Day: July 7, 2021

Spain, Pamplona: the “Fiesta” is over for this year!

We have very good news:  ​​According to the regional government of Navarra, the bull run in Pamplona has to be canceled this year due to the corona pandemic.
We have already reported about it:

Photo courtesy of CNN

The Spanish newspaper “El Pais” announced the city’s decision as follows: “Sadness and silence in a new July 7 without closure of San Fermín. In 2022 the centenary of the bullring is commemorated and the mayor advocates celebrating “something special”.

“Something special” is the spectacle of San Fermin!
Because to inspire and enjoy in the 21st century how innocent and completely defenseless animals suffer and are tortured to death is a sign that humanity has barely developed, and that invalidates our humorous manifesto that we are “the coronation of creation”.

The second consecutive cancellation is seen as a major blow to Navarre’s economy, which is heavily reliant on hospitality and cheap tourism.
Hotel and restaurant operators are angry and sad because they are still struggling with the consequences of several corona lockdowns.

But we are very happy, although we know exactly that next year the “something special” will come again, and this massacre will mean blood and life for the animals again.
PETA has therefore organized a petition calling for the eternal abolition of this medieval spectacle in Spain.

San Fermín. Feste in Pamplona | auf deutsch

It says: “No More Deaths: Call For a Permanent End to Bullfights and Bull Runs”
We sign and share

My best regards to all, Venus

Canada: Poisons for wolves, bears and coyotes!

Every year, with the permission of the Government of Canada, thousands of wildlife die a painful, slow, and excruciating death from poisoning.

The Canadian government allows the deadly poisons strychnine, sodium cyanide, and sodium fluoracetate to be used to kill wolves, bears, and coyotes in the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan.

But every year the widespread and poorly regulated use of these poisons leads to the agonizing and painful death of not only these species, but also other animals including dogs.

No question: an unnecessarily long and painful death from poison is inhuman. There are far better ways of dealing with conflicts between animals and humans. If the killing of a wild animal is indeed inevitable, there would also be more humane solutions.

These poisons have no place in modern wildlife policy.

Killing wolves, coyotes and bears is not a sustainable solution to recurring conflicts between humans and these animals. And there is enough scientific evidence to end the ineffective, unnecessary, and cruel use of the above poisons.

Please help us and send an email on your behalf to the Canadian government (Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Minister for Environment and Climate Change Jonathan Wilkinson, Health Minister Patty Hajdu and Ambassador Stéphane Dion) using the prepared form.
The email can be found further down:

“I am writing to express my concern about the current policy allowing the use of using poison to kill wolves, bears and coyotes in Canada. There is sufficient scientific evidence indicating that the use of strychnine, Compound 1080 and sodium cyanide to kill large vertebrate predators is inhumane, and I would like to see an immediate end to the use of these poisons to kill wolves, bears and coyotes in Alberta and Canada.

The use of strychnine, currently approved for use in the province of Alberta, is in contravention of the guidelines of the Canadian Council on Animal Care, the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association, the American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Society of Mammalogists. The use of cyanide and compound 1080 have also been denounced by many of these bodies.

Strychnine, sodium cyanide and compound 1080 are inhumane and indiscriminate poisons, causing unnecessary pain and suffering and killing far more animals than those for which they are intended. These poisons have no place in modern wildlife conservation practices.

Wolves, grizzly bears and coyotes are apex predators that play a valuable ecosystem role. There is no scientific evidence to suggest that killing predators will assist in the recovery of prey populations, such as caribou, or to reduce human-wildlife conflicts. I urge your governments to invest in humane, non-lethal methods to manage conflicts between humans and wildlife”.

Text: ifaw


And I mean…There are some people, who really think that human civilisation is a blessing even for animals, not the least for wild animals, and that wilderness is the epitome of cruelty and violence.

When did one “violent” wild animal poison another?

Canada is a huge country and the wolves live mostly in very sparsely populated regions.
There are around 60,000 wolves in Canada, they are found all over the country and generally avoid the densely populated south.
Encounters between wolves and farm animals are correspondingly rare.

Nevertheless! The criminal deals of Canada with its wildlife has long been known: in British Columbia, in the far west of Canada, over 460 wolves were shot in the winter of 2019.

Polar bears are critically endangered around the world. There are only about 25,000 left! Main threats: climate change and commercial hunting!
The living space melts away from the animals’ paws, they fight for survival.
Yet hundreds of polar bears are shot down in Canada every year – quite legally!

=> Canada sells hunting licenses to international hunting tour operators, who in turn directly to trophy hunters – officially!

=> Canada is the only country in the world that allows trophy hunting for polar bears and makes money from it!
Trophy hunters from all over the world come to Canada every year and pay up to 40,000 dollars to shoot a polar bear!

=> In Canada up to 700 polar bears are shot by hunters every year, who then enjoy their “trophy”!

When will this government finally cease to be the unconditional servant of the hunters and farmers?

My best regards to all, Venus

UK: Boiling Lobsters Alive to be Banned Under New Government legislation – Also Includes Crabs, Octopuses, Squid and other invertebrates recognised as Sentient Beings Capable of Feeling Pain.

Boiling lobsters alive to be banned under new Government legislation

Cooking lobsters by boiling them alive could be banned under animal welfare plans being drawn up by Government ministers.

The Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill, currently making its way through the House of Lords, only covers animals with a backbone.

But the House is making amendments to the legislation which would mean crabs, lobsters, octopuses, squid and other invertebrates are recognised as sentient beings capable of feeling pain.

It would give them legal protections and stop fishmongers and chefs boiling crustaceans alive. Instead they would have be stunned or chilled before boiling which is believed to be a more humane way of cooking.

Shrink-wrapping live shellfish or posting them is also likely to be banned under the amendment, put forward by Baroness Hayman of Ullock.

Lobsters’ feelings loom large as British Parliament debates animal welfare bill


William Booth

July 4, 2021 at 9:28 p.m. UTC

LONDON — How does a lobster feel when it’s dropped into the boiling pot? The British Parliament wants to know.

Is an octopus sad, sometimes? Does the squid learn its lessons? The bee feel joy? The earthworm anxiety? The peers in the House of Lords are currently debating the matter.

These questions arise because Prime Minister Boris Johnson is trying to make good on his electoral pledge to enshrine into law the idea that animals are “sentient beings,” meaning the government would be obligated to not only safeguard creatures’ physical well-being but also take into account their feelings — of pleasure, pain and more.

The Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill is a potentially sweeping piece of legislation that could require all arms of government — not just the agriculture ministry — to consider animal sentience when forming policy and writing regulations. The implications could be moral and profound, supporters hope — or cumbersome and bureaucratic, critics say, with some seeing a power play by vegan activists and animal rights radicals.

The bill does appear to go further than European Union protections, once seen as the most comprehensive on Earth, and far beyond the relatively lax laws in the United States.

What is sentience? As Charles Darwin suggested 150 years ago, it may be the ability to feel “pleasure and pain, happiness and misery.”

In the House of Lords, the peers wondered aloud whether they were not touching on questions of the soul.

“The big picture has changed,” said Donald Broom, a Cambridge University authority on animal welfare.

“I think of the new idea as ‘one biology.’ That human animals and other animals are extraordinarily similar,” he said, “and that sentient animals are individuals who feel pain and suffering and all sorts of other things, and that should be taken into account.”

Broom said he was “not against eating or exploiting animals, but we should think about them as individuals.”

He said the scientific study of animal cognition, consciousness and sentience has galloped forward in recent years and that abilities once thought unique to humans have also been discovered in nonhuman animals, including tool use, language, sense of time and the future, deception, empathy and altruism.

The bill now being debated is unprecedented in scope because it seeks to protect wildlife as well as domesticated and companion animals such as cows and chickens, dogs and cats.

Positive News about time;

Regards Mark

Enjoy ‘Grumpy old Rick’

EU: Finally After Decades of Asking, The EU Consumer May Now Be Given More Detailed Information On Their Food Products – Production; Transportation; Slaughter Method Etc.


WAV Comment:  For decades, we (in past forms), along with other massive numbers of animal welfare groups across Europe, have been calling for this.  Are we now going to see the EU Commission finally wake up and listen to what people have been asking for years ?

One EU wide labelling system is drastically needed, rather than the current dozen different labelling schemes that include farm animal welfare criteria in at least six European countries.  Consumers need to know how their food is produced; is it free range or intensive ? (hopefully cages will go but we need this info earlier); stunned in a slaughterhouse or to religious standards (non stunning / ritual) only ? – we would like to see the country of origin and the country of slaughter; as this will no doubt involve the consumer if the animal involved has suffered live transportation. Labelling needs to apply to ALL products, and to an informative standard, rather than the yukspeak people have had so far. If people knew the facts; we think shoppers would amend their shop drastically. Is this why the EU has never moved on this issue ?

It is time for change, as it was time for change twenty years ago, but then, the EU considered itself above us / more important to bother with issues such as this.  People power is now demanding change, and they want it now; as we have seen with the cage systems; consumers want to know where their food comes from.  We regard this one standard labelling system as a positive move, but ALL aspects of animal welfare must be given / included to a nowdays much informed consumer. 

The days of buying products and not being given any useful information on them has passed, it is now time for change.  Bring it on !

Regards Mark

Close up food label on egg box from ASDA explaining UK Egg Codes. Food  packaging, nutrition labels, food labelling, British produce, food Stock  Photo - Alamy

BVA is campaigning for the introduction of mandatory method of production labelling of meat

Lidl trials new meat 'production method' labelling | Food and Drink  Technology

European Commission gives green light for a comprehensive labelling system displaying the well-being of animals over the whole animal food production cycle

7 July 2021

Today, the European Commission’s Subgroup on Animal Welfare Labelling published its final recommendations giving green light for an EU-wide label on animal welfare which will create greater transparency, better opportunities for farmers and a progression framework to improve animal welfare. In order for the labelling system to be effective, it is, however, important the European Commission commits to a mandatory Method Of Production + (MOP+) label which guarantees a harmonised uptake across food industries in the EU.

MOP+ is the most transparent, progressive and fair labelling method. It gives clear and transparent messaging to consumers about how animals are reared as well as allowing for a benchmarking platform amongst existing labels. It also allows for a progression on animal welfare standards by stimulating improvements on animal welfare and providing a full range of products with different levels of welfare to the consumers. On top of that, it provides farmers with a transparent way of demonstrating their achievements on animal welfare, allowing for a fair compensation of their efforts.

The conclusions foresee the labelling to start off as voluntary and state that the possibility of becoming mandatory should be evaluated at a later stage. They also state that a voluntary label represents a great risk to the impact of the label, since not only could the uptake be low but it would also be likely to only be adopted by producers already committed to higher animal welfare standards. The impact of a voluntary label on animal welfare would therefore be lower than of a mandatory label. This would not serve the purpose of providing full transparency to consumers and a fair level playing field for farmers and certainly would not serve the purpose of improving animal welfare across the EU.

Further to that, the recommendations do not mention the coverage of the label in terms of range of production systems. It states animal welfare labels should cover as many individuals as possible. Eurogroup for Animals asks for the scope to be from minimum EU standards to premium standards, also clearly indicating products that do not comply with the minimum EU animal welfare standards, to guarantee the label’s effectiveness. 

Other positive key points of the recommendations:

  • EU animal welfare label should also protect the use of terms and claims indicating a better welfare for animals.
  • The scope should include not only the rearing but also the slaughter and transport phase. Standards used in animals that are directly involved in the production as sows or cleaner fish should also be included in the label.
  • Besides fresh products, processed products or products used in food services should also be covered.
  • The EU label should help harmonise and take existing labels into consideration, helping the consumer gain more clarity on those. 
  • Active participation of all stakeholders is necessary in the creation of an EU wide animal welfare related label and its development should be monitored and evaluated.
  • Animal welfare is an important part of sustainability, but in case of labelling integration, animal welfare can never be diluted.

Currently, there are a dozen different labelling schemes that include farm animal welfare criteria in at least six European countries, risking the Single Market to becoming fragmented.The European Commission aims to counter this trend and is expected to put forward a proposal for a harmonised food labelling scheme in the context of its Farm to Fork strategy (F2F). At the end of last year, the Council of the European Union on Agriculture and Fisheries also adopted Council Conclusions which had called for an EU-wide animal welfare label aimed at improving animal welfare for as many food producing animals as possible. 


Animal Welfare and Food Labelling1.84 MB



ENGA pushes for non-GMO food labelling across Europe



Country-of-Origin Labelling, Food Traceability Drivers and Food Fraud:  Lessons from Consumers' Preferences and Perceptions | European Journal of  Risk Regulation | Cambridge Core
For Shoppers - Global Animal Partnership Animal Welfare Food Labeling

South Korea: KARA rescues 33 dogs from a dog slaughterhouse in Goyang Yongdu-dong.

KARA rescues 33 dogs from a dog slaughterhouse in Goyang Yongdu-dong

Early yesterday morning, Korea Animal Rights Advocates (KARA) raided the slaughterhouse in Yongdu-dong, Goyang City, and, with the help of the Goyang Animal Protection Department, officially took ownership of a total of 33 dogs at that site.🙏

While some of the dogs at the slaughterhouse were extremely afraid of people, others were so happy to see their rescuers it is clear they were once pets. When we leashed the dogs, there were some that walked right next to people. Pitbull, who appeared to have been tied up to protect the slaughterhouse, was also friendly to activists.🐕

Activists who stayed at the front of the slaughterhouse throughout the early morning immediately rescued all of the dogs as soon as abandonment of ownership was decided.

Inside the slaughterhouse, a dog was lying with an illegal electric skewer in his mouth. He was immediately taken to a nearby animal hospital and given CPR, but because of the electric shock the poor dog’s heart had stopped and he couldn’t be revived.😭

The slaughterhouse in Yongdu-dong, Goyang, had been feeding dogs the boiled organs of unknown animals. In the front yard of the slaughterhouse, a plastic bag filled with hair from the bodies of dead dogs was found. Inside the slaughterhouse, many different leashes from dogs that had been caught gave rescuers an idea of how many dogs died there in pain.😢

KARA will file a formal complaint against the animal abuser in Yongdu-dong, Goyang, on charges of beating dogs with golf clubs; slaughtering dogs brought to him by individuals; feeding livestock waste to animals; and slaughtering dogs with illegal electric iron skewers. 

The journey with the 33 dogs rescued from the slaughterhouse has just begun. It may not be easy to domestically adopt out many of those dogs, especially the large ones. There are also dogs who appear to be very unhealthy, and the time and costs to treat these dogs and restore them to health so they may be adopted will be significant.

KARA recently rescued 10 young puppies from a dog farm in Namyangiu, so the 33 dogs just rescued will need to be placed elsewhere due to the lack of a protected space at the KARA’s The Born Center.

💙 Your love and support is desperately needed to help protect and care for the dogs rescued from the slaughterhouse and give them the opportunity for a new chance at life. Won’t you please help KARA care for these poor animals?💗🙏

Learn more and updates at:

KARA rescues 33 dogs from a dog slaughterhouse in Goyang Yongdu-dong – Stop the Dog and Cat Consumption in S. Korea! (

Donate to KARA:

동물권행동 카라 (


Past Newsletters:

Newsletters – Stop the Dog and Cat Consumption in S. Korea! (


Read this article, combined with more actions to take at:!_&utm_medium=email

Regards to all