The director of the body representing foxhound packs encouraged members to use trail hunting, where horseback riders with dogs follow trails laid with scent in advance, as a “smokescreen” for illegal foxhunting, a court has heard.
Mark Hankinson, the director of the Masters of Foxhounds Association and an employee of the Hunting Office, appeared at Westminster magistrates court on Monday charged with encouraging or assisting others to commit an offence because of his comments.
Mark Hankinson outside court. He denies an accusation of “giving advice to a webinar audience on how to conceal their illegal hunting activity”
The 60-year-old, of Frampton Farm, Sherborne, Dorset, was charged after footage from a training webinar for MFHA members, broadcast in August 2020, was obtained by hunt saboteurs, who passed it to the media and the police.
Hankinson appeared at Westminster magistrates court wearing a navy pinstripe suit and polka-dot tie, for the first day of his trial.
“His intentions shine through very clearly,” Gregory Gordon, prosecuting, told the court.
“The prosecution say that the defendant gave advice on how to make it more difficult to be able to prove that an illegal hunt was happening. He gave advice on how to use trail hunting, in his own words, as a ‘smokescreen’ behind which illegal hunting could continue.
“The prosecution only have to prove that his actions were capable of encouraging an offence, not whether anybody was encouraged or acted on that encouragement”.
WAV Comment – I am old enough to remember the terrible situation of BSE in the 1980’s; which was largely due to cows being fed the ground up remains of other cows – or giving meat to animals that should feed on grass. Watch the video for detail; which shines a bright light on the modern day farming practices.
The video explains it better:
Brazil has confirmed two cases of BSE, or mad cow disease, and has suspended beef exports to China. Ireland, a smaller beef supplier to China, reported a case of mad cow disease in May last year, but has not yet been able to resume exports.
How the cruel death of a little stray dog led to riots in 1900s Britain
Novelist campaigns for statue of terrier experimented on by scientists to regain its place in a London park
An animal in peril can inflame British public opinion like nothing else. Nearly 120 years ago, the fate of one small brown dog caused rioting in the streets of London, to say nothing of the protest marches to Trafalgar Square and questions asked in parliament.
Now the astonishing, little-known story – involving anti-vivisectionist campaigners, an eminent doctor, a legal battle and a controversial memorial statue in a park – is the subject of a new book and of a fresh campaign to honour the lowly terrier at the heart of it all.
An “affair” that made headlines and provoked disorder, but has since been forgotten, the Brown Dog story is a tale that has “obsessed” the imagination of first-time novelist Paula S Owen ever since she heard it.
“The book and the campaign really are a dream come true for me after all this time,” Owen said this weekend before the publication of Little Brown Dog, her fictionalised account of historic events. “I’ve been obsessed with this story for so long, it’s fantastic to know it has been told.”
The extraordinary row began with the public vivisection of a stray dog carried out in 1903 by Dr William Bayliss, a renowned physiologist who was also instrumental in the discovery of hormones. Operating alongside his brother-in-law, Professor Ernest Starling, Bayliss demonstrated the procedure to medical students at University College London, including a duo of undercover Swedish feminists and animal rights campaigners, Leisa Schartau and Louise Lind-af-Hageby. The operation, the women declared in their diary, was cruel and unnecessary, and the dog, which had been previously experimented on, had not been properly anaesthetised.
Months later, the campaigners recruited the help of a barrister Stephen Coleridge, a descendant of the Romantic poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge and secretary of the National Anti-Vivisection Society. He spoke out in public against Bayliss, prompting, first, an action for slander, and then one for libel, once the accusations of cruelty had been repeated in print.
The case quickly became a cause célèbre, discussed across the country, and when Coleridge eventually lost the case, Britain’s animal lovers were enraged. A fundraising drive resulted in the erection of a statue in Latchmere recreation ground in Battersea, south London, to commemorate the life of the stray dog. But, as Owen explains in a note at the end of her novel, in the 1900s the nation was not prepared to let a deceased dog lie.
The issue, she recounts, “became a lightning rod for continuing disturbances, riots, and rallies across London.
[The statue] was subjected to repeated attacks by outraged medical students. And was defended by the equally outraged working-class locals of Battersea, plus a cast list of feminists, suffragists and suffragettes, trade unionists, radical liberals and anarchists. The situation became a national talking point and was debated in parliament. The statue was protected, at great expense, day and night, by the police.”
Eventually the council acted, taking down the statue covertly at night. It has never been seen since.
In 1985, a bronze statue by Nicola Hicks, which commemorates the dog and the lost memorial, was unveiled in nearby Battersea Park. But on Sunday Owen is to visit the spot in Latchmere recreation ground where the original statue once stood to launch her campaign for a new monument to the terrier. She will put up a carefully re-created lightweight model.
“It’s incredible that the team who helped me have made something so realistic and 3D from a grainy old picture,” she said.
Owen, who is Welsh but lives in south London, has worked as a climate change campaigner and environmentalist. Her factual book about the Brent Spar controversy of 1995, when Greenpeace fought Shell’s plan to sink a decommissioned North Sea oil storage and loading platform in the Atlantic, is being adapted for a television series. And she sees a clear link between the animal protection story at the heart of her novel and her environmental work.
“This isn’t simply the tragic tale of one stray dog, appallingly treated and abused in a less enlightened age,” she has written. “Nor is the hysteria, violence and bewildering behaviour directed at a lump of stone and metal – so feared by authorities it drove them to steal and destroy it – the main focus of the novel.
“It’s more complicated than that. The whole sorry episode is an echo, a mirror, reflecting the endless injustices and evil carried out by humans on other species throughout history.”
Her novel is being published by Honno Press, a supporter of Welsh women’s writing for 35 years, and Owen said it keeps very close to the facts. “I have stayed true to events but I have changed the key characters a little. My surgeon is Bayling and my heroines are now British ≠ one upper class and one a working-class young woman from Wales.”
On Wednesday, when Owen launches her book and the new statue campaign, it will be the 115th anniversary of the day the original Brown Dog statue was unveiled to gathered celebrities, including Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw.
In the spirit of the words of Lena, Owen’s fictional heroine, who argues “our humanity is defined by how we treat, respect and nurture other species, not just our own kind”, the author now says she hopes her book will ask: “Can we say, hand on heart, we are any more ‘humane’ today than we were one hundred years ago?” This article was amended on 16 September 2021 to include reference to the 1985 memorial by Nicola Hicks that stands in Battersea Park.
Who said that justice and morality apply to all living beings?
Nazis, inquisitors, slave drivers and generally all butchers in world history have never before been able to act with justice and morality.
If we didn’t do what happens in the video with the worst criminals, then logically we can’t do it with animals.
And yet! we do it!
Why can’t we
-Transport people for days without food and water?
-Get human mothers pregnant again and again in order to steal their milk?
-Take away their children from the human mothers so that the human babies do not drink the milk?
-Killing the human babies and processing them into meat and sausage?
Why not? Where is the Problem?
Oh yes! humans have rights and animals don’t, because … … because we human animals have just defined this fascist supremacy!
Animal Liberation Queensland VimeoEven as a vegan for many years, I had not heard of this horror until recently. That this is an accepted method of “animal husbandry” is wretched, that it is concealed as “animal husbandry” is vile.
It has been relentlessly and successfully proven that if a human can devise a form of torturous confinement, causing abject pain and maximum suffering, apathetically and indifferently, and then provide the most harrowing and terrifying death, it has been achieved on animals.
If you participate in animal exploitation in any form (consumption, products, entertainment, clothing, etc.), you contribute to this hell that humans inflict on sentient creatures – like humans, cats, and dogs – effortlessly, willingly, and without condemnation.
“Welfare” laws are 100% meaningless to the victims who suffer for them, there is no part of “welfare” that includes suffering and violence, which occurs in ALL animal exploitation; even the most “cared-for” animal is used and then killed. Using terms like “welfare” and “humane” and “husbandry” to define exploitation requiring bodily control, intrusion, violation, and violent death (yes, killing any unwilling being is inherently violent absent suffering, defense) means those human-manufactured, self-soothing terms are for HUMANS and not the victims of them. If you care, you don’t exploit. SL
Footage released in January shows filthy conditions, violent abuse by workers, untreated wounds, and one boar left to slowly die over several days.
Authorities have failed to prosecute and boars continue to suffer in this facility every day.
This is the reality for animals that live within this broken system, but thanks to you, more and more people are becoming aware and turning away from animal agriculture.
You’ve heard of sow stalls, but did you know about boar stalls?
In an unseen facet of pig farming, boars are kept in small stalls all their lives, only being released for a brief time for semen collection a couple of times a week.
Semen collection farms are a relatively unknown facet of the industry. At this facility, at least 20 boars are kept in tiny stalls – most are equivalent to sow stalls – with no room to turn around, and barely enough room to even lie down. They have no enrichment, they are left with untreated injuries, fed only the minimum food required to keep them alive and “useful”, and are routinely abused. The only time the boars leave their tiny, filthy stall is for semen collection.
When we received the footage our immediate concern was around the strong possibility of another boar suffering a similar fate to Boe from untreated illness and dying a slow painful death. We immediately informed the authorities with a complaint to RSPCA Qld and passed on the video footage. RSPCA Qld acted quickly and arranged a team of inspectors and vets from both RSPCA Qld and Biosecurity Qld to conduct a surprise inspection.
We understand at least one boar was euthanised that day. After that, the rest of the investigation was handed over to Biosecurity Qld. In Queensland, a Memorandum of Understanding exists in which all farmed animal issues are referred to Biosecurity Qld, which is part of the Queensland Department of Agriculture.
On receiving no further updates from Biosecurity Qld, and realising authorities were not taking this seriously, we released the footage through two videos.
First, on 6 March, Animal Liberation Queensland & Animal Liberation (NSW) released Boe’s story. The public reacted and shared Boe’s story resulting in more than 630,000 views on Facebook.
On 11 March we released the second video documenting further abuse and filthy conditions. Faeces and infestations were found throughout the facility. Video footage shows the worker kicking the boars, stomping and smashing metal bars against a boar’s head.
After numerous follow-ups with the Department, we learned that several “direction orders” were given to the owner to rectify issues they had found in their inspection. Biosecurity Queensland has confirmed that they have been back multiple times since the initial inspection and they are satisfied that all direction orders are being adhered to. In other words, it seems they will not be taking further action and have given this place the tick of approval. In practice, very little has changed for the boars that may spend the rest of their lives in these barren rusty metal cells. From the information we have, the direction orders related to the untreated wounds, and the maintenance or uncleanliness of the facility. There is nothing that will give any sense of relief to these boars and nothing that will stop others from meeting a similar fate to Boe.
Despite numerous requests for further information authorities would “not comment on the outcome of any investigations”. We can, unfortunately, conclude that no charges have been laid – despite numerous animal cruelty abuses outlined above that were documented by investigators, as well as issues during the inspection by authorities. If these boars were dogs, the owner and workers would now be facing court.
More than 3000 people sent emails of concern to the Minister for Agriculture. A couple of weeks later his office sent out a generic reply showing very little concern:.
Above: Minister’s office response to public concerns regarding lack of action taken by the Department.
We have also raised several conflicts of interests. Firstly, the land on which the Wacol pigs are incarcerated is leased from the Department of Agriculture – the very Department that is responsible for upholding animal welfare laws – is also taking money from this facility. The Minister failed to see any conflict here.
Secondly, this issue reminds us of the conflict of interest that exists for all animal agriculture. The Department of Agriculture in each state is responsible for growth and economic sustainability of the industry, but at the same time has the responsibility to enforce the Animal Care and Protection Act – and to police the very businesses it seeks to promote and grow. Both the Premier and Minister continue to ignore this very clear conflict of interest.
We are grateful to the investigators who took great risks to bring this cruelty to light. This is a thankless task, being confronted first hand with this cruelty. We greatly appreciate the thousands of you who complained to the Minister, made phone calls, and shared the video footage.
Sadly, this is the reality of millions of animals used and abused around the country every day. It is no wonder we see cruelty like this when the system is set up to fail these animals. As long as we have a society that supports, embraces and even celebrates animal agriculture, scenes like this will continue to be commonplace.
Know that this hasn’t all been for nothing. Hundreds of thousands of people have had their eyes opened to the reality of animal agriculture. For countless people, this was the final straw, and they have committed to going vegan. For others, this may be the start of their journey.
We can all help through our daily choices. By choosing vegan alternatives and never buying meat, dairy, eggs and other animal products, we take away the demand. Speak to your friends and family. Keep sharing footage and stories on social media. Keep writing and calling the Ministers, and speak to your local MP. Volunteer with or donate to animal advocacy groups.
Pressure on industry and government is growing every day, and every day the public is becoming more and more informed. Sadly, these industries of cruelty will not close down overnight, but with your help their days are numbered. We will keep fighting, and we will achieve animal liberation.
Want to do more than go vegan? Help others to do so! Click below for nominal, or no, fees to vegan literature that you can use to convince others that veganism is the only compassionate route to being an animal friend:
50 NGOs call on the European Commission to end the promotion of meat and dairy
19 September 2021
Eurogroup for Animals have signed a letter to the European Commission together with 50 NGOs calling for an end to the promotion of meat and dairy.
The EU promotion policy for agricultural products has previously funded campaigns that have aimed at increasing meat and dairy consumption with slogans such as “Milky is great” and “Pork lovers Europe”. Some campaigns have specifically targeted young people with the aim to reverse a declining trend in meat consumption among European youth.
The European Commission is currently reviewing the promotion policy, with “a view to enhancing its contribution to sustainable production and consumption, and in line with the shift to a more plant-based diet, with less red and processed meat and more fruit and vegetables”, as emphasised in both the Farm to Fork Strategy and Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan.
The letter points out that in the last four years the European Commission spent 32% of its €776.7 million budget for agrifood promotion on advertising campaigns for meat and dairy. The European Commission also spent 28% of the promotion budget on the promotion of mixed baskets of products, almost all of which included meat and dairy. This use of public money goes contrary to the established science about the negative impact on the environment and on public health of current diets that are heavy in animal protein.
The letter calls on the Commission to support the public interest to stop the promotion of meat and dairy and instead shift the promotion policy to promote healthy, sustainable plant-based food.
“Plant-based foods deserve wider promotion to benefit public health, the environment, and farmers. However, a shift towards a more plant-based diet can only be achieved if, in addition, the plant-based sector receives sufficient support to grow and to produce alternatives that can adequately mimic the texture, taste, and price of conventional meat and dairy products.”
European Commission to ban beef, soy and palm oil imports linked to deforestation
20 September 2021
The European Commission will propose in the next months a piece of legislation aiming at banning imports of certain products linked to deforestation. Eurogroup for Animals welcomes the initiative, but calls on the Commission to avoid any loopholes that would defeat the purpose of the legislation.
In a bid to minimise the risk of deforestation and forest degradation associated with products placed on the EU market, the European Commission will propose by December 2021 a piece of legislation that would encompass product-specific due diligence requirements, and a prohibition of placing deforestation-related commodities on the EU market. This legislation should complement other EU initiatives aiming at further embedding sustainability into corporate governance, such as the upcoming proposals on Due Diligence and non-financial reporting.
The scope will be limited to products with “the highest global contribution to deforestation” such as palm oil, wood, cocoa, coffee, beef and soy. The legislation would apply to all origins, “without geographical indication”, but it would create a system categorising countries into “low, standard and high risks of deforestation”, with simplified due diligence duties for low risk countries, and enhanced scrutiny for high risk ones.
The proposal is interesting for animals in regions of the world where intensive animal agriculture or economic activities fuels deforestation. For instance, by banning imports of palm oil linked to deforestation, the habitats of wild animals such as orangutans and gibbons could be better preserved. Also, the welfare of farmed animals used in intensive productions could be improved, as intensive animal agriculture – which fuels deforestation as requiring crop feed – would be dissuaded. If Mercosur countries are categorised as “high risk countries” – two of the main products responsible for deforestation in Mercosur are beef and soy for animal feed – the legislation could possibly ban or restrict the imports of these products into the EU.
Eurogroup for Animals welcomes this initiative as producers intending to export to the EU would be incentivised to switch to more sustainable food production systems. However, the upcoming legislation must avoid loopholes that would defeat its purpose. For instance, the scope of the legislation needs to be improved as some products that are currently left out contribute to deforestation. Pig and poultry meat are for now excluded, but these animals are most often fed with soy, which largely contributes to deforestation. Avoiding this “distortion” is all the more important as some trade partners of the EU, such as Ukraine, exports significant quantities of poultry meat to the EU under the EU-Ukraine FTA. This means that Ukraine – biggest supplier of poultry meat of the EU – could feed the chicken from which the meat it exports derive with soy linked to deforestation that would be banned in the EU.
The geographical scope of the legislation must include other ecosystems in addition to forests, as the EU’s consumption of beef, soy and palm oil is linked to the destruction of other ecosystems such as grasslands, wetlands, and savannahs. The categorisation system of “low, standard and high risks of deforestation” could open the way for goods which have been produced on illegally deforested land, to be ‘green washed’ through a “low standard” country.
Considering that agriculture-driven deforestation is permanent (whereas lands that suffer from deforestation caused by fires may regenerate), there is urgency for the EU to uphold its sustainable agenda. The EU must adopt this legislation before the ratification of any FTA with Mercosur. Mercosur is already the largest supplier of beef to the EU, accounting for 73% of total EU beef imports. If the EU-Mercosur trade deal was implemented as it stands, imports of beef would increase between 30% and 64%. The Ambec report – the impact study commissioned by the French government – concluded that, as it stands, the EU-Mercosur agreement would generate an extra 25% of deforestation in the Amazon in the six years following its entry into force.
Hundreds of thousands of leaflets will never be able to develop as much force against the meat mafia as the actions of compassionate people who actively save these beautiful and characterful animals and only finally give them the opportunity to show who they are.
In the Romanian capital derby there was a special action over the weekend. The Dynamo Bucharest players ran onto the pitch with dogs in their arms.
To draw attention to animals without a home, the Romanian Football Association has come up with something very special.
At the derby of the two city rivals of the Romanian capital Bucharest, Dynamo and Steaua, the players of the former team showed a heart for animals.
Four football players from Dynamo Bucharest before the game with their dogs from the shelter and from the street.
Before the match, they marched with dogs from the Romanian public shelter Branesti on the stadium lawn to draw attention to the suffering of the Romanian strays.
This campaign aims to encourage fans to adopt dogs from the often hopelessly overcrowded animal shelters.
Throughout the season, footballers will run into games with dogs from the shelter or from the street with the goal to find new owners for the four-legged friends.
Romania has had a significant problem with street dogs for many years, and stray dogs have a difficult time in Romania.
There are hardly any comprehensive, effective castration projects and unfortunately there are still killing stations.
The goal: respect and love for the dogs
Under the name “Fill the void in your life”, the beginning of the unique project was made last weekend in Bucharest. The dogs come from the local animal shelters or from the street and each have a small scarf with their name around their necks.
If viewers want to adopt one of the four-legged friends, they can easily get in touch with the initiators of the project.
The prerequisites have also been created within the stadium so that the dogs can attend the games without any major problems. All fireworks and pyrotechnics were banned.
At the weekend, the fans also adhered to these requirements.
A nice action that will definitely make one or the other dog’s life a lot nicer!
And I mean…When footballers walk into the stadium before the game, there is usually a familiar image: They almost always have small children on their hands who can come into contact with their idols and fulfill a childhood dream.
Now Romania gives us a new message: All animal lives matter!
We hope that their action has touched many people and will lead to the adoption of a stray dog from one of the animal shelters.
THANK YOU, DYNAMO !!!
A recent report by SMACC (Social Media Animal Cruelty Coalition) documents how animal cruelty is being promoted.
Videos on the social media platforms TikTok,YouTube and Facebook were analyzed for 13 months.
Perhaps the most amazing revelation is that the approximately 5,480 individual videos that were documented were viewed a total of 5,347,809,262 times at the time the report was written.
89.2% of them were hosted on Youtube because they are easier to find there.
In one of the many staged animal rescue videos on YouTube, a dark tiger python wraps around a gibbon. The great ape is freed by a man who appears at the scene with a video camera, apparently “by chance”.
This staggering number is associated with extreme agony for the animals concerned – and the platforms that host such content have benefited by millions, according to the report.
The data clearly confirm that online content that is cruel to animals is a major global problem.
The five most commonly shown animal species were birds of various species, dogs and cats, wildlife, snakes, and primates.
Social Media Animal Cruelty Coalition (SMACC)
In 2020, founded the Asia for Animals (AfA) network – SMACC – to answer the hundreds of inquiries its member organizations have received.
The main SMACC organizations include: Action for Primates, AnimalsAsia Foundation, Humane Society International, PETA Asia and World Animal Protection.
E-mails and phone calls described horrific animal cruelty to organizations, including the burial of live animals, the mistreatment of companion animals, the setting on fire and the recent fake rescue videos – all posted freely on social media.
According to the SMACC report, the videos found on social media platforms showed animals being drowned, broken limbs, and even how mothers were killed and their babies stolen from them.
The report states that “animals have become silent victims of the hunt for clicks and advertising dollars as videos promoting, encouraging, and benefiting from their abuse become rampant”.
The hunting videos regularly feature foxes, hundreds of species of birds and wild boar, as well as animal fights.
Of the 5,480 videos that were recorded, 2,634 were assigned to the topic of “hunting”. These videos often show protracted deaths, extreme suffering, and both legal and illegal hunting methods used by the hunters.
The availability of thousands of hunting videos on social media platforms encourages this cruelty.
It is actively encouraged and normalized while the activity is being sold as “fun and exciting” and at an extreme cost to the wildlife.
The report quotes Nick Stewart, World Animal Protection’s Global Head of Wildlife Campaigns, as saying, “Wild animals are not props, toys, or entertainers; they are sentient beings with a right to life.”
Adam Parascandola of Humane Society International said, “The devastating data uncovered by this research only scratches the surface to reveal the shocking levels of animal cruelty on social media.”
Text: Together for the Animals(“Gemeinsam für die Tiere”)
In the past you were considered a criminal with a tattoo, but today you are often looked at wrong if you don’t wear one.
But what is common to all people who have the color in the flesh?
They do it voluntarily and accept the associated pain for their little work of art. Forcing a person to have a tattoo or forcing them to tattoo is coercion, mutilation and grievous bodily harm. And of course punishable!
WHY NOT ALSO IN ANIMALS?
A new trend is emerging among mindless pet owners: Tattoos for Animals.
They have their pigs, dogs, cats etc. decorated with painful pictures.
An animal does not even want a tattoo, nor has it consented to the pain associated with it.
No animal voluntarily lets a needle penetrate its flesh thousands and thousands of times until the injected color forms an image determined by the animal owner.
So it happens with coercion and violence, whereby both the animal keeper and the “artist” can be described as perpetrators. It’s not a fashion trend, it’s just pure cruelty to animals.
Giving an animal pain for no good reason is against the law: For example, the administrative courts in Germany and Austria have decided – Ergo, it is illegal and must be severely punished, apart from the fact that it is morally reprehensible.
The passage “justified reason” in the legal text can be disputed because, strictly speaking, there is never a justifying reason for violence against other living beings.
We strictly reject this form of alleged art.
Tattoos are for people who get it done of their own free will, but never for animals. There must be international action here and an offense punished accordingly, for animal keepers and tattooists.
Prison sentences and a lifetime prohibition of practicing the craft of tattooing seem to us only more than fair. Leave tattoos where they belong: under human skin !!!
And I mean…There are countless photos circulating on the Internet showing dogs and cats with tattoos and nose rings.
How does one get this perverse idea to do something like this to his pet?
Who says animals would agree to wear tattoos?
There is no question that something like this is reprehensible for ethical reasons and that it is animal cruelty to do such a thing to an animal, because tattooing is pretty painful.
In some countries and after years of pressure from animal rights activists, tattooing or piercing of animals is already banned
In Mexico, for example, animal rights activists campaigned for a ban on tattoos and piercings on animals.
After this pressure, a new draft law should prohibit tattooing on pets for aesthetic reasons and punish the tattooing or piercing of animals with the equivalent of more than 1,000 euros.
The environmental protection commission of the Congress of Mexico City had already unanimously approved the new ban.
In Germany and Austria it is forbidden to have animals tattooed for aesthetic reasons and to cause them pain for no reason.
In New York there has even been an official ban since this year. According to the law, pets are no longer allowed to be tattooed or pierced. “It’s cruelty to animals, it’s that simple,” said Andrew Cuomo, ex-governor of New York.
In the twenty-first century, after years of fighting over a ban on docking ears and tail for aesthetic reasons, we are still forced to look at shameful photos like these that are still circulating on the internet.
It’s not cool, it’s not aesthetics, it’s a degradation of animal dignity and a cruelty to animals that gets under the skin.
Received anonymously by Animal Liberation Pressoffice
Fifteen hunting towers and seven posts attacked in Jaizkibel, Jarindo,Kastañarri,Gorbeia,Arrikurutz and mount Kintoa. The Basque Animal Liberation Front denounces the “deplorable state” and the slaughter of animals by hunters.
“We will not be passively looking elsewhere as long as the sensitive creatures of other species are exploited, oppressed, or killed,” the members of the Basque People ‘s Animal Liberation Front stated in a communique about the attacks on the hunting towers and posts on the night of 31 August and 1 September.
“Hunting licenses go up, but hunting towers go down”.
“As long as violence, domination, and murder of human and other animals continues to be normal, we see “legitimate and necessary” to attack companies, institutions, or structures that promote and reproduce such oppression.”
The Animal Liberation Front is a clandestine organization operating in various countries worldwide, with no known leader or public face, and carrying out direct action for animal rights. The last few days are not the only actions the Front has taken in the Basque Country.
For example, in December 2018, several hunting stations were also damaged and in May and June of the same year, cement was dumped on the runway at Iruñera to create obsstruction and a fire was set in the bull fighting stadium.
And Imean…Hunters are psychopaths and as we know psychopaths have tremendous criminal energy and endurance.
Instead of locking them up in a psychiatric institution (which would also cause costs for the family), I find it much more economical to destroy their criminal craft.
Lebanon – end point of bird migration: Around 500,000 hunters are officially registered in Lebanon, they are allowed to shoot 12 species of birds.
But the hunting law in the “cedar state” is mostly only on paper. In reality, many hunters target anything that comes within range of the rifle.
Now, during the peak of the bird migration, we receive photos every day, which the perpetrators themselves post on social media.
Almost all of them show strictly protected species in Lebanon – from bee-eaters and blue-nails to ortolans and orioles to barn owls and short-toed eagles.
Fortunately, there are many nature lovers in Lebanon who do not just watch the hunters go by.
They search social media for such posts, report the perpetrators’ profiles to us and the authorities, and thus ensure prosecution.
Together with its Lebanese partner associations SPNL and MESHC, the Committee against Bird Murder will again be on site with an international bird protection team from next week.
The economic crisis in the country and the political unrest make the operation a risk – wish us luck!
The pictures are all up-to-date – they show protected migratory birds illegally shot.
The animals with which the heart is laid are ortolans, which are highly endangered almost everywhere in Europe!
And I mean…The birds are eaten – as a “second use”, so to speak.
But the motivation is the pleasure of hunting! whoever hunts, kills for sheer pleasure.
And that applies to hunters all over the world.
What state of mind can we expect in someone who cowardly shoots an animal while it is eating or breeding, although he does not need its flesh and skin to live and then call it as a “hobby”, “nature conservation”, “protection of species”, “epidemic protection” “or” tradition “?
“Hunting is just a cowardly paraphrase for particularly cowardly murder of chanchenless fellow creatures. Hunting is a side form of human mental illness” (Theodor Heuss, former Federal President)
Over 1 billion fish are being raised on fish farms in the EU at any one time. These are undomesticated species quite new to being captive in production systems, which are often highly intensive and are themselves new technologies undergoing development.
EU aquaculture and animal welfare policies are pursuing fish welfare objectives, while a new regime governing EU financial support to fisheries and aquaculture has weakened the links between EU investment and EU policy objectives.
National aquaculture strategies and the implementation of EU financial support mechanisms need a smooth and coordinated implementation by Member States for subsidies to operate in support of policy initiatives and realise improvements in fish welfare.
When compared to terrestrial farm animals, scientists, producers, policy makers and animal advocates alike were late to understanding fishes’ needs and applying animal welfare approaches to fish in aquaculture. Some milestones were:
2005 the Council of Europe adopted guidelines for fish welfare during farming
2008 EFSA scientific opinion on fish sentience
2009 EFSA scientific opinion on welfare during husbandry and slaughter
2009 The OIE adopted standards for fish welfare during transport and at slaughter
2020 EU Platform on Animal Welfare adopts fish welfare guidelines
With the many EU and external research projects in the intervening years, we now have a wealth of knowledge for practical implementation. Initiatives from sectororganisations, thirdpartycertifiers, and policymakers seek to apply knowledge to provide a better life and death for farmed fish, improve product quality and resource efficiency, and better meet consumers’ expectations.
In May 2021 the European Commission published its newaquaculture strategy until 2030 which includes fish welfare priorities including developing best practice codes and guidelines, setting validated indicators, providing training, and supporting a transition to lower-trophic species.
The Farm to Fork Strategy previously committed the EU’s aquaculture policy to being a part of its animal welfare initiatives, and in August 2021 the inception impact assessment of the revision of all EU farm animal welfare legislation included specific options for fish welfare.
The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) 2021 – 2027 regulation seeks to simplify Member States’ administration and programming. One approach to simplification is to only reference high level Union priorities such as sustainable economies and communities, and to maintain weaker links between national and EU aquaculture policies.Opening up the fund for investments to meet legal obligations has also weakened the incentive to invest it now in policy areas marked as important next priorities.This is where the link between the spending of EU funds and the delivery of EU policy is weakened.
Maintained from the previous regulation is the requirement that financial support is consistent with Member States’ own multiannual national strategic plans, and those plans must themselves use the EU’s aquaculture strategy as their basis. However there is no real requirement that national priorities contribute to specific EU objectives, or even that Member States update their national plans now. Then the EU’s aquaculture strategy is referenced as a more complete set of policy priorities, but there is less impetus for Member States to direct financial support for the delivery of EU policy priorities.
Aquaculture is not an area of exclusive EU competence and Member States operate national policies and licensing regimes specific to their varied geographical and market contexts. Member States should take the fish welfare objectives from the EU’s aquaculture strategy as priorities in their national strategies in support of the moves to advance animal welfare in aquaculture.
The Commission funds aquaculture research and facilitates Member States’ coordination of aquaculture policies, and it needs to do more to provide substance and cohesion for its aquaculture priorities. It needs to look beyond the small portion of the EMFAF that it controls directly and to activate mechanisms in other policy areas including animal welfare.
Animal welfare policy could consolidate knowledge into implementable indicators and guidelines through a dedicated Animal Welfare Reference Centre. The Commission could mandate EFSA to provide the necessary knowledge, since its last opinion on fish welfare was more than ten years ago.
The alternative path is that intensive aquaculture systems continue to evolve without accounting for the needs of the animals. Aquaculture takes the production and reputational losses that are seen with intensive terrestrial agriculture systems, and the fish continue to suffer unnecessarily.
The EU has identified the right fish welfare policy priorities, and they are aligned with voluntary measures being taken widely in the market. The new EU financial support regime (EMFAF) has weakened the explicit links between EU financial support and specific EU aquaculture policy objectives, but Member States can take up the common EU priorities and the Commission should use other mechanisms to provide the necessary resources and cohesion.
Op-ed by Douglas Waley, Fish Welfare Programme Leader at Eurogroup for Animals
Even locals outraged as 1400 dolphins die in Faroese hunt
There has been widespread condemnation after over 1400 Atlantic white-sided dolphins were killed in the Faroe Islands last weekend, believed to be the largest number of dolphins ever killed in the country.
Much of the criticism has come from within the country where usually there is a strong defence of the hunts, which are portrayed by locals as a long-standing tradition providing a necessary supplement to their diet.
The dolphins were herded into a bay on the island of Eysturoy on Sunday after being encountered far out to sea. Even though the hunt was sanctioned by local authorities, it appears there was confusion over the number of dolphins being driven to shore with first estimates putting the number at around 200.
As a result, local reports suggest there were not enough people on the beach to kill the dolphins when it became apparent how many there actually were. The process took several hours as dolphins were left in a distressed state while their fellow pod members were killed with knives.
The meat from the hunt is traditionally distributed to local people but with so many dolphins killed, there are concerns that much of it may have to be discarded.
On September 12th, a huge school of 1,428 Atlantic white-sided dolphins was hunted and driven to their deaths for hours.
The driven hunt, the so-called grind, took place on the Faroe Islands, which belong to Denmark. The animals were driven over a distance of approx. 45 km with speedboats and jet skis into the shallow waters near Skálabotnur, where every single animal was cruelly killed.
According to locals who shared videos and photos with Sea Shepherd, this hunt violated several Faroese laws regulating grind:
First of all, the grind supervisor responsible for this area was not informed and therefore never authorized the hunt.
Instead, the decision was made by another grind chief who was not authorized to do so.
Second, many of the participants did not have permission to participate. This permit is required in the Faroe Islands because it includes special training to ensure the rapid killing of pilot whales and dolphins. The footage also shows that many of the dolphins were still alive and moving when they were dragged ashore with the rest of their dead school.
Thirdly, photos show that many of the dolphins were run over by motorboats and torn apart by the screws, resulting in a slow and painful death.
According to local residents, the grid was illegal and was reported to the Faroese police for these violations.
The Danish newspaper“Ekstra Bladet” published interviews with locals, whose full names were changed to protect their families, stating that many Faroe Islands are angry about the incident.
“I suspect that most of the dolphins will end up in the garbage or in some digging hole,” said a local. “We should have quotas per district and not kill dolphins,” said another.
A local asked the Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksento investigate the incident:
“If she expresses herself critically in public, it will also be easier for the locals who want to end this barbaric tradition.”
Others fear that the international press will show the pictures of the slaughtered dolphins and that this will endanger their exports (e.g. the Faroe Islands export salmon to Germany, Great Britain, the USA and Russia).
And I mean…Sea Shepherd considers this to be “the largest single hunt for dolphins or pilot whales in Faroe history” (followed by the hunt for 1,200 pilot whales in 1940) and “it is believed to be the largest single whale hunt ever documented worldwide”!
We call it mass murder. Driven in any place that is a very wealthy European island group that has no need for meat to survive, based on secret licenses and documents, practically an illegal process, carried out by anonymous sadists and corrupt officials,who settled the crime among themselves.
An illegal massacre with no basis, no legal evidence.
Here borders were crossed and a new dimension of brutality and barbarism reached.
What the residents of the Faroe Islands can never be ashamed of
WAV Comment – No final news yet, but we will report as soon as we know.
Challenge to badger cull due as Bern Convention Bureau considers alleged breach case
13 September 2021
Complaint alleges UK Govt in breach of international wildlife treaty obligations after failing to consider cull impact on badger population
A coalition of animal protection groups will have their complaint against the UK Government, alleging a breach of an international wildlife treaty, considered by the Bern Convention as its Bureau meets this week (15 and 16 September).
The Bern Convention, to which the UK has been a signatory since 1982, aims to ensure the conservation and protection of Europe’s wildlife, and regulates the exploitation of species listed in Appendix III, which includes badgers.
Badger Trust, Born Free Foundation, and Eurogroup for Animals allege that the UK Government’s ongoing badger culling policy places it in clear contravention of its commitments under the Convention. Their complaint challenges whether the UK Government has adequately considered the impact of mass culling of badgers on the badger population and wider biodiversity, and whether there has been any significant disease control benefits to justify the culls.
The consideration comes just a week after the UK Government announced that badger culling will be ramped up in 2021, with seven new licences issued expanding the cull area and setting maximum kill quotas that could see the highest numbers of badgers killed in a single year since culling began. There are now 61 areas with active cull licences, covering counties from Cornwall to Cumbria, and up to 75,930 badgers could be killed in 2021 – taking the total since the cull began to well over 200,000.
Britain is home to more than 25% of the European badger population. However, with more than 140,000 badgers killed under licence since the cull policy started in 2013, and with culling set to continue until 2025 under recently confirmed UK Government plans, that population is coming under severe pressure. The case was put on “standby” by the Bern Convention in 2020, with a request for further information, the first time a complaint made against the UK Government’s badger culling policy had not been dismissed at the initial stage.
That the UK government continues to hand out new cull licences not only lays bare claims made by British ministers to be champions for animal welfare, but only serves to showcase a bewildering level of cognitive dissonance. No evidence whatsoever supports the ongoing culls in England, which is why, I suspect, no such evidence demonstrating a disease control benefit has been produced by the British government. We now rely on the other parties to the Convention to hold the UK government to account. England’s badgers — Europe’s badgers — cannot continue to be sacrificed for domestic political expediency.
Reineke Hameleers, CEO of Eurogroup for Animals
Whilst we are grateful that our complaint is at last being reviewed, it has been two years since we initially submitted our complaint in 2019. In that time another over 76,000 badgers have been killed under this failed approach to controlling bovine Tuberculosis – a respiratory disease in cattle that starts and ends with cattle. The latest licences for 2021 alone could take the same amount again, and the cull is set to run to 2025 – so we have years and years of further culling ahead. The impact on the badger population is unknown, and seemingly inconsequential to the UK Government who claim it is coming to an end, but in reality this senseless slaughter continues. We hope for a positive outcome from the Bern Bureau, and a brighter future for Britain’s badgers.
Adam Laidlaw, Executive Director of Badger Trust
The UK Government has hailed its badger culling policy a success. However, after eight years of culling which has seen the destruction of more than 140,000 badgers, representing perhaps a quarter of the UK badger population, evidence for significant disease control benefits among cattle herds in cull areas is lacking, and the Government’s woeful efforts to estimate and monitor targeted badger populations are failing to guarantee their eventual recovery. In spite of this, the Government has issued licences for 2021 which could see a further 75,930 badgers killed. We urge the Bern Convention to take action that will help to bring this inhumane, ineffective, unscientific and unnecessary slaughter of a native, protected wild animal to a permanent end.
Dr Mark Jones, veterinarian and Head of Policy at the Born Free Foundation
Notes A briefing on the complaint can be viewed here.
Final information relating to the complaint was submitted by Badger Trust, Born Free, and Eurogroup for Animals, in July in advance of the meeting this week.
The original complaint lodged with the Bern Convention in 2019 can be found here.
Farm to Fork Strategy own initiative report: vote in committees moving closer to systemic change and higher animal welfare
10 September 2021
On Friday 10th September the AGRI and ENVI committees adopted with a large majority (94 in favour, 20 against and 10 abstensions) the draft report on a Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally friendly food system.
Thanks to the 48 compromise amendments passed, the Farm to Fork own initiative report is now closer to leading a systemic change and higher EU animal welfare production.
Nevertheless, parts of some compromise amendments would have needed to be altered, such as the one stating that the support of affordable food should not lead to cheap animal products that prompt intensive farming.
The committees also supported theconsumption of algae for a dietary shift, which is welcomed, but at the same time the one of insects. Eurogroup for Animals believes that insect farming should not be promoted as an alternative protein source for animal feed or direct consumption due to serious animal welfare and sustainability concerns. Moreover, insects are not a sustainable solution for the EU’s food system transformation. On the contrary, insect farming is a false solution, given its potential to prompt more intensive farming instead of promoting the much needed systemic change.
Besides the compromise amendments, the AGRI and ENVI committees also adopted favourable amendments concerning trade, animal experiments and PMSG production, specifically:
On trade, a very clear amendment calling for EU animal welfare standards to be imposed on imported products. With the ongoing review of animal welfare standards and the growing calls by countries like France to see more production standards applied to imports (a concept they call “mirror measures”), there has never been such an opportunity to extend the scope of EU measures, and by doing so, to use the leverage that access to the EU market represent to incentivise foreign producers to improve animal welfare standards.
On animal experiments, an amendment reminding that structural animal experiments that are not indispensable should have no place in the food chain, as the Animal Experimentation Directive (2010/63/EU) prescribes the replacement and reduction of the use of animals in procedures.
The amendment also calls on the Commission and Member States to stop the import and domestic production of Pregnant Mare Serum Gonadotropin (PMSG),which is extracted from the blood of pregnant horses that are systematically impregnated and exposed to blood collections, involving health- and welfare issues.
The amendment calling on the EC to suspend import of horse meat from “countries where applicable EU requirements relating to traceability and animal welfare are not complied with” was also adopted.
The adoption of amendment 2294 is an important and timely statement from MEPs, proving that the objectives of the Farm to Fork Strategy remain clear and encompass all species. The call underlines the Parliament’s commitment to extend EU animal welfare standards to third countries, similarly to other amendments adopted in this report. Furthermore, it serves as a poignant reminder that the implementation of the Animal Experimentation Directive is far from perfect, a call that reverberates repeatedly from MEPs offices.
Reineke Hameleers, CEO, Eurogroup for Animals
Unfortunately other key amendments for the protection of animals were rejected such as the call for a ban on fur production, and the amendment calling on Member States to ban mink farming.
Besides the serious ethical issues disconsidered in those decisions, they also don’t take into account the recently adopted Report on the EU Biodiversity Strategy, where the EP acknowledged that fur farming can significantly compromise animal welfare and increase the susceptibility to infectious diseases including zoonoses.
The plenary vote on this report is scheduled for the beginning of October. Eurogroup for Animals and its members urged MEPs to vote for an initiative report that leads to real systemic change and steps up the game for animal protection in Europe.
On Wednesday, the European Parliament adopted a resolution vote calling for the European Commission to develop a definitive action plan to bring an end to lab animal testing. This should clearly identify key milestones and targets in order to ensure and incentivize meaningful progress.
Cross-party members of the European Parliament voted by an overwhelming majority (667-4) in favor of a transition from animal testing to ethical and effective alternatives.
In a press release, animal advocacy NGO Human Society International (HSI) welcomed the vote, calling it a “historic opportunity” to protect the almost 10 million animals used by EU laboratories every year in invasive experiments.
The vote is not legally binding, but it does place political pressure on the European Commission to respond to the results and take action. (Earlier this year, a similar process began to ban cruel caged animal farming in the EU, which the commission is now moving forward on.)
“This vote signals the need for systemic change in the EU’s approach to safety science and health research,” says Troy Seidle, vice president for research and toxicology at HSI.
Seventy-two percent of European citizens agree that the EU should set binding targets and deadlines to phase out animal testing, while 70 percent of adults believe full replacement of all forms of animal testing should be prioritized. Sixty-six percent say that all animal testing should be ended immediately.
“We need to let go of the unfounded belief that these animals are miniature people and get serious about understanding and predicting human biology in the real world,” says Seidle.Nearly ¾ of adults in Europe believe the #EU should set targets to phase out experiments on animals. We want to see humane, human-relevant, animal-free science properly funded and fully utilised in Europe. If you AGREE sign here ➡️ ➡️ https://t.co/Tve5BC9vNL#EndAnimalTestingpic.twitter.com/rGVt5zOkxE
Pharmaceutical testing, in particular, receives criticism for its relative lack of reliability. Small animals are not humans, and “successful” initial tests can lead to dangerous clinical trials. A 2015 study titled the Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation explored this.
“The unreliability of animal experimentation across a wide range of areas undermines scientific arguments in favor of the practice,” wrote the study author. “Animal experimentation often significantly harms humans through misleading safety studies, potential abandonment of effective therapeutics, and direction of resources away from more effective testing methods.”
Seidle lists human organ chips, stem cell models, and next-generation computer modeling among the most successful modern alternatives. Some companies are even developing cultured human skin for the cruelty-free testing of both pharmaceuticals and cosmetics.
Cosmetic animal testing is even less necessary, reputable, and popular than pharmaceuticals. Mexico recently became the first North American country to completely ban cosmetic animal testing, while Hawaii became the fifth U.S. state to implement a ban earlier this year.
The UK, however, could be about to pivot back towards animal testing after more than 100 years of slow progress and over 20 years after a national ban. This news also comes in the midst of ongoing protests over a beagle factory farm located near the notorious Huntingdon Life Sciences. According to activists, the site breeds up to 2000 puppies every year specifically to sell them for animal experiments.
To learn more about the history of animal testing in the UK, read on here.
Fortunately, today and thanks to undercover investigations by animal rights activists, it is already widely known how the dairy industry operates its animal cruelty system worldwide
Cows, goats or even sheep are exploited, tortured and ultimately killed.
Calves are stolen from their mothers so that they can produce milk, udders are simply scorched, animals are tortured while being tethered – all this is unfortunately nothing new and is well known to many.
“Downer cows”, however, represent a previously unknown peculiarity of human ignorance and greed for profit.
In the dairy industry, “downer cows”are female cattle that are too weak to stand up on their own.
Often a calf was born shortly before, the mother is already severely weakened by the birth, but then there is also an acute calcium deficiency due to the unnaturally high milk production that has been bred.
Another reason can be an injury caused by the often terrible housing conditions in the industry.
And now comes the actual, criminal cruelty to animals: These massively weakened animals are often simply brought outside by the farmers in front of the barn.
These cows are called “downers”.
And why not leave them in the stable?
There is only one answer to this: For the farmer, this cow has been written off and its corpse can be removed from the outside more easily and cost-effectively after it has perished miserably. It couldn’t be more cruel.
So the animals are somehow dragged with their last strength outside to their intended “death bed”.
The farmers often do not care what pain and stress this means for the poor creatures.
In their eyes they are “only farm animals”
This is the story of how Kiska, a whale who once lived happily with her family in the Icelandic Ocean, became the loneliest whale in the world:
In August 2011, a somewhat unseemly custody battle erupted between Busch Gardens(at that time the owner of SeaWorld) and Marineland Canada.
Ten years earlier, Marineland had approached Busch Gardens with a view to acquiring a male orca whom he could breed with the female orca Kiska.
Busch Gardens had been looking for some beluga whales, and was willing to make a breeding loan agreement whereby one male orca one of its SeaWorld entertainment parks would be sent to Marineland in exchange for four belugas.
Marineland said it wouldn’t go higher than three.
Busch wouldn’t go lower than four but finally offered to toss in a couple of SeaWorld’s trained sea lions.
And so the deal was done. And shortly thereafter, Ikaika, a four-year-old orca at SeaWorld Orlando, was flown to Marineland in Niagara Falls.
“Ike”, as he was generally known, had been developing dental problems, most likely from chewing on the metal bars of his pool, and he needed daily treatment along with antibiotics and pain medication.
The plan was that Marineland would keep up his treatments and although he was too young to breed, he could develop a relationship with Kiska and with Nootka, a younger female orca, and become a father in the coming years.
The contract stipulated that the two companies would alternate ownership of baby whales, all of which promised to be lucrative for both sides.
Nootka, however, died in 2008, and meanwhile Ike’s teeth were going from bad to worse. In 2009, SeaWorld decided they could give him better care and said they wanted him back. But Marineland didn’t want to give him up.
SeaWorld pushed harder, including making some unusually candid statements about the dangers of keeping killer whales captive.
The dispute, which focused on the terms of the contract, ended up in court. SeaWorld won, Marineland appealed and lost again, and Ike was shipped back to the United States – this time to SeaWorld San Diego, where a 12-year-old orca named Sumar had recently died of a twisted intestinal tract.
For Kiska, Ike’s return to SeaWorld meant that she was now alone. Two years earlier, she had witnessed the death of her fifth child, Athena, at age four.
The bond between orca mother and calf is lifelong, and a growing number of studies suggest that orcas’ capacity to feel deep, complex emotions rivals or even exceeds the emotional capacity possessed by humans.
Since 2011, Kiska has lived alone in her concrete tank. Alone and bored, KISKA has been living in captivity in a tank in Canada for 40 years.No family members swim by her side. No friends invite her to play.
She holds the cruel distinction of being the only captive orca in North America held in social isolation from any other marine mammal.
Video footage and eyewitness accounts depict her behavior as repetitive, unmotivated and lethargic. When not swimming in slow circles, she often floats in place, staring at the emptiness that is the inside of her tank.
We have been documenting this stereotypical behaviour that Kiska exhibits for years. Below is a video we have provided of Kiska in 2014 displaying the same thrashing behaviour that has recently been circulating and there will also be another video we took posted in the comments below.
We have seen statements and headlines claiming that Kiska is “committing suicide.” Whilst this stereotypical behaviour is a result of poor welfare in captive orcas.
Whistleblower Phil Demers, who used to work at the park, claims 44-year-old Kiska was caught off the coast of Iceland and has been in captivity since 1979.
In a 30-second aerial clip taken by Demers, Kiska can be seen ferociously whacking her head and body against a wall.
The footage was shared on social media with the caption: “This video was taken on Sept 4th, 2021.
Anti-captivity activists entered MarineLand and observed Kiska, their last surviving orca bashing her head against the wall.
Please watch and share. This cruelty must end. #FreeKiska.”
Phil Demers posted a second video that shows a closer image with the orca stirring up the water as she rammed herself against her walled enclosure.
He claimed: “Another angle. This is dangerous and self harming behaviour. Kiska is in distress.” The footage has been viewed more than 160,000 times on Twitter and has almost 2,000 retweets.
Worried members of the public have been shocked by the video.
And I mean…Marineland is one of the worst places for marine animals in the world.
You can hear every stupid saying … “I love MarineLand” and that means that everyone is only oriented towards having fun with enslaved animals, one thinks it is funny to be splashed by a whale and does not notice Kiska’s pathological behavior, due to her loneliness, her suffering, her miserable life.
Even worse: most of them also take their children with them so that the children can later view the enslavement of the whales as animal welfare
Everyone who buys a ticket for MarineLand is the employer of these animal exploiters, who actually have to earn their own money and do not get rich with the slave trade.
Call on Spanish airline — WAMOS AIR— to stop flying monkeys to laboratories
Wamos Air, the Spanish airline that operates holiday charter flights, is also involved in transporting many hundreds of monkeys to research laboratories in the USA.
Wamos Air is a subsidiary of the Royal Caribbean Group (formerly Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd), the world’s second-largest cruise line entity.
Torn from their family and social groups, monkeys are imprisoned on their own in small transit crates and travel on Wamos Airas cargo.
The journeys are extremely long, including about 24 hours of flying time and many hours in transit to and from the airports and layovers at Madrid airport.
We appeal to Wamos Air and the Royal Caribbean Group to discontinue their direct or indirect association with the cruel global trade in monkeys.’ [Action for Primates : https://actionforprimates.org/%5D
(This petition to Wamos Air and Royal Caribbean Cruises has been launched by Stop Camarles, Action for Primates and One Voice and is written in Spanish, English and French). Please see below.
(Spanish) Llamamiento a la aerolínea española — WAMOS AIR — para que cese el transporte de macacos destinados a la experimentación
Wamos Air, la aerolínea española que opera vuelos chárter de vacaciones, también está involucrada en el transporte de cientos de monos destinados a laboratorios de experimentación en EEUU, Wamos Air es filial de Royal Caribbean Group (anteriormente Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd), la segunda compañía de cruceros más grande del mundo.
Apartados de su familia y su grupo social, son enjaulados en su cajas de transporte y viajan con Wamos Air como mercancía. Los vuelos son extremadamente largos, alrededor de 24 horas, y muchas horas en tránsito entre aeropuertos y escalas en el aeropuerto de Madrid.
Reclamamos a Wamos Air y a Royal Caribbean Group que paren su asociación, directa o indirecta, con el cruel comercio global de monos. [Stop Camarles : @Scamarles]
(French) Appel à la compagnie aérienne espagnole WAMOS AIR pour qu’elle cesse de transporter des singes vers les laboratoires
Wamos Air, la compagnie aérienne espagnole qui exploite des vols charters pour vacanciers, assure également le transport de plusieurs centaines de singes vers des laboratoires aux États-Unis.
Wamos Air est une filiale de Royal Caribbean (anciennement Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd), deuxième plus grande compagnie de croisières au monde.
Arrachés à leur famille, enfermés seuls dans de petites caisses, ils effectuent le trajet en tant que fret.
Les trajets sont extrêmement longs, comprenant environ vingt-quatre heures de vol, de nombreuses heures de transit en direction et en provenance des aéroports, ainsi que des escales à l’aéroport de Madrid.
Nous demandons à Wamos Air et Royal Caribbean de ne plus participer directement ou indirectement à la barbarie que représente le commerce mondial de singes. [One Voice :https://one-voice.fr%5D
And I mean…On 21st August, Wamos Air flew monkeys from Cambodia, via Madrid, to the US.
“Action for Primates”Organisation has been informed through contact in Europe, that the shipment comprised 720 individuals, destined for Envigo.
The suffering these intelligent and sensitive individuals experienced during their traumatic ordeal, packed into small crates and travelling as cargo for over 24 hours with many hours in transit to and from the airports and a layover at Madrid airport, is unimaginable.
It is simply not possible to confine non-human primates to small crates, away from familiar surroundings, and transport them on long journeys across the world without causing considerable distress, physical and psychological suffering.
The transportation and resulting suffering of these sensitive and highly intelligent animals is unacceptable.
What lies ahead for these individuals in the laboratories is unthinkable.
Envigo is a global contract research company that uses various species of animals, including monkeys, to carry out tests on behalf of other companies.
It was formed in 2015, following the merging of Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) and Harlan Laboratories.
Neither Wamos Air or Royal Caribbean Cruises, one of the parent companies of the Spanish airline, has responded to the appeal of Action for Primates Organisation to end their involvement in this cruel trade.
Please take action and ask others to do likewise. It is important to show Wamos Air and Royal Caribbean Cruises the strength of public feeling on this issue.
Without our resistance, animal abusers will do their work much more easily
It must have been a horrific sight – the stench was bestial. Residents from the tranquil Nikolaus village in the district of Cloppenburg (Lower Saxony) find 250 dead pigs in an abandoned stable.
Their mummification had already started, probably from drying out. There is no trace of the pet owner!
When police officers opened the stable on the outskirts of Nikolaus village, they came across skeletonized and, in some cases, mummified dead pigs. Experts from the veterinary office had to count the skulls of the animals – and came to around 250.
It is unclear why the farmer left 250 pigs die miserably and helpless, when he left the farm (!!!)
Nobody of the around 1100 inhabitants in the small Nikolaus village suspects what terrible fate must have played out behind the red stable walls.
“We have started an investigation against the pig owner for violating the Animal Welfare Act,” replied a spokeswoman for the Cloppenburg police station. The farmer had moved to another area in 2018.
It is unclear how long the animals had been lying alone in their boxes.
The veterinary office is also investigating the case
The police and the veterinary office in Cloppenburg, which is also investigating the case, do not want to give more precise information about the causes of death of the animals. “The Cloppenburg district immediately ordered the former livestock keeper to remove the remains of the pigs from the stable and to have them disposed of harmlessly,” reports a spokesman for the veterinary office.
And further: “Then the stable must be cleaned and disinfected. This is monitored by the authorities.”
Pig farming was deregistered from the Cloppenburg district on December 31, 2012 and cattle farming on October 23, 2018, confirms veterinary office spokesman Frank Beumker. Controls after de-registration of the animal husbandry are not provided.
“The company was previously not noticed because of violations of animal welfare regulations,” (!!!) said the spokesman for the veterinary office.
And I mean…The police found 250 dead pigs on a farm in Lower Saxony. The operator left the farm several years ago and apparently let the animals die.
How could this happen? in a country with the “best animal welfare” in Europe?
Quite simply: because farms that keep animals are checked on average in Germany (at best) every 17 years. Veterinary offices in their current form are part of the problem. They lie and cover up cruelty to animals.
So if the veterinary office has come to the conclusion that… “The company had not previously been noticed for violating animal welfare regulations”, it is an outrageous lie.
Has the farmer deregistered his business and nobody from the veterinary office has asked for proof of the whereabouts of the animals?
It seems like nothing was checked here …
That means that the responsible veterinary office has not done its job.
This is a violation of the Animal Welfare Act due to omission!
But that’s not the only shame in this story.
Didn’t anyone notice how the pigs were roaring to death for weeks after the criminal farmer ran away and let the pigs slowly perish?
has that only dawned on people after years?
and just because it stank?
Sir Roger Gale said: ‘Brexit has presented us with the opportunity to reform our farming systems.
WAV Comment – For a very long time, welfare campaigners in the UK have been calling for this. ALL food should be clearly labelled to show production methods, nation of origin, and how the animal was slaughtered is clearly identified on the packaging. We very much welcome this decades (far too late) late legislation, but are hugely supported by the fact that so many Brits are demanding to see how their food is produced – and that animal welfare is a ‘high up the chain’ concern.
If you personally wish to get involved with, and submit to the consultation, then please go to;
Halal and kosher meat will have to be labelled in a victory for animal welfare campaigners.
As part of the proposed law, all meat will have to be marked with how the animal was killed.
Animals slaughtered to be compliant with kosher and halal rules are often killed without being stunned first and have their throats slit.
At the moment, it is not compulsory to label meat as halal, so campaigners have argued that those who eat the products and care about animal welfare should be able to make the choice to buy meat killed in a more humane way.
The Bill is currently in the early stages and is the subject of a public consultation. But ministers have privately said they aim to bring in the law – and that it is supported by the majority of the British public.
Victoria Prentis, minister for farming, fisheries and food, said: ‘As a nation, we care enormously about animal welfare and increasingly about environmental standards.
‘Consumer information and labelling are part of the toolbox that we have when it comes to creating a better food system for people and the planet. It is something that we will be considering in detail with industry and stakeholders in the weeks and months ahead.’
The Conservative Animal Welfare Foundation (CAWF), which the Prime Minister’s wife Carrie Johnson has long been a patron of, has been calling for this policy change for years.
Lorraine Platt, chairman of CAWF and a friend of Mrs Johnson, welcomed the news: ‘With the exception of whole eggs, there are currently no legal requirements to label products with information on how the animal was reared and slaughtered.
‘But the fact is the British public do care about these conditions – over 80 per cent of UK consumers are in favour of food labelling.
‘Where labelling does currently exist, consumers have been able to identify higher welfare products and subsequently many farmers have been rewarded with increased demand. It is our hope that through extending labelling to all farmed produce, we can help the growth of higher welfare farms in the UK.’
MPs have also been calling for the change. Sir Roger Gale said: ‘Brexit has presented us with the opportunity to reform our farming systems.
‘Transparency with consumers must be at the heart of these reforms and implementing labelling for animal welfare represents a critical step forward. In doing so we can empower consumers to make informed decisions about which farming systems they want to support – or avoid supporting.
‘There is an overwhelming democratic mandate for such a move, with around eight in ten British consumers stating animal welfare is an important consideration for them when shopping.’
Under new laws, there will also be stricter animal welfare labelling requirements – with how the animal was reared and cared for prominently displayed on the packaging.
This is part of a raft of legislation under the Animal Welfare Bill including plans to ban boiling lobsters alive and outlawing the sale and import of ‘cruel’ animal products such as fur and foie gras.
Halal meat is worth around £2.6billion a year in the UK, according to the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB).
It accounts for around 20 per cent of all lamb and mutton sold, despite Muslims only comprising around 5 per cent of the population.
This is because ‘halal consumers eat more meat per capita than the general population’, says the AHDB.
About 42 per cent of all halal meat is not stunned before slaughter, according to the Food Standards Agency.
Slaughter of kosher livestock – the method is known as shechita – is a small percentage of all animals killed accounting for only 0.5 per cent of all cattle, 0.1 per cent of sheep, 0.3 per cent of chickens.
In the same month the U.S. Senate recognized August as National Catfish Month, Animal Equality, an international animal protection organization that has conducted hundreds of investigations into slaughterhouses and industrial farms, released disturbing footage of an undercover investigation at Simmons Farm Raised Catfish. Simmons, in Yazoo City, Mississippi, is one of the largest USDA-inspected catfish slaughterhouses in the U.S. and a supplier for Cracker Barrel and Captain D’s restaurant chains, as well as Kroger, Save A Lot, and Piggly Wiggly grocery stores.
Video footage revealed catfish piled on overcrowded conveyor belts slowly suffocating as workers take lengthy breaks, fish returning to consciousness after electrical stunning and beheaded while fully awake, and undersized, deformed, or parasite-scarred fish languishing in bins without water for hours before being ground alive and turned into feed for growing catfish. A turtle, bycatch from the netting process that removes the farmed fish from ponds, was tossed onto a conveyor belt loaded with severed fish heads and tried to escape being shredded alive.
The month-long investigation further revealed that these were not isolated incidents, according to Animal Equality’s Director of Investigations Sean Thomas, but that catfish, turtles, and other bycatch fish were routinely left to suffer out of water before being killed.
Pressing for Criminal Animal Cruelty Charges
Animal Equality presented evidence to the Yazoo County Sheriff’s Office and County Prosecutor alleging that Simmons had violated Mississippi law against animal cruelty, which does not exclude fish from legal consideration, according to Kathy Hessler, Director of the Animal Law Clinic at Lewis and Clark School. Hessler further stated in a memo that “scientific research indicates that fish and turtles can suffer and feel pain, and that animals who live in water, fish, in particular, suffer when taken out of water.” Thomas points out that catfish are “robust” fish and can survive for prolonged periods out of water, making their slow suffocation even more excruciating.
The slaughter process itself also causes pain and suffering. The catfish pass through an electrical stunning device intended to incapacitate them prior to decapitation. The fish are heaped on top of each other, and the stunning relies on the current being carried from fish to fish through their crowded bodies. However, videos of the slaughter line show catfish flopping, gasping, and moving their fins after stunning, and many appear to be fully conscious when beheaded and may even maintain consciousness for some time after decapitation.
In one haunting scene, the severed head of a catfish gasps slowly as the conveyor belt passes. Studies in other species of fish have shown that respiration and gasping can persist for up to eight hours after decapitation, and research in rats suggests that brain death does not occur for a least a minute after decapitation—raising questions about how much suffering these conscious catfish endure, and for how long. To that point, Thomas cites a 2020 study showing that catfish are resilient to electrical stunning and most immediately regained consciousness.
The organization has also reached out to companies that purchase catfish from Simmons, and Kroger has initiated an independent investigation into the allegations. Animal Equality also filed consumer complaints with Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee state attorneys general, stating that Simmons’s claim of “swiftly processing” catfish constitutes unfair or deceptive trade practices. In response, Simmons removed the claim from its website that the fish are processed “within 30 minutes.”
A Unique Opportunity to Demand Federal Oversight
While catfish are not excluded from local animal cruelty laws, they are excluded from the Humane Methods of Livestock Slaughter Act, originally passed in 1958 and the only federal legislation overseeing animal welfare during slaughter. This act requires the “proper treatment and humane handling” of all animals slaughtered in USDA-inspected facilities but omits chickens and fish. According to Hessler, “fish and aquatic animals have no legal protections during transportation to, or within, the slaughter process. Methods of slaughtering fish and other aquatic animals can be quite gruesome, painful to the animals involved, and take significant periods of time.” In 2021, over 193,000 tons of catfish (measured in live weight) have already passed through slaughterhouses, with no oversight for their humane handling or welfare.
However, catfish do hold the unusual status of being the only fish species inspected by the USDA, the federal organization responsible for enforcing the Humane Slaughter Act. This unique regulatory situation was implemented in 2016 to undercut foreign competitors to the U.S.’s home-grown catfish industry. Producers hoped that adding USDA certification to their products would give them an edge in the market. In the states of Mississippi, Alabama, and Arkansas, which collectively use 53,200 acres of water surface for catfish farming, catfish production is frequently marketed as “sustainable, traditional family farms” rather than as an industry bringing in significant sales, to the tune of 371 million dollars in 2020.
Despite catfish’s special status, USDA inspectors don’t assess live fish in slaughterhouses. As Thomas explains, “it’s just for the sanitary conditions under which the fish are packaged. So, if a piece of that fish fell on the floor they would inspect it, but they’re not going over to the other side and watching where the live animals come in and seeing if stunning is occurring or anything like that.” Thomas points out that this sends a potent message to the industry “where the USDA doesn’t recognize them [the catfish] as animals deserving of even the most basic protections.”
But, because USDA inspectors are already present in these facilities, Animal Equality sees this as an opportunity to press for federal oversight of catfish being slaughtered. And as Hessler states, the legislative framework is already present, and “these animals now vastly outnumber their mammal counterparts in the slaughter process, and scientific evidence has clearly shown that they can feel pain and suffer. It is therefore incumbent on us to protect them from unnecessary suffering during the slaughter process.”
To this end, Animal Equality is petitioning Congress to include fish in the Humane Slaughter Act. Thomas admits that this is only a first step in humane oversight for farmed fish, but it would be a crucial move toward recognizing their capacity for pain and suffering and their need for federal protections.
Simmons Farm Raised Catfish and The Catfish Institute could not be reached for comment.
Political leaders have accused Cop26 president Alok Sharma of “hypocrisy” after it emerged he has flown to at least 30 countries this year in the run-up to the climate summit. Sharma also attracted criticism for failing to self-isolate after visits to red-list countries, most recently Bolivia and Brazil, by relying on rules exempting ministers from quarantine.
“Get-out-of-jail free” card
The former secretary of state for business remains in Brazil where he’s meeting with state and business leaders in a bid to get them to commit to net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Liberal Democrat spokesperson Sarah Olney MP accused him of treating flexible rules for Crown servants as a “get-out-of-jail free” card.
As usual with this Government, it’s one rule for them and another for everybody else.
While Alok Sharma flies to red-list countries with abandon, hard-working families can hardly see loved ones or plan holidays as the Government changes travel rules on the hoof.
People are sick of the Government giving themselves get-out-of-jail free passes while the rest of us stick to the rules.
Alok Sharma, the government minister responsible for vital UN climate talks, is facing calls to self-isolate when he returns from Brazil, after he was hit with a double barrage of criticism for not quarantining when returning from “red-list” countries and for the environmental impact of his trips around the world.
The president of Cop26, which is being hosted in Glasgow in October and November, has visited 30 countries since February, including Brazil, where he has been this week, Indonesia and Kenya, it was reported.
Despite travelling to six countries on the government’s travel “red list” he was not required to isolate, according to the Daily Mail. The revelations came as the government added countries including Mexico to its red list, scuppering many people’s summer holiday plans.
The Mail also reported that Sharma had an indoor meeting – without masks – with Prince Charles days after returning from Bangladesh (a red list country) before going on a visit to a primary school.
With Sharma currently in Brazil, where the P1 and P2 variants emerged, he is now facing pressure to show he is not above the rules the public are subject to.
The Liberal Democrat health spokesperson, Munira Wilson, said: “It seems incredible that this government never seems to learn the lesson; it simply cannot be one rule for them and one rule for everyone else.
“Whether or not he should be going to red countries on his tour is up for debate – but whether he should be self-isolating when he returns is not.
“The Conservatives have made a terrible mess of international travel since March last year and it has cost many thousands of lives.”
Sharma has also been criticised for not leading by example when attempting to encourage others to reduce emissions. But Downing Street said face-to face talks were essential on occasion as Sharma tried to persuade major emitters to cut emissions and secure ambitious action ahead of the Cop26 summit.
The Welsh first minister, Mark Drakeford, told Sky News: “I’m afraid I do think it really undermines the effort that we know everybody has to make. We’ve all got used to having meetings with people in different parts of the world without needing to travel around the world to do it.
“And when we’re trying to persuade people to make the changes they need to make, we need to make, in our daily lives, transport, in our own homes, in the way that we think about the contribution we can make, we need the people at the very top to be demonstrating that they are doing that too, not thinking that that is for other people to carry that burden.”
David Lammy, the shadow justice secretary, said Sharma’s behaviour demonstrated that “it’s one rule for them and another rule for us” and “feels to not be setting the example”.
The Labour MP told the broadcaster: “Well, the optics are very clear – it’s one rule for them and another rule for us, whether it’s Dominic Cummings, whether it’s Matt Hancock, whether it’s Alok Sharma.
“Of course some international travel is required, but this amount of international travel when you’re climate change minister feels to me bizarre, and feels to not be setting the example.”
The Green party peer Jenny Jones, who has already accused the former business minister of being “excessive” and “hypocritical”, on Friday added that Sharma’s flights to France and Belgium “could hardly be faster than rail if you take into account the ability to work efficiently on the train”.
Most of Sharma’s trips were during the winter and spring months when international travel from the UK was mostly banned.
He visited India, Costa Rica, Qatar and UAE in March, while in April he travelled to South Korea and Japan before going to Bangladesh in June.
Not all of the 30 known trips were return flights to the UK, but travel to and from all the destinations would total 200,000 miles, or the equivalent to eight times around the Earth.
The delayed Cop26 conference will mark the first time since the 2015 Paris climate change conference that countries will set ambitious new targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
A No 10 spokesperson said: “As Cop president, Alok Sharma is leading climate negotiations with countries including major emitters to cut emissions and secure ambitious action ahead of the Cop26 summit.
“The majority of this work is done remotely but some travel to key countries for face-to-face talks is essential. He has secured ambitious action as a result of the discussions he has had.”
The spokesperson added: “Ministers conducting essential travel such as this are exempted from quarantine, as set out in the rules.”
Asked if Sharma would quarantine on his return from Brazil, where he is currently, the spokesperson said: “He will continue to comply with the rules as set out.”
Important Note – we have just tried to e mail and telephone the office of Alok Sharma, and everything seems to be closed down – we are even told the wrong number by phone; which we took from his official ‘contact’ area on his site !! – strange. Lets hope he is getting the message about all this. Thus, the action links given below may not now work at present. All I can say is keep trying now and again.
WAV Comment – Is this not like inviting the senior arsonist as a principal guest to the firefighters annual ball ?
What the hell are these people on ? – and they call themselves experts and politicians who are supposed to be dealing with the climate situation !
The United Nations’ COP26 climate summit—which will be the largest summit that the U.K. has ever hosted—is fast approaching, and we learned that there’s a plan to serve animal-derived food at the convention, even though animal agriculture is devastating for animals and the planet.
Vegan foods have a far smaller carbon footprint than their animal-derived counterparts. Speak out today to ensure that the COP26 climate summit sets a good example for the world to follow. See action below.
The 26th United Nations Conference of the Parties (COP26) Climate Change Conference is fast approaching. Urge the president of COP26, Alok Sharma, to set a meaningful example during this climate crisis by serving a fully vegan menu at the event.
Eating Vegan Is Better for the Environment The fishing, meat, dairy, and egg industries are not only cruel to animals but also catastrophic for the environment. For decades, the U.N. has identified animal agriculture as a leading cause of deforestation, pollution, ocean dead zones, habitat loss, species extinction, and the spread of zoonotic diseases.
Vegan foods have a far smaller carbon footprint than their animal-derived counterparts—even when comparing imported plant proteins to flesh from grass-fed, locally farmed animals—and a switch to vegan eating can reduce food-related carbon emissions by 73%. Quite simply, eating meat and dairy is part of what got us into this mess.
Animals can feel pain in the same way as humans. Just like us, they value their lives and don’t want to suffer.
In her natural environment, a hen will cluck to her chicks before they even hatch while sitting on the eggs in her nest. They peep back to her and to each other through their shells. In the ways that matter, humans and other animals are the same. There is no moral justification for exploiting animals for human purposes.
The COP26 Climate Summit Should Set an Example Given everything that we now know about the devastating impact of animal agriculture on the environment, serving meat, dairy, or eggs at a climate change summit would be like distributing cigarettes at a health convention.
Plant foods are the way forward, and a vegan menu would not only allow attendees to dine with a clear conscience but also set an important example for the world to follow.
Take action and tell Sharma to serve only vegan food at the event.
For many people, a visit to the circus is a welcome distraction from everyday life.
With the animals in the circus, on the other hand, it looks completely different.
They suffer from constant transport, inadequate and unsuitable husbandry conditions and from training that is based on violence and coercion.
Lifelong for your entertainment- Four Paws
Which animals are allowed in the circus?
In Germany in 2012, a total of more than 900 wild animals were kept in 141 of around 330 traveling circuses – camel-like animals are not even included here.
According to a recent EU-wide survey, Germany is the country with the most wildlife circuses, with an estimated 75 circus companies.
Nevertheless, there is so far no law in this country that fundamentally prohibits or even restricts the keeping of animals in the circus.
The Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) presented a draft for a ban in autumn 2020, but it falls far short of the mark, as only the acquisition of certain species of wild animals in traveling circuses is to be banned.
Bad housing conditions and inadequate controls
In particular, a circus can never meet the demands of wild animals on their natural habitat.
Violent dressage, tiny cage wagons and constant transports characterize the life of animals in the circus.
Constant changes of location and stressful transports
Up to 50 changes of location per year and the associated transport are associated with great stress and physical strain for the animals – especially for large mammals such as elephants, rhinos or giraffes.
Animal-friendly keeping of wild animals is impossible in traveling circuses because the basic needs of these animals cannot be met.
Mendip Farmers Hunt, Ston Easton, 11th Sep 2021
Thanks to local tip offs we were able to catch the Mendip Farmers Hunt out illegally hunting foxes and terrorising wildlife.
We hot-footed it off to Ston Easton (a linear village and civil parish in the English county of Somerset) to start our day.
Our supporter funded drone again proved to be worth it’s weight in gold,we were able to safely watch and record the vile blood thirsty hunt.
The hunt move off after the vicious attack on sabs.
With the drone, we watched them unboxing near a field of solar panels then separating themselves out around a maize field, lying in wait to flush fox cubs back into the maize to the jaws of the waiting, ill fed hounds.
These are the people who pass you in the street, stand next to you in a queue in Toolstation….horrible thought isn’t it?
Our two foot sabs caught up with Huntsman Hickmott on horseback with hounds et al on Thickthorne Lane. They turned into a field adjacent to Burnt House Farm where almost instantly the hounds picked up the scent of a fox and went into cry.
Our two foot sabs quickly made their way up the field on the public footpath following the terrible, overlapping, dreadful, screaming cacophony of the hounds now in fully cry.
Our two remaining sabs quickly made their way up the farm track, desperately spraying citronella both sides of the hedgerow and rating the hounds. The hounds began to hesitate and back off of the line but the hunts’ blood thirst was too strong.
Some of the gang of thug terriermen laughing post-attack as Hickmott departs with his hounds in the background.
Huntsman, Matthew Hickmott encouraged the hounds with voice calls, brrrs and fast horn blows and the remaining hounds poured through the hedgerow, across the dusty farm track and ran into the yard. The sound of encouragement from the field riders and hunt supporters was sickening to the core.
As these two sabs rounded the corner of the barn the dreadful sight of a fox being ripped apart alive by a pack of writhing hounds faced them. The hounds were packed in a chaotic pile all over the structure where the fox had taken cover. The screaming mass of hounds trampled over each other, climbing through, over and into the structure in the yard. On their right Tim Pullen and the approaching farmer. Ahead near the hounds Kevin Stevens.
Stevens, surprised at the swift appearance of our witnesses began to shout “GET OUT! THIS IS PRIVATE PROPERTY! GET OUT!” Then from behind a farm building on the left Matthew Hickmott walked forward on his horse his eyes on the still squirming, screaming hounds.
His satisfied expression changed instantly when he saw our sabs.
How Many CO2 Emissions Does the Meat Industry Produce? (Hint: Way More Than You Think)
What we eat impacts our planet – but how destructive is the meat industry?
The effects of the climate crisis are becoming more obvious and more severe. As a result, researchers are eager to dissect the climate breakdown, not only to better understand it, but to find ways to intervene.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a leading driver of the issue. In fact, CO2 makes up the largest portion of anthropogenic (human caused) greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). IPCC is the world’s leading authority on climate science.
For decades, it’s been widely accepted that transportation is a huge part of the carbon problem, and it is. But another field’s carbon footprint is also problematic – the meat industry. But how many CO2 emissions does animal agriculture actually produce? And is it enough that we must curb our eating habits?
What is carbon dioxide?
Carbon dioxide is an acidic colorless gas that occurs naturally in the Earth’s atmosphere. Plants absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen, making it integral to life on Earth.
CO2 is harmless in small amounts, but human activity causes levels of the gas to surge. Writing for Forbes, chemical engineer Robert Rapier highlighted that global carbon dioxide emissions have tripled in the last 55 years, sitting at 32.3 billion metric tons last year.
Why is carbon dioxide harmful?
CO2 is a greenhouse gas, meaning it creates a cover that traps heat in the Earth’s atmosphere. When concentrations are too high, the planet’s carbon cycle can’t process it efficiently enough. This causes global temperatures to increase, a phenomenon known as the greenhouse effect.
Global climate change has led to loss of sea ice, rising sea levels, and more frequent and severe heat waves and droughts, according to NASA. Climate breakdown is also linked to stronger hurricanes, flash flooding, increased wildfires, erosion in coastal areas, ocean acidification, and biodiversity loss, the government agency highlights.
“The effects of human-caused global warming are happening now, are irreversible on the timescale of people alive today, and will worsen in the decades to come,” NASA sums up.
How much carbon dioxide does meat produce?
Awareness of the transportation and fossil fuel industries’ impact on the environment has been growing for decades. But a sector that often slips under the radar is animal agriculture.
According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), global livestock production makes up 14.5 percent of all anthropogenic (human caused) emissions – 7.1 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent per year.
There is some debate surrounding the widely accepted FAO figure of 14.5 percent. Research published this year claims that this figure is ‘now out of date’. The article argues that the minimum estimate for animal agriculture’s emissions should be updated to 16.5 percent.
“Some will contest the importance of a few percentage points. Yet even the difference between 14.5 and 16.5 percent is the difference between animal agriculture being responsible for close to one in seven, or one in six of all emissions,” the article reads.
Which foods have the lowest carbon footprint?
In 2019, researchers published the most comprehensive analysis to date of farming’s environmental impact. Looking at emissions per 100 grams of protein, beef emits just under 50kg of CO2 equivalents, according to the analysis. Lamb and mutton emit just under 20kg, while farmed prawns and pig meat emit 18.19kg and 7.61kg respectively.
For context, grains emit 2.71kg of CO2 equivalents per 100g of protein and soybeans emit 1.98kg. And peas – a common ingredient in plant-based meat (like Beyond Burgers) – emit just 0.44kg.
Comparing emissions per kilogram of food (rather than per 100g of protein), plant-based sources are still significantly lower than animal-based ones.
Producing a kilogram of beef emits 60kg of CO2 equivalents, the researchers concluded, while pea production emits just 1kg per kilogram of food.
Lamb, poultry, and pork generate 20kg, 6kg, and 7kg of CO2 equivalents respectively. Contrastingly, root vegetables and apples both produce 0.4kg. Rice (4kg), tomatoes (1.4kg), nuts (0.3kg) and bananas (0.7kg), to name a few, also carry a smaller carbon footprint.
“A vegan diet is probably the single biggest way to reduce your impact on planet Earth, not just greenhouse gases, but global acidification, eutrophication, land use and water use,” Joseph Poore, who led the study, said in a statement. He added that the impact of ditching animal products is ‘far bigger’ than flying less or opting for an electric car.
In early March 2020, Rob Wallace, an evolutionary biologist who had been adrift after an unceremonious exit from the University of Minnesota, flew to New Orleans and then got on a bus to Jackson, Miss., where he was scheduled to speak at an event on health and racial injustice. Wallace, who turned 50 this summer, has been studying and writing about infectious diseases and their origins for half his life. For almost as long, he’s been warning that the practices of industrial agriculture would lead to a deadly pandemic on the scale of Covid-19—or worse. “A pandemic may now be all but inevitable,” he wrote of the H5N1 avian influenza virus in 2007. ”In what would be a catastrophic failure on the part of governments and health ministries worldwide, millions may die.”
Before his trip to Jackson, Wallace had been closely monitoring the outbreak of a novel virus in Wuhan. Though he’d been spooked by a news report that showed a delivery driver in China practicing extreme social distancing, he went ahead with the trip. As an underpaid academic, he needed the money, and as an American, he didn’t expect anything to happen to him. “I too had been infused with a peculiarly American moment, wherein financial desperation meets imperial exceptionalism,” he wrote.
When Wallace returned from his trip, he threw himself back into writing and research with such fervor that he managed to ignore a pounding headache. When the shortness of breath started, his teenage son yelled at him through the computer screen to see a doctor. After he filled out an online questionnaire, Wallace was diagnosed with Covid-19 over the phone.
He’d been infected with something he’d been warning about for years, and like so many around the country and the world, all he could do was to hope to keep breathing. “No test. No antiviral. No masks and no gloves provided. No community health practitioner stopping by to check on me,” Wallace wrote.
“You can intellectually understand something but still not assimilate the oncoming damage,” he told me later, as he recalled the “sour vindication” of having his worst fears come true. “So there’s an aspect of rage, and an arrival at an understanding.”
I met Wallace for coffee on an afternoon in late June. We sat on benches under the shade on the campus of a liberal arts college near his home in St. Paul, Minn. He was dressed in a pale-red short-sleeve shirt, dark jeans, and sneakers. He wore rectangular black-rimmed glasses and a Minnesota Twins baseball hat and had a five o’clock shadow
Wallace looks more like a dad on the way to his kid’s Little League game than a lab-coat-wearing scientist who used to consult with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the United Nations. That could be because he hasn’t had a job in academia for more than a decade, a circumstance he attributes to his decision to take the implications of his scholarship seriously.
That’s why the book Wallace published last October came with a provocative title—Dead Epidemiologists: On the Origins of Covid-19. Though there are many “brilliant, bright, amazing, and hardworking” epidemiologists whose work he cites, their impact is limited, Wallace said: “They are in the business of cleaning up the mess the system brought about, and that’s the extent to which they’re willing to go.” In his first essay on Covid, “Notes on a Novel Coronavirus,” published in January 2020, Wallace wrote that an epidemiologist is like a “stable boy with a shovel following around elephants at the circus.”
“As an epidemiologist, you’re supposed to want to put yourself out of business,” Wallace said. “Everyone has bills to pay; I understand that. But the extent to which your corruption might lead to a pathogen that could kill a billion people—that’s where my line is.” While he’s not the only Cassandra whose warnings of a pandemic like Covid-19 went unheeded, there are few as clear-eyed about where to direct the blame. “Agribusiness is at war with public health,” he wrote in the March 2020 essay “Covid-19 and the Circuits of Capital,” and if no serious action is taken, the interval before the next pandemic will be “far shorter…than the hundred-year lull since 1918.”
The animal welfare organization Animals ‘Angelspublished its report “100 Reasons to Revise Council Regulation EC 1/2005 on the Protection of Animals during Transport” this week.
The report combines Animals ‘Angels’ more than 20 years of experience in animal transport controls in the EU and worldwide with the results of scientific studies.
In “100 Reasons” Animals ‘Angels specifically uncovered the weaknesses of the EU Regulation (EC) No. 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport and made over “100 specific demands” on the revision of the regulation that is currently taking place.
The existing EU laws are unable to adequately protect the animals being transported.
The main flaw of the regulation: it does not impose an absolute limit on the transport time.
Their implementation fails on many levels. Despite positive approaches, it cannot curb the suffering of the animals on the transports.
In 22 chapters, Animals’ Angels criticized parts of the ordinance on topics such as transport duration, loading density, transportability, temperature limit values, official controls, the sanction system and much more.
In addition to scientific findings, the report draws on countless empirical examples and first-hand information from actors such as veterinary and police officers, transporters, animal owners and drivers.
Animals’ Angels calls for a detailed revision of Regulation (EC) No. 1/2005 with the aim of ensuring the best possible protection for the animals being transported.
But above all, Animals’ Angels is calling for a rethink.
EU Treaties recognize animals as sentient beings.
It is high time to do justice to this recognition.
The revised Regulation on the protection of animals during transport has to reflect a morally acceptable treatment of animals that respectfully considers their life and their suffering as sentient beings.
The public deserves the truth. For this reason, Animal Equality’s investigators take their cameras where the industry does not want you to see.
Animal Equality is committed to exposing the terrible fate of cows, calves, and steers exploited by both the meat industry and the–only seemingly less cruel–milk industry.
Our investigative team has captured images and footage from around the world showing the harsh living conditions, inherent suffering, and brutal abuse that farmed animals endure.
The evidence we have gathered over the years shows calves left outside to die in freezing temperatures in the US, calves beaten and force-fed in the UK, and pregnant cows slaughtered in Brazil.
In addition to documenting animal welfare issues, Animal Equality’s investigative team in Brazil has uncovered the devastating environmental impact of beef production in the Pantanal, one of the world’s most biodiverse areas.
Behind all of this suffering and destruction are industries that treat cows as money-making machines. It’s a system of endless suffering; calves separated from their mothers, females exploited for their milk, and males killed for their meat. That’s why the animal agriculture industry–relentless in its pursuit of profits–is so careful not to reveal what is happening behind closed doors.
The public deserves the truth. For this reason, Animal Equality’s investigators take their cameras where the industry does not want you to see: onto the trucks that transport cows across countries and continents, into the air above the Amazon Rainforest where forests are burned and cleared for cattle farming, and inside factory farms and slaughterhouses.
It will be cost not kindness that ends animal agriculture – but when will we achieve vegan meat price parity?
As much as we care for animals, it’s likely that ‘price parity’ between plant-based and animal-derived meats will see the quickest changes made to our food system
We love cheap food. When asked, we nearly always say we prefer to buy products that are ethical, sustainable, and healthy. But research shows time and again that what actually drives most of our food choices are cost, convenience, and taste.
Most of all, it’s the price.
Vegan meat price parity
That’s why the question of ‘price parity’ is a hot topic in plant-based food. With price, especially a cheap price, such a driving force in our food choices, the cost of plant-based meats really matters.
But lessons from other industries (such as electric cars) show that as technology develops and demand increases, price parity will arrive. But for plant-based meat products, when will that be? Can it really bring an end to the slaughter-based meat products that are currently cheaper and purchased more often?
‘Cheap food paradigm’
We love cheap food. As the UK government’s Behavioral Insights Team wrote in their report ‘A Menu For Change’, price (alongside convenience and taste) is the most important factor for people when shopping. This includes for healthier alternatives.
This isn’t our fault. Supermarkets, advertising, and government policies have spent 70 years creating what food expert Professor Tim Lang calls our ‘cheap food paradigm’.
This is especially in the UK and US. Along with Singapore, these are the three cheapest food markets in the world. In the UK, we spend only 8 percent of our household budget on food. This is the cheapest in Western Europe. Greeks spend 16 percent, Peruvians 26 percent, and Nigerians 59 percent.
This cheap food paradigm emerged during World War 2. Farmers were asked to grow more food, quickly and cheaply. They were the heroes feeding a country at war, and rebuilding afterward.
Farmers were doing what they were asked. They began using heavy chemicals and pesticides. They abandoned rotation farming and replaced them with monocultures. Food got increasingly cheap. There were supermarket price wars (continuing today). We lost touch with the true cost of food.
Last month’s Chatham House/UN report drove home the point: “Cheap food is driving destruction of the natural world.” The constant demand for economic growth has ‘sustained vicious circles’ of agricultural efficiency, coupled with ‘increased economic competition through the liberalization of trade’.
Cheap foods also tend to be more processed. In the UK, we eat the most ultra-processed foods in Europe, nearly 50 percent of our diets. Compare this to around 11 percent in Italy or 16 percent in Portugal. This massively increases the incidence of Type-2 diabetes and other serious health epidemics.
A price transformation
It’s obvious we need a food transformation. And that includes the price we pay for it.
What we should do is ask those who can afford more to pay more, while supporting those currently in food poverty to be able to buy better. But that’s another article!
Their analysis suggested that price parity between existing plant-based meats (for example, the Impossible Burger) and animal-derived meats would arrive sometime between 2021-23.
When this happened, they wrote, adoption of more plant-based eating “will tip and accelerate exponentially.”
It is why companies such as Impossible Foods keep slashing their prices to drive demand, knowing that ‘price parity’ will increase not only sales but awareness and acceptability.
Are we close to the tipping point?
At the moment, buying a vegan supermarket product twice a week would cost an additional £35 a year, a spokesperson for Insure4Sport, who produced research on cost comparisons, told The Times.
Right now, the early-adopter vegan and vegetarian or adventurous meat-eater will pay the premium price for the new plant-based alternatives. That won’t last.
The plant-based producers know they need to compete on price. Demand is growing. In 2019, demand for plant-based meats grew by 18 percent and 11 percent for the plant-based category overall, according to a study from The Good Food Institute.
More people than ever now support improved access to plant-based options. New research last week from The Vegan Society showed one in three (32 percent) believe the government should be promoting vegan and plant-based diets to address the current climate emergency.
Bill Gates recently urged people to buy plant-based products and drive down the price. “You can also send a signal to the market that people want zero-carbon alternatives and are willing to pay for them,” he told the BBC.
The Green Animal Welfare Forum and the RespekTiere association from Salburg (Austria) demonstrated against the unbearable animal rights situation in the Balkan state in front of the Serbian embassy in Vienna.
Animal rights and animal welfare are not part of the Serbian government’s agenda. The policy of the Balkan state is attested to inactivity in animal welfare.
Dogs, cats, etc. are being hawked and are condemned to a dreary, unlawful life that is at the mercy of any human arbitrariness. Like domestic animals, wild animals in private zoos, large and small, are condemned to all the agonies of pathetic animal husbandry.
“It’s great that Serbia wants to join the European Union. Now is the perfect opportunity to prove that this country is ready for real change, “explains Cosma Stöger, chairwoman and spokeswoman for the Green Animal Welfare Forum, a network organization of Green Vienna, on the sidelines of the demo.
She adds: “I was allowed to accompany ‘RespekTiere’ to Serbia last year to get a picture of the situation.
What I saw there was at times indescribably shocking.”
“RespekTiere” Association has now* written a letter to the Serbian government in the Serbian language that supporters can send to Belgrade!
Serbia, the II. – concrete cases! Letter to the President, NOW !!
Now, after several protests in front of the embassy or consulate of Serbia, let’s move on to the next stage of the campaign!
We have drawn up a friendly but specific letter which is to be addressed to the decisive points; to the embassies in our countries, to the President of Serbia, to the Prime Minister and to the veterinary authority! Please help everyone, from now on every vote counts!
Here is the letter to copy, please send it in the Serbian version!
Ladies and gentlemen! Have a wonderful, good day!
I would like to ask you to finally give animal welfare a higher priority in your country! The reward is certain: for people will know how to appreciate any such effort! Animal welfare is a major concern of the population – don’t look the other way and take action!
As a candidate for accession to the European Union, it must be high time to introduce the corresponding reforms. Take the appropriate steps and you can be sure of applause from all sides!
If you do not do it, the protests against Serbia’s accession to the EU will not subside. There is no excuse for cruelty to animals, you will surely agree! Stop Cruelty to Animals Now !!!
with best regards
Please put your letter in your own words or copy the template (wording as above):
Poštovane dame i gospodo! Želim Vam prelepi dan!
Ovom prilikom bih želela da Vas zamolim da pružite svoju pomoć, da bi zaštita životinja u Vašoj zemlji konačno dobila veći značaj. Nagrada za to je izvesna: drugi ljudi će znati da cene svaki takav trud! Zaštita životinja je važno pitanje za stanovništvo – nemojte skretati pogled, nego budite aktivni! Za državu koja je candidate za pristupanje Evropskoj uniji sada je krajnje vreme da se pokrenu odgovarajuće reforme. Napravite odgovarajuće korake i biće Vam osiguran aplauz sa svih strana! Ako to ne učinite, protesti protiv pristupanja Srbije Evropskoj uniji neće utihnuti. Ne postoji opravdanje za mučenje životinja – sigurno ćete se složiti s time! Zaustavite mučenje životinja – zaustavite ga odmah !!!
Sa srdačnim pozdravom
Please write today !!! ** The animals have no voice, they need us !!!
Serbian Embassy in Vienna: email@example.com
Serbian Embassy in Berlin: firstname.lastname@example.org
Serbian Embassy in Bern: email@example.com
President Serbia, Aleksandar Vucic:
Prime Minister Serbia, Ana Brnabić: firstname.lastname@example.org
Ministry of Veterinary Affairs (Uprava za veterinu, v.d. direktora: Emina Milakara) e-mail: email@example.com
P.S: (Incidentally, this “now *” means a while ago, exactly two years. But the letter remains as a good letter to those responsible and can be sent at any time. The same applies to the “today !!! **”)
And I mean…The street dogs in Serbia (perhaps with the weak exception of Belgrade) are among the poorest of the poor: the city does not take care of them or catch them, the residents complain about the strays, they are run over or mistreated in rows.
The status of four-legged friends in Serbia is rather low in terms of legislation.
The urban dog catchers, who continue to go about their “business” despite the Corona crisis, collect stray dogs and bring them to the urban institutions, a practical hell for animals.
All measures that endanger the life of the stray animals are actually illegal, because the stray problem was created by humans.
But there is also one thing to keep in mind: it’s not that people don’t like dogs, it’s that they are scared of them. In a country like Serbia, problems with dogs quickly become political problems. Fear is deliberately stoked in the population in order to justify government actions.
It is very likely that the catastrophic situation with the stray in Serbia will be interpreted as a reason to refuse the country entry into the EU.
For the Serbian government it is still a national disgrace, which became known thanks to the massive protests across Europe, and is considered a grave disgrace for a country that has been standing at the EU door for a long time and begging to come in.
Before the law one could achieve a victory and enforce a ban on the questionable “culinary delights” after previous animal cruelty unparalleled, but unfortunately this un-tradition is still practiced illegally.
We are talking about a custom from France in which protected songbirds – Ortolane or garden bunting – are mistreated and eaten.
The garden bunting is a songbird that overwinters in Africa and flies thousands of kilometers to breed with us. The slightly larger than sparrow-sized bird with the yellow throat, also called Ortolan, was never common in Germany – and is becoming increasingly rare.
One reason for this is its flight route.
On their strenuous journey around the Mediterranean Sea, the animals have to make a stopover in southern France to recover. That will doom for thousands of them.
Because the French love Ortolans. Not because they are beautiful to look at or because they sing adorable. But because they taste good.
The animals end up as a precious specialty in the palate of wealthy gourmets.
The well-heeled French upper class has these animals caught and fattened for 3 weeksin the dark so that the little birdies put on fat and mutate into so-called “fat bangers”.
They are then drowned in Armagnac so that the birds can take in plenty of it.
Then the birds are fried in fat in a special saucepan and put into their mouths whole by gourmets with skin and bones and chewed.
For about two years the group of ten chimpanzees at Magdeburg Zoo (Germany) has been housed exclusively in an indoor enclosure.
In August 2021, PETA Germany filed a criminal complaint against the zoo officials, because according to the requirements of the Federal Ministry of Agriculture for the keeping of mammals, the great apes must also have access to an outdoor enclosure.
According to media reports, the animals are permanently locked inside for security reasons, as two of the chimpanzees broke out of the outdoor enclosure in September 2019.
Safety deficiencies at the chimpanzee house, opened in 2014: monkeys suffer from animal welfare behavior
The zoo officials speak of “zoo-horticultural defects” in the planning of the enclosure, which means that the outdoor enclosure is not escape-proof. The 3.1 million expensive new chimpanzee house in Magdeburg was only opened in 2014.
In this new building, wooden palisades were erected in the outdoor area, in which small holes formed over the years.
The chimpanzees used this as an opportunity to climb up the stockade and jump out.
Since then, the animals have only been confined in the indoor enclosure in order to avoid further outbreaks and accidents.
The deficiencies are now to be remedied by another new building by 2023, which would again cost the city just under two million euros. The city council is expected to make a decision on the construction plans in September.
For the chimpanzees, this would mean at least two more years, during which the animals would have to endure under completely indisputable conditions. The city and zoo of Magdeburg have to find a solution for the welfare of the animals. Now!
We criticize the years of inactivity by the authorities and zoo managers and demand that a solution be found as soon as possible so that the chimpanzees at least don’t have to stay inside.
In addition, we are calling on the city politicians and the zoo to completely phase out the captivity of great apes in the Magdeburg zoo.
“It is a crime to imprison great apes. They are innocent prisoners who want to be free – attempts to break out like 2019 in Magdeburg are therefore not surprising.
It is absolutely unacceptable that no action has been taken here long ago and that the animals should remain incarcerated in the chimpanzee prison for at least another two years. Instead, the zoo should generally end chimpanzee husbandry. “ Dr. Yvonne Würz, PETA Germany
Great apes can never be kept appropriately in zoos
Appropriate keeping of great apes – our closest relatives in the animal kingdom – is not possible in captivity in zoos.
The needs of great apes are so complex that no zoo can offer them a species-appropriate habitat: In nature, chimpanzees live together in groups with a flexible social structure, which at times can comprise several dozen animals. They take up a living space that can be up to 65 square kilometers.
It is extremely psychologically stressful for great apes to be forced to “live” in captivity.
The decisive factor here is the captivity situation itself and not the specific housing conditions: Even structural changes such as enlarged enclosures cannot resolve the system-related inadequate housing and the associated animal suffering.
In zoos they therefore often develop significant behavioral disorders such as self-mutilation, compulsive rocking of the upper body and eating their own excrement.
In some cases, zoos give the animals psychotropic drugs so that they can endure the lifelong dreary captivity and their suffering is less noticeable to the visitors.
Contrary to what is often claimed, animals that have spent their lives in the zoo can no longer be released into the wild: In their prisons, they cannot learn important behaviors for survival in nature.
However, zoological institutions invest millions in taxpayers’ money in expensive and questionable breeding programs and costly construction projects.
With measures to preserve the natural habitat of the animals, on the other hand, more great apes could be sustainably protected than is ever possible in zoos.
And I mean...For a number of years, one scandal has followed another in the Magdeburg Zoo. Kai Perret, was director of the zoo in Magdeburg from 2003, and was released on January 30, 2020 with immediate effect.
Employees accuse him of endangering animal welfare.
The mayor of Magdeburg wanted to “take the zoo boss out of the line of fire” and released him.
The public prosecutor’s office is now dealing with the allegations.
The first trial came in 2008 when he had three healthy baby tigers killed after it was discovered that they were not purebred!
In his opinion, the tigers did not fit into the international breeding program because the father was not a pure-bred Siberian tiger.
Perret and two employees were charged.
The zoo also made negative headlines in 2019 when two giraffes died and an elephant was seriously injured.
Female giraffe Femke gave birth to a dead calf in May and died shortly afterwards as a result of childbirth.
Cow elephant Mwana was seriously injured in November 2019 when she trapped her trunk in a gate in the enclosure. Trying to break free, she tore off four inches of her trunk.
A zookeeper had not received this. Only when Mwana roared did he stop the gate.
The veterinary office rated the incident as an accident. A culpable act in terms of animal welfare was not recognized at that time.
The then zoo director Kai Perret said of the incident: “Accident! accidents also happen in nature” !!
In connection with this, a video emerged in which a keeper apparently beats an elephant.
Obviously cruelty to animals has long been a tradition at Magdeburg Zoo.
And because this cruelty to animals brings money into the cash register, no zoo director is interested, regardless of who, whether the chimpanzees remain imprisoned in closed rooms for no reason.
The science is in and experts agree that spices not only improve the flavour of our food but also enhance our health. This 2019 review stated:
“There is now ample evidence that spices and herbs possess antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antitumorigenic, anticarcinogenic, and glucose- and cholesterol-lowering activities as well as properties that affect cognition and mood.”
So let’s take a look at five of the most popular spices and their individual superpowers.
A golden spice with a myriad of health benefits, turmeric is a true example of medicinal food.
The superhero compound in turmeric is called curcumin – a very strong antioxidant with anti-inflammatory properties. Its antioxidant capacity means it goes around disabling those pesky free radicals that can damage your cells, DNA, enzymes, fatty acids and lead to disease. On top of being a powerful antioxidant, curcumin also stimulates your body’s own defences and antioxidant compounds, making them more effective.
Turmeric has been shown to improve inflammatory bowel conditions such as Crohn’s, IBS or ulcerative colitis, has cancer-inhibiting properties, can protect the heart from cholesterol and may even reduce the symptoms of depression and improve mood.
A big problem is that it’s hard to get enough curcumin from the powder or root alone – even if you use it liberally. But there is a smart solution – always combine it with black pepper. Black pepper contains piperine, which increases our absorption of curcumin by up to 2,000 per cent! Many turmeric supplements contain piperine but it’s good to follow this rule in the kitchen too.
The sweet spice of cinnamon is just as sweet for our health, thanks to the compound cinnamaldehyde.
As well as being a healthy simple swap for sugar to sweeten dishes, several studies suggest it may lower blood sugar levels in those with type 2 diabetes. Cinnamon may also be good for our heart by reducing cholesterol and triglyceride levels, which, according to , is “especially important for people with diabetes who are at greater risk for developing heart disease.”
Studies show that cinnamon can also help with inflammation, fend off free radicals that can damage your cells, and fight bacteria.
One of the most popular ingredients in the world, ginger has a million uses and is amazing for your health.
Ginger contains several potent biochemicals of which gingerols – one of the phenolic compounds – have the strongest effects. Gingerols are very strong antioxidants, protecting our tissues from free radical damage and they have antimicrobial properties, helping fight infection. Gingerols hinder the production of inflammatory molecules in the body, thus being a natural anti-inflammatory, calming angry tissues in our joints, bowels or airways.
Probably the best-known benefit of ginger is that it can help you combat nausea – whether due to stomach upset, motion sickness, pregnancy or even chemotherapy, ginger is the hero you need.
Lower down the digestive tract, it can relieve bloating, cramping and general discomfort. Most people react well to ginger and enjoy its benefits but if you take very high doses, it can cause heartburn. However, small doses have actually been shown to prevent acid reflux and heartburn so it’s all about finding the right balance.
Ginger is a favourite in the time of colds and flus but it can even help with asthma and allergic coughs because it helps to relax the airway muscles so they don’t overly contract, which helpsyou breathe easier and cough less.
It also works wonders for relieving arthritis and has been shown to have a neuroprotective effect – helping to protect our nerves against damage and prevent neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s.
Technically not a spice but garlic is too good to ignore. Garlic is a true powerhouse with many sulphur phytochemicals which are stronger than those in onions and offer a number of health benefits.
These phytochemicals act as antioxidants and help protect our bodies from free radicals, the nasty by-products of metabolism, including protecting your blood vessels. They are also anti-inflammatory and help to fight infection.
As well as protecting the walls of our veins and arteries, garlic’s sulphur compounds can do even more. Some of the phytochemicals slightly reduce blood clotting, which helps lower the risk of thrombosis – a blood clot blocking blood supply to a vital organ. If you’re already taking blood-thinning medication though, ask your GP about garlic to stay on the safe side!
Garlic can also moderately reduce the levels of triglycerides (fats) and cholesterol in the blood and helps lower blood pressure by relaxing blood vessel walls. If you’re worried about your heart, garlic is your friend!
Despite all these benefits, garlic is probably best known for its antibacterial properties and rightly so. It helps fight infection but has also been shown to be able to prevent infection by some bacteria and yeast.
Chilli peppers contain a compound called capsaicin. It’s what makes them spicy and it’s also what makes them super-spices. A 2015 review examined the health claims made by chilli pepper proponents and found that capsaicin “has intriguing potential for health promotion.”
Chilli peppers have been shown to have beneficial effects on metabolic health, insulin control and weight management, therefore reducing the risk of obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. However, people who already regularly eat spicy food may not experience the same weight loss benefits.
Some studies also suggest that capsaicin has an anti-cancer effect as it “has been shown to alter the expression of several genes involved in cancer cell survival, growth arrest, angiogenesis and metastasis.” Although there have unfortunately been many studies exploring the effects of capsaicin on cancer in animals, more human data is needed.
But it is for its pain relief properties that capsaicin is most commonly lauded. By reducing the number of pain signals sent to the brain, it eases discomfort from conditions such as arthritis and migraines. For this reason, it can be found in many over-the-counter topical pain-relief lotions.
These are just five of many spices that have amazing health benefits and can form part of a healthy plant-based diet. There are many more so mix it up because you know what they say, variety is the spice of life. And if you’re looking for recipes including all of these spices and more, be sure to check out Vegan Recipe Club for some inspiration.
Vegan Meat Featured On US Menus 1320% More Times Since Before COVID-19
The vegan and vegetarian meat market presents major opportunities for companies across the US
Anew market report demonstrates the ever-growing popularity of plant-based meat substitutes, which present a $14 billion opportunity, the report notes.
AI platform Tastewise put the report together. It stated that the retail market for plant-based foods already sits at $7 billion in the US alone.
Tastewise found that plant-based meat is appearing on US menus 1,320 percent more compared to before the emergence of COVID-19.
Further, 9.2 percent of restaurants in the US are now plating up vegan meat. Especially in states like California, New York, Florida, Maryland, Ohio, and Oregon. The latter has the highest percentage of restaurants offering meat-free meat.
Most people are reaching for plant-based food for health reasons, the report said.
But sustainability motivations are rapidly rising – increasing by 58 percent year on year. Eating plant-based meat due to climate crisis concerns, in particular, is also growing, by 83 percent year on year.
In contrast, health concerns have dropped 12 percent year on year.
“Responding to the devastating advance in climate change, many companies are working to reduce the significant climate footprint of the animal-farmed meat industry by innovating ways to move away from animal meat,” Tastewise CEO Alon Chen wrote in the report.
“This increase in resources devoted to plant-based meat products, combined with consumer demands for real, versatile solutions, results in a timely shift in the way we consume food,” he said. “We’re looking forward to a healthier, more sustainable world of food and beverage, where we all play a part.”
We do not have much info at present and have asked Goran for more. All we know is that it involves a walk for animals from Serbia to Brussels, Belgium, where formal letters of protest, demanding action in Serbia, will be handed in. This will probably be late in the year – awaiting response for confirmation.
Serbia is not an EU member state yet but is a ‘candidate country’ to join up.
This is all we have at present, but will publish more when we have further info.
The situation for strays has always been bad for in Serbia, and still is; here below is a video made by Goran which shows a Serbian street dog which HAS been sterilised by welfare group Vier Pfoten and has been fitted with a red ear tag to clearly show this. As the animal cannot reproduce more strays, it should be left alone. But you can clearly se in the video that the dog has been darted by ‘shinters’ (dogcatchers) who are wearing balaclava masks and are opposite the dog, waiting to collect it and take it away to be killed. As it is sterilised, and is clearly identified as such with the ear tag the shinters should leave animals such as this alone. They do not – they kill everything.
We also have a SAV Facebook page with many hundreds of members. It is a ‘talk shop’ for Serbian activists, as well as showing shelters and animals up for rehoming.
Geronimo postmortem results negative for TB, say owner’s lawyers
Defra denies claim and says culled animal has ‘TB-like lesions’ and awaits further investigations
A fresh row has broken out between the owner of Geronimo the alpaca and the government over the results of an initial postmortem examination of the culled animal.
Lawyers acting for Helen Macdonald have said the preliminary gross postmortem findings, reviewed by veterinary surgeons, are negative for visible lesions typical of bovine tuberculosis (TB).
However, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said a number of TB-like lesions were found in Geronimo and will be further investigated, adding the full postmortem results will not be concluded until the end of the year.
The dispute is the latest in a long line of battles between Macdonald and the government over the fate of Geronimo, who was put down last week.
The eight-year-old animal, who had tested positive twice for bovine TB and whose fate triggered heated debate across the country, was taken from his home at Shepherds Close Farm in south Gloucestershire on 31 August and later put down.
Lawyers acting for Macdonald, a veterinary nurse, said she had received a letter from the government’s legal department containing the preliminary findings of the postmortem. These findings were reviewed by veterinary surgeons.
In a statement, the lawyers said: “As reviewed by Dr Iain McGill and Dr Bob Broadbent, the preliminary gross postmortem findings are negative for visible lesions typical of bovine tuberculosis.
“For clarity there are no white or cream caseous, enlarged abscesses typical for bTB in alpacas whether in the lungs, bronchial, mediastinal or retropharyngeal lymph nodes.”
Macdonald has formally requested the full findings of the postmortem report and the results of further tests on tissue samples, blood, serum or plasma taken from Geronimo, and other additional test results.
Defra appeared to directly contradict the claims. The chief veterinary officer, Dr Christine Middlemiss, said: “We have completed the initial postmortem examination of Geronimo. A number of TB-like lesions were found and in line with standard practice, these are now undergoing further investigation.
“These tests include the developing of bacteriological cultures from tissue samples which usually takes several months – we would expect to complete the full postmortem and culture process by the end of the year.”
Geronimo was brought to England from New Zealand by Macdonald in August 2017 and tested positive for TB in the same month. He had been living in isolation ever since; he could see some of the other 80-odd alpacas on the farm but was separated from them by a fence.
In July 2018, a court order for the animal’s destruction was sought by the government and he was given a stay of execution, to be slaughtered by the end of August that year.
Macdonald mounted a legal challenge, pleading with the UK government to allow Geronimo to be retested.
A Zimbabwe park official has warned people against approaching elephants after a man was reportedly trampled to death whilst taking a photo with one of the animals.
The elephant involved in the incident was shot dead by rangers following the fatality, according to Zimbabwe news outlets.
Another person is said to be in hospital with injuries.
The attack took place outside the Zimbabwe city of Kwekwe, according to local newspaper The Chronicle.
The news outlet said the man, whose name has not been disclosed, reportedly died after being dragged and trampled by the animal.
He was said to have been “taking selfies” with it, Tinashe Farawo,a spokesman for the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Authority (Zimparks) said.
Farawo added, per The Chronicle:“Communities are urged to stay away from the animals and minimise close contact with the animals.
“It is very unfortunate that we have lost life unnecessarily as it could have been avoided.”
The spokesman said park officials are on the ground working with communities so that “no-one provokes the animals”,
Newsweek subscription offers
The spokesman also highlighted another incident in which an elephant was shot dead as it was seen approaching a residential area in Kwekwe.
The issue of human-elephant conflict in Zimbabwe is one that Farawo has spoken out about recently. The country has one of the largest elephant populations in the world, behind Botswana.
According to the African Wildlife Foundation, Zimparks reported 20 human deaths due to elephants between January and October 2019. These human deaths often result in elephants being killed by community members.
In March this year, the African forest elephant and African savanna elephant became listed as Critically Endangered and Endangered, respectively, under the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
Prior to that update both types had been treated as a single species under the vulnerable classification system.
However, Farawo maintains that Zimbabwe is overpopulated with elephants despite concerns about Africa’s elephant population more widely, he told Al Jazeera in June.
Officials in the region announced they were going to sell the rights to shoot as many as 500 elephants this year because of declining tourism revenue amid the COVID pandemic.
But Simiso Mlevu, a spokeswoman for the Center for Natural Resource Governance in Zimbabwe, told CNN the plan was “appalling” and feared the practice “escalates human-wildlife conflicts”.
This is in addition to reports that officials are considering a mass cull to control numbers, according to “Al Jazeera”.
Farawo told the outlet that other options, such as relocating elephants, were hampered by a lack of money from the country’s government.
And I mean…“It is very unfortunate that we lost lives unnecessarily as it could have been avoided.”
I mean that too, and by that I mean the elephant life.
If the elephant population is controlled by human hands through extermination, hunting and eviction from their habitat, then it is fair for an elephant to reduce the human population, the cause of his misery, in the same way.
Zimbabwe’s Wildlife Agency plans to sell the right to shoot 500 elephants this year.
Is it unfortunate too, Tinashe Farawo?
Apparently not, it is business with the live of others who have no rights.
The hunting rights for the elephants are between 10,000 and 70,000 US dollars, depending on the size of the animal. The hunting season starts in April and lasts until October when the rainy season begins.
Both Botswana and Zimbabwe get most of their hunting tourists from the United States, who pay for the privilege of taking their tusks home as trophies.
Hopefully we will read back soon about several “selfies” human-victims in the press until the end of October.