_press_release,143980.shtml
Farm Animal Protection Organization Leads the Fight to End Sale and
Production of Foie Gras
WATKINS GLEN, N.Y., July 23 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Farm Sanctuary,
the nation's leading farm animal protection organization, has launched a
new website with expanded and updated information on the production of the
cruelly produced delicacy known as "foie gras." The web address,
http://www.nofoiegras.com, will remain the same. Farm Sanctuary web
administrator Tim McGlynn, working in conjunction with Boston Web Design,
has created a site that is visually compelling, simple to navigate and
provides expanded information to meet the needs of activists, citizens,
educators, researchers and journalists.
"We are extremely pleased with the launch," said Farm Sanctuary
President Gene Baur, "and happy to be able to offer this comprehensive
information on such a critical issue. When people understand and actually
see how foie gras is produced they reject it as completely out of step with
a society that values compassion. This new site will go a long way in
bringing out the truth about the gratuitous violence involved in this
archaic and unacceptable practice."
Foie gras (translated from French as "fatty liver") is produced by
force- feeding ducks and geese two or three times each day through a pipe
shoved down their throats. The force-feeding can cause painful bruising,
lacerations, sores, and even organ rupture. Due to this unhealthy and
unnatural diet, the birds' livers become diseased and swell up to 10 times
their normal size, making it difficult for them to walk or even breathe.
Foie gras production is banned in more than a dozen countries; as well as
California and Chicago.
The launch of the site coincides with the release of a new video, Foie
Gras: Culinary Cruelty, a compelling and informative DVD revealing the
truth about the elitist "delicacy" available by direct order from the site.
Part of an ongoing campaign by Farm Sanctuary to end the production and
sale of foie gras, the 12-minute film features commentary by Wildlife
Pathologist Dr. Ward B. Stone, from the NY Department of Conservation, Dr.
Holly Cheever, DVM, and Farm Sanctuary President Gene Baur. Veterinarians
and other animal experts, along with religious leaders, businesses and
legal scholars, have called for an end to the production of foie gras for
reasons that will be manifestly clear to anyone who views the heart
wrenching footage captured in Culinary Cruelty.
"I urge everyone to see this sobering portrait of institutionalized
torture endured by ducks on the foie gras assembly line," said Farm
Sanctuary President Gene Baur. "People have a right to know how a product
gets to their plate, and once learning about the cruelties involved in
producing foie gras, members of the public have consistently cast their
votes for compassion."
Foie Gras: Culinary Cruelty can be ordered directly from Farm
Sanctuary's website. For more information about how you can help end foie
gras production, go to http://www.nofoiegras.com
About Farm Sanctuary
Farm Sanctuary is the nation's leading farm animal protection
organization. Since incorporating in 1986, Farm Sanctuary has worked to
expose and stop cruel practices of the "food animal" industry through
research and investigations, legal and institutional reforms, public
awareness projects, youth education, and direct rescue and refuge efforts.
Farm Sanctuary shelters in Watkins Glen, N.Y., and Orland, Calif. provide
lifelong care for hundreds of rescued animals, who have become ambassadors
for farm animals everywhere by educating visitors about the realities of
factory farming. Additional information can be found at
http://www.farmsanctuary.org or by calling 607-583-2225.
Another Disturbing Reality of Zoos: Many Sell Off Healthy Tigers and Other Endangered Species to Be Stuffed and Mounted As Trophies for Collectors
In essence:
“…zoos had recognized there was a market and were placing a “shelf life” on animals to cash in by having them stuffed before they got old, suffered illness and then cost them money. “What’s happening is that various zoos . . . [have] realized there’s a market, hence . . . there is a fixed price on tigers.”
Another reason to strongly appose zoos and the cruel reality that they represent. This is a sick as sick can be.
Just look at the facts. They are presented below.
Article:
Zoos kill healthy tigers for the skin trade
\http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/
europe/article2116179.ece
Daniel Foggo
ZOOS are killing healthy tigers and other endangered species and selling their skins to be stuffed and mounted as trophies for private collectors, an investigation has found.
The skins are sold by the zoos to taxidermists who prepare them for clients in defiance of attempts by the government to stifle the trade in tiger products.
Last week undercover reporters from The Sunday Times were offered the skins from two zoo tigers, which were both only a few years old when they died, for £6,000. “There are too many of them and if they are not put down they will die of old age, get incinerated and thrown away,” Andre Brandwood, a Hertford-shire taxidermist, told them.
He said zoos had recognised there was a market and were placing a “shelf life” on animals to cash in by having them stuffed before they got old, suffered illness and then cost them money. “What’s happening is that various zoos . . . [have] realised there’s a market, hence . . . there is a fixed price on tigers.”
Related Links
* ‘For a price I can get you any animal’
The taxidermists sell the stuffed tigers in Britain by exploiting a loophole in the European Union law controlling the trade in endangered animals.
Will Travers of the Born Free Foundation said: “It is abhorrent to imagine zoo animals, some of which may have been visitors’ favourites, are being killed to feed a demand for trinkets and decorative items.”
Craig Redmond of the Captive Animals’ Protection Society said zoos were overbreeding and creating a massive surplus of animals. “Nobody wants old animals. They think the public want to see babies,” he said.
“…zoos had recognized there was a market and were placing a “shelf life” on animals to cash in by having them stuffed before they got old, suffered illness and then cost them money. “What’s happening is that various zoos . . . [have] realized there’s a market, hence . . . there is a fixed price on tigers.”
Another reason to strongly appose zoos and the cruel reality that they represent. This is a sick as sick can be.
Just look at the facts. They are presented below.
Article:
Zoos kill healthy tigers for the skin trade
\http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/
europe/article2116179.ece
Daniel Foggo
ZOOS are killing healthy tigers and other endangered species and selling their skins to be stuffed and mounted as trophies for private collectors, an investigation has found.
The skins are sold by the zoos to taxidermists who prepare them for clients in defiance of attempts by the government to stifle the trade in tiger products.
Last week undercover reporters from The Sunday Times were offered the skins from two zoo tigers, which were both only a few years old when they died, for £6,000. “There are too many of them and if they are not put down they will die of old age, get incinerated and thrown away,” Andre Brandwood, a Hertford-shire taxidermist, told them.
He said zoos had recognised there was a market and were placing a “shelf life” on animals to cash in by having them stuffed before they got old, suffered illness and then cost them money. “What’s happening is that various zoos . . . [have] realised there’s a market, hence . . . there is a fixed price on tigers.”
Related Links
* ‘For a price I can get you any animal’
The taxidermists sell the stuffed tigers in Britain by exploiting a loophole in the European Union law controlling the trade in endangered animals.
Will Travers of the Born Free Foundation said: “It is abhorrent to imagine zoo animals, some of which may have been visitors’ favourites, are being killed to feed a demand for trinkets and decorative items.”
Craig Redmond of the Captive Animals’ Protection Society said zoos were overbreeding and creating a massive surplus of animals. “Nobody wants old animals. They think the public want to see babies,” he said.
Indictment of Michael Vick for Running Dog-Fighting Rings Brings Forth Calls to Get Tougher on Dog Fighting in Many States, Including New Jersey
If anything good comes from the evil of Michael Vick, it’s that states will wake up to the reality of dog fighting.
Article:
Van Drew: Vick Indictment Underscores Need for Overhaul of State's Animal Cruelty Laws
http://www.politicsnj.com/van-drew-vick-indictment-
underscores-need-overhaul-states-animal-cruelty-
laws-10462
By droseman - July 23, 2007 - 2:50pm
Tags: Jeff Van Drew, animal cruelty,
Release Date: July 23, 2007
Assembly Democrats News Release
VAN DREW: VICK INDICTMENT UNDERSCORES NEED
FOR OVERHAUL Of STATE'S ANIMAL CRUELTY LAWS
(First Legislative District) - The federal conspiracy case building against NFL star Michael Vick for his role in running a vicious dog-fighting ring highlights the need for New Jersey to modernize its ineffective and archaic animal cruelty laws, Assemblyman Jeff Van Drew said today.
According to the indictment handed-down last week against Vick and three other co-defendants, the dog-fighting ring allegedly operated by the Atlanta Falcons' quarterback was twice involved in fights with dogs from New Jersey.
"The allegations against Michael Vick are appalling in their own right, but to read that dogs from New Jersey were involved in this sordid conspiracy is absolutely alarming," Van Drew (D-Cape May/Cumberland/Atlantic). "The Vick case underscores the difficulties state are encountering with illegal dog-fighting and it underscores the need for tougher penalties against the depraved individuals who breed dogs for blood sport."
Van Drew recently introduced legislation (A-2649) - dubbed "Angel's Law" after a South Jersey dog that died after being starved and beaten by its owner - that would overhaul the state's animal cruelty laws for the first time in over 125 years. The measure would establish a series of new animal-cruelty offenses - including specific penalties against the use of an animal for fighting - and significantly increase criminal and civil penalties for violations.
Under Van Drew's bill, the most egregious abuse cases would draw penalties up to 20 years in jail and $200,000 in fines. Individuals involved in animal fighting also would face up to $7,500 in civil penalties for aggravated animal cruelty.
"The Michael Vick debacle is shining a stark light on the underground network of animal cruelty that many would like to think does not exist in New Jersey," said Van Drew. "We can no longer pretend dog-fighting doesn't happen in our state. Now is the time to take strong action to put these illegal fight rings out of business."
Article:
Van Drew: Vick Indictment Underscores Need for Overhaul of State's Animal Cruelty Laws
http://www.politicsnj.com/van-drew-vick-indictment-
underscores-need-overhaul-states-animal-cruelty-
laws-10462
By droseman - July 23, 2007 - 2:50pm
Tags: Jeff Van Drew, animal cruelty,
Release Date: July 23, 2007
Assembly Democrats News Release
VAN DREW: VICK INDICTMENT UNDERSCORES NEED
FOR OVERHAUL Of STATE'S ANIMAL CRUELTY LAWS
(First Legislative District) - The federal conspiracy case building against NFL star Michael Vick for his role in running a vicious dog-fighting ring highlights the need for New Jersey to modernize its ineffective and archaic animal cruelty laws, Assemblyman Jeff Van Drew said today.
According to the indictment handed-down last week against Vick and three other co-defendants, the dog-fighting ring allegedly operated by the Atlanta Falcons' quarterback was twice involved in fights with dogs from New Jersey.
"The allegations against Michael Vick are appalling in their own right, but to read that dogs from New Jersey were involved in this sordid conspiracy is absolutely alarming," Van Drew (D-Cape May/Cumberland/Atlantic). "The Vick case underscores the difficulties state are encountering with illegal dog-fighting and it underscores the need for tougher penalties against the depraved individuals who breed dogs for blood sport."
Van Drew recently introduced legislation (A-2649) - dubbed "Angel's Law" after a South Jersey dog that died after being starved and beaten by its owner - that would overhaul the state's animal cruelty laws for the first time in over 125 years. The measure would establish a series of new animal-cruelty offenses - including specific penalties against the use of an animal for fighting - and significantly increase criminal and civil penalties for violations.
Under Van Drew's bill, the most egregious abuse cases would draw penalties up to 20 years in jail and $200,000 in fines. Individuals involved in animal fighting also would face up to $7,500 in civil penalties for aggravated animal cruelty.
"The Michael Vick debacle is shining a stark light on the underground network of animal cruelty that many would like to think does not exist in New Jersey," said Van Drew. "We can no longer pretend dog-fighting doesn't happen in our state. Now is the time to take strong action to put these illegal fight rings out of business."
Thursday, July 12, 2007
West Hollywood Bans Declawing of Cats: Upheld by State Appeals Court
Excellent move and hopefully the first of many.
To learn more about why declawing cats is wrong, see: http://www.everycreaturecounts.org/declaw.htm
In essence, it is not a manicure. It is a serious surgery that literally removes the top bone in the toes. In fact, declawing equals mutilation. Really it is amputation.
Article:
Animal Rights’ Group Applauds Bans on Declawing of Cats
http://www.ebpublishing.com/*ws4d-db-query-Show.ws4d?
*ws4d-db-query-Show***DAE-CFA-298298302306299301-1434
***-Database***-***sltimes(directory)***.ws4d?sltimes/
column(R).html
By : Daphna Nachminovitch : 7/10/07
West Hollywood’s groundbreaking ban on declawing cats, which was just upheld by a state appeals court, is the first such ban in the U.S., although 21 other countries have already banned this painful and “unnecessary mutilation,” as the British Veterinary Association calls it.
There are many humane and effective ways to prevent cats from damaging furniture short of amputating their toes, such as trimming front claws twice a month, putting double-sided tape on furniture that Kitty tends to scratch, and providing plenty of inexpensive cardboard scratching posts, especially in the areas where cats sleep (cats commonly stretch and scratch when they wake up).
To learn more about why declawing cats is wrong, see: http://www.everycreaturecounts.org/declaw.htm
In essence, it is not a manicure. It is a serious surgery that literally removes the top bone in the toes. In fact, declawing equals mutilation. Really it is amputation.
Article:
Animal Rights’ Group Applauds Bans on Declawing of Cats
http://www.ebpublishing.com/*ws4d-db-query-Show.ws4d?
*ws4d-db-query-Show***DAE-CFA-298298302306299301-1434
***-Database***-***sltimes(directory)***.ws4d?sltimes/
column(R).html
By : Daphna Nachminovitch : 7/10/07
West Hollywood’s groundbreaking ban on declawing cats, which was just upheld by a state appeals court, is the first such ban in the U.S., although 21 other countries have already banned this painful and “unnecessary mutilation,” as the British Veterinary Association calls it.
There are many humane and effective ways to prevent cats from damaging furniture short of amputating their toes, such as trimming front claws twice a month, putting double-sided tape on furniture that Kitty tends to scratch, and providing plenty of inexpensive cardboard scratching posts, especially in the areas where cats sleep (cats commonly stretch and scratch when they wake up).
Monday, July 09, 2007
Moby Serves Dish of Truth: Calls out “Live Earth” for Serving Meat when Meat Production Accounts for More Greenhouse Gases than Driving Cars
Very good points. Please read on. Here is just one of many good quotes from the article below:
He writes: “The one thing that still stuns me… is that almost no one in the 'stop global warming' camp talks about the environmental ramifications of animal production. To quote a UN article: ‘rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gases than driving cars.’
Article:
Moby Hits Out At Live Earth For Serving Meat
http://www.gigwise.com/news.asp?contentid=34439
A major source of greenhouse gases..
* by Scott Colothan
* on 09/07/2007
Moby has hit out at organisers of the Live Earth concerts for selling meat at the shows.
Speaking through his blog, the vegan dance veteran quoted the UN statistic that livestock breeding and the gases the animals emit is a huge contributor to worldwide the greenhouse gases in the environment.
He writes: “The one thing that still stuns me… is that almost no one in the 'stop global warming' camp talks about the environmental ramifications of animal production. To quote a UN article: ‘rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gases than driving cars.’
”Livestock production is responsible for the release of more greenhouse gases than every car or SUV or pickup-truck on the planet.”
Clearly on a roll, he continues: “When the major news media report on global warming why do they rarely (if at all) discuss the role of livestock production in climate change?
”It's kind of like talking about the causes of the civil war and forgetting to mention slavery and abolitionism, or talking about someone with lung cancer and neglecting to mention that they smoked 2 packs of cigarettes a day.
”Yesterday at the 'live earth' concerts people were eating hamburgers and hot dogs and chicken, which is akin to getting drunk at the funeral for someone who died of alcohol poisoning.
”It's just depressing that some huge truths about climate change are too inconvenient even for the well-intentioned left.”
He writes: “The one thing that still stuns me… is that almost no one in the 'stop global warming' camp talks about the environmental ramifications of animal production. To quote a UN article: ‘rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gases than driving cars.’
Article:
Moby Hits Out At Live Earth For Serving Meat
http://www.gigwise.com/news.asp?contentid=34439
A major source of greenhouse gases..
* by Scott Colothan
* on 09/07/2007
Moby has hit out at organisers of the Live Earth concerts for selling meat at the shows.
Speaking through his blog, the vegan dance veteran quoted the UN statistic that livestock breeding and the gases the animals emit is a huge contributor to worldwide the greenhouse gases in the environment.
He writes: “The one thing that still stuns me… is that almost no one in the 'stop global warming' camp talks about the environmental ramifications of animal production. To quote a UN article: ‘rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gases than driving cars.’
”Livestock production is responsible for the release of more greenhouse gases than every car or SUV or pickup-truck on the planet.”
Clearly on a roll, he continues: “When the major news media report on global warming why do they rarely (if at all) discuss the role of livestock production in climate change?
”It's kind of like talking about the causes of the civil war and forgetting to mention slavery and abolitionism, or talking about someone with lung cancer and neglecting to mention that they smoked 2 packs of cigarettes a day.
”Yesterday at the 'live earth' concerts people were eating hamburgers and hot dogs and chicken, which is akin to getting drunk at the funeral for someone who died of alcohol poisoning.
”It's just depressing that some huge truths about climate change are too inconvenient even for the well-intentioned left.”
Sunday, July 08, 2007
Cruel Namibia at it Again: Begins Bloody Annual Seal Slaughter
Reminiscent of Cruel Canada’s baby seal slaughter. Unfortunately, Namibia also resorts to barbaric cruelty.
Article:
Activists launch protests against African seal cull
http://www.guelphmercury.com/NASApp/cs/
ContentServer?pagename=mercury/Layout/Article_
Type1&c=Article&cid=1183808759142&call_pageid=
1050067726078&col=1050421501457
WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA (Jul 7, 2007)
Namibia's annual seal hunting season started this week amid a war of words with animal rights activists that echoes similar protests in Canada.
Namibia's government accused the activists of "deliberately distorting information," and said controlling the seal population was important for both the fishing industry and to the people who work in jobs created by the hunt.
The sparsely populated southern African country is famous for its wildlife and desert scenes along its Atlantic coastline, known as the Skeleton Coast. An estimated 850,000 seals live on a group of islands off its southern coast.
Article:
Activists launch protests against African seal cull
http://www.guelphmercury.com/NASApp/cs/
ContentServer?pagename=mercury/Layout/Article_
Type1&c=Article&cid=1183808759142&call_pageid=
1050067726078&col=1050421501457
WINDHOEK, NAMIBIA (Jul 7, 2007)
Namibia's annual seal hunting season started this week amid a war of words with animal rights activists that echoes similar protests in Canada.
Namibia's government accused the activists of "deliberately distorting information," and said controlling the seal population was important for both the fishing industry and to the people who work in jobs created by the hunt.
The sparsely populated southern African country is famous for its wildlife and desert scenes along its Atlantic coastline, known as the Skeleton Coast. An estimated 850,000 seals live on a group of islands off its southern coast.
Atlanta Falcons Michael Vick Again At Center Of Dog Fighting Investigation: New Raid on House Brings Forth “Rape Stand” And Bloodied Carpet
These spoiled NFL guys just can’t stay out of trouble. If it isn’t beating up people it’s beating up or killing dogs. Let’s hope the law and the NFL holds Vick accountable for his illegal and cruel behavior.
As stated below:
“Fifty-four pit bulls were recovered from the property during searches in April, along with a "rape stand," used to hold dogs in place for mating; an electric treadmill modified for dogs; and a bloodied piece of carpeting, the documents said.”
Article:
Feds Detail Alleged Dogfighting Operation at Vick Property
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/
falcons/2007-07-06-vick-details_N.htm
July 7, 2007 - 11:39am
By HANK KURZ JR. and MICHAEL FELBERBAUM
Associated Press Writers
SURRY, Va. (AP) - A property owned by Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick was used as the "main staging area for housing and training the pit bulls involved" in an alleged dogfighting operation, according to court documents.
The papers, filed by federal authorities, give details for the first time about what authorities contend was a long-running dogfighting venture. Vick is not named in the documents.
On Friday, federal agents searched the property for a second time, using a backhoe to dig in an area about 10 feet wide by 20 feet wide. They finished their work at about 4:30 p.m. and declined to answer reporters' questions as they left.
The documents filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Richmond and obtained Friday by The Associated Press contain the address of the Vick property that has been at the center of the investigation.
According to the documents, dog fights have been sponsored by "Bad Newz Kennels" at the property since at least 2002. For the events, participants and dogs traveled from South Carolina, North Carolina, Maryland, New York, Texas and other states.
Members of the venture also knowingly transported, delivered and received dogs for animal fighting, the documents state.
Fifty-four pit bulls were recovered from the property during searches in April, along with a "rape stand," used to hold dogs in place for mating; an electric treadmill modified for dogs; and a bloodied piece of carpeting, the documents said.
The documents said the fights usually occurred late at night or in the early morning and would last several hours. The winning dog would win from "100's up to 1,000's of dollars," and participants and spectators also bet on the dogfights.
Before fights, the participating dogs of the same sex would be weighed and bathed, according to the filings. Opposing dogs would be washed to remove any poison or narcotic placed on the dog's coat that could affect the other dog's performance. Sometimes participants would not feed a dog before the fight to "make it more hungry for the other dog," the documents said.
Fights would end when one dog died or with the surrender of the losing dog, which was sometimes put to death by drowning, strangulation, hanging, gun shot, electrocution or some other method, according to the documents. The property has an aboveground swimming pool, and investigators were seen looking into the pool Friday.
During a June search of the property, investigators uncovered the graves of seven pit bulls that were killed by members of "Bad Newz Kennels" following sessions to test whether the dogs would be good fighters, the documents said.
Members of "Bad Newz Kennels" also sponsored and exhibited fights in other parts of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Maryland, New Jersey and other states, the filings said.
On Vick's Web site, he lists his birthplace as Newport News, Va., "a.k.a. BadNews."
Friday, federal agents used shovels and heavy equipment to search the Vick property, where an informant told authorities as many as 30 dogs could be buried.
A backhoe-front loader was brought in and used to excavate a cleared area on the property. The material found to be of interest was transferred into numerous large, ice-filled coolers and loaded into a rental truck, which left the property.
Some of the investigators wore T-shirts reading: "Federal Agent USDA-OIG."
An Associated Press reporter and photographer viewing the investigation from a helicopter could not clearly identify the evidence being collected.
Investigators were digging in an area about 50 yards behind the large white house on the property. About 15 people could be seen on the property, which includes several kennels surrounded by pens made of metal fencing, other kennels and outbuildings.
Located in southeast Virginia, the expansive property has a metal gate at the entrance and a white plastic fence around the perimeter. The fence and a large two-story building painted black behind the home obscured the work of investigators.
More than 15 vehicles were on the property, including the rental truck and at least one Virginia State Police evidence collection truck.
Corinne Geller, a spokeswoman for the Virginia State Police, said state authorities were working with federal investigators in an "assistance capacity."
Vick has said he rarely visited the property. No charges have been filed.
During an April 25 raid at the property, about half the dogs were tethered to car axles with heavy chains that allowed them to get close to each other, but not to have contact, an arrangement typical for fighting dogs, according to an affidavit.
Later, Surry County officials secured a search warrant based on an informant's information about dogs being buried on the property, but never acted on it because prosecutor Gerald G. Poindexter said he had concerns with the wording of the document.
On June 7, the day that warrant expired, federal officials executed their own with the help of state police investigators.
Poindexter publicly questioned the federal government's interest in a dogfighting case. He suggested Vick's celebrity was the draw and raised race as a possible motivation. Poindexter and Vick are black, as is Sheriff Harold Brown.
Poindexter, on vacation in Louisiana, said by telephone he was unaware of Friday's search and was still pursuing what he called a parallel investigation. He said he assumed Surry County and federal officials eventually will share their evidence.
Vick initially said he had no idea the property might have been used in a criminal enterprise and blamed family members for taking advantage of his generosity. He also put the house up for sale and reportedly sold it quickly, although there is no record that the sale has closed. Vick has since declined to talk about the investigation.
As stated below:
“Fifty-four pit bulls were recovered from the property during searches in April, along with a "rape stand," used to hold dogs in place for mating; an electric treadmill modified for dogs; and a bloodied piece of carpeting, the documents said.”
Article:
Feds Detail Alleged Dogfighting Operation at Vick Property
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/
falcons/2007-07-06-vick-details_N.htm
July 7, 2007 - 11:39am
By HANK KURZ JR. and MICHAEL FELBERBAUM
Associated Press Writers
SURRY, Va. (AP) - A property owned by Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick was used as the "main staging area for housing and training the pit bulls involved" in an alleged dogfighting operation, according to court documents.
The papers, filed by federal authorities, give details for the first time about what authorities contend was a long-running dogfighting venture. Vick is not named in the documents.
On Friday, federal agents searched the property for a second time, using a backhoe to dig in an area about 10 feet wide by 20 feet wide. They finished their work at about 4:30 p.m. and declined to answer reporters' questions as they left.
The documents filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Richmond and obtained Friday by The Associated Press contain the address of the Vick property that has been at the center of the investigation.
According to the documents, dog fights have been sponsored by "Bad Newz Kennels" at the property since at least 2002. For the events, participants and dogs traveled from South Carolina, North Carolina, Maryland, New York, Texas and other states.
Members of the venture also knowingly transported, delivered and received dogs for animal fighting, the documents state.
Fifty-four pit bulls were recovered from the property during searches in April, along with a "rape stand," used to hold dogs in place for mating; an electric treadmill modified for dogs; and a bloodied piece of carpeting, the documents said.
The documents said the fights usually occurred late at night or in the early morning and would last several hours. The winning dog would win from "100's up to 1,000's of dollars," and participants and spectators also bet on the dogfights.
Before fights, the participating dogs of the same sex would be weighed and bathed, according to the filings. Opposing dogs would be washed to remove any poison or narcotic placed on the dog's coat that could affect the other dog's performance. Sometimes participants would not feed a dog before the fight to "make it more hungry for the other dog," the documents said.
Fights would end when one dog died or with the surrender of the losing dog, which was sometimes put to death by drowning, strangulation, hanging, gun shot, electrocution or some other method, according to the documents. The property has an aboveground swimming pool, and investigators were seen looking into the pool Friday.
During a June search of the property, investigators uncovered the graves of seven pit bulls that were killed by members of "Bad Newz Kennels" following sessions to test whether the dogs would be good fighters, the documents said.
Members of "Bad Newz Kennels" also sponsored and exhibited fights in other parts of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Maryland, New Jersey and other states, the filings said.
On Vick's Web site, he lists his birthplace as Newport News, Va., "a.k.a. BadNews."
Friday, federal agents used shovels and heavy equipment to search the Vick property, where an informant told authorities as many as 30 dogs could be buried.
A backhoe-front loader was brought in and used to excavate a cleared area on the property. The material found to be of interest was transferred into numerous large, ice-filled coolers and loaded into a rental truck, which left the property.
Some of the investigators wore T-shirts reading: "Federal Agent USDA-OIG."
An Associated Press reporter and photographer viewing the investigation from a helicopter could not clearly identify the evidence being collected.
Investigators were digging in an area about 50 yards behind the large white house on the property. About 15 people could be seen on the property, which includes several kennels surrounded by pens made of metal fencing, other kennels and outbuildings.
Located in southeast Virginia, the expansive property has a metal gate at the entrance and a white plastic fence around the perimeter. The fence and a large two-story building painted black behind the home obscured the work of investigators.
More than 15 vehicles were on the property, including the rental truck and at least one Virginia State Police evidence collection truck.
Corinne Geller, a spokeswoman for the Virginia State Police, said state authorities were working with federal investigators in an "assistance capacity."
Vick has said he rarely visited the property. No charges have been filed.
During an April 25 raid at the property, about half the dogs were tethered to car axles with heavy chains that allowed them to get close to each other, but not to have contact, an arrangement typical for fighting dogs, according to an affidavit.
Later, Surry County officials secured a search warrant based on an informant's information about dogs being buried on the property, but never acted on it because prosecutor Gerald G. Poindexter said he had concerns with the wording of the document.
On June 7, the day that warrant expired, federal officials executed their own with the help of state police investigators.
Poindexter publicly questioned the federal government's interest in a dogfighting case. He suggested Vick's celebrity was the draw and raised race as a possible motivation. Poindexter and Vick are black, as is Sheriff Harold Brown.
Poindexter, on vacation in Louisiana, said by telephone he was unaware of Friday's search and was still pursuing what he called a parallel investigation. He said he assumed Surry County and federal officials eventually will share their evidence.
Vick initially said he had no idea the property might have been used in a criminal enterprise and blamed family members for taking advantage of his generosity. He also put the house up for sale and reportedly sold it quickly, although there is no record that the sale has closed. Vick has since declined to talk about the investigation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Search for More Content
Custom Search
