|
|
AR-NEWS Digest 666
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) FWD: National organic standards (long)
by Andrew Gach
2) HUMANE - "Compassion Is The Fashion"
by Vegetarian Resource Center
3) [UK] Sergeant's sandwiches tame dogs
by David J Knowles
4) [UK] Firms facing stiffer fines for pollution
by David J Knowles
5) [FR] Hunters' march marred by drunkenness
by David J Knowles
6) [IT] EU adviser on BSE arrested in Italian corruption inquiry
by David J Knowles
7) Re: Circus abuse in UK
by David J Knowles
8) (US) Two Wolves Run Wild On Island
by "Cari Gehl"
9) Predator Friendly Beef?
by "Cari Gehl"
10) Symposium: CANADIAN PERSPECTIVES ON WILD ANIMALS
by "Cari Gehl"
11) A Life Is a Life
by SDURBIN@VM.TULSA.CC.OK.US
12) Boston BRAVE- Meatout walk
by HenQuest@aol.com
13) (US-NJ) MAN REGRETS THROWING CARCASS AT ACTIVISTS-Star Ledger 2-13-98
by "Jeffrey A. LaPadula"
14) (US-NJ) Week Long Protest in NJ ends.á
by "Jeffrey A. LaPadula"
15) Overview of week long demo in New Jersey from ADL-NJ.
by "Jeffrey A. LaPadula"
16) The Oregonian opposes changing state livestock law
by "Bob Schlesinger"
17) e-mail/letters needed
by "bhgazette"
18) N.AMERICAN A.L.F. PRESS OFFICE
by " North American A.L.F. Supporters Group"
19) This Dog Would Rather Nurse a Cat Than Chase It
by SDURBIN@VM.TULSA.CC.OK.US
20) LA Times still giving attention to Nadas
by "Eric Mindel @ LCA"
21) More Vilas Stuff
by paulbog@jefnet.com (Rick Bogle)
22) FW: circus animal info requested
by Bob Chorush
23) (NZ)Child's beloved pet rabbit dies of RHD
by bunny
24) (US) Judge to hear arguments for dismissal
by allen schubert
25) (US) Attorneys debate judge's actions
by allen schubert
26) USA-Los Angeles- Political Rally
by "David Meyer"
27) [US] "'63 UW-zoo lease brings city into monkey debate"
by Steve Barney
28) Urgent!á Exotic Animals May Die
by SMatthes@aol.com
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 1998 21:03:39 -0800
From: Andrew Gach
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: FWD: National organic standards (long)
Message-ID: <34E7C8AB.28CB@worldnet.att.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
FOOD BYTES
News & Analysis on Genetic Engineering & Factory Farming
Issue #7 (February 15, 1998)
by: Ronnie Cummins, Pure Food Campaign USA
email: alliance@mr.net
http://www.purefood.org
____________________________________________________________________
SPECIAL ISSUE:
*NATIONAL ORGANIC STANDARDS:á THE BATTLE WE CAN'T AFFORD TO LOSE
____________________________________________________________________
U.S. ORGANIC STANDARDS: HOW TO WIN THE BATTLE
Note: Please post and circulate this article as widely as possible.
Over the past 60 days the U.S. Department of Agriculture's proposed
rules to degrade organic food standards and outlaw eco-labels have come
under increasing attack from consumers, farmers, producers, and natural
food retailers. According to Washington sources, USDA bureaucrats have
been "surprised and shocked" by the nationwide and now global backlash.
In a strategic move to try to contain the crisis the USDA announced on
Feb. 10 the resignation of Michael Hankin, Acting Program Manager of the
National Organic Program, and his replacement by Keith Jones, an
official considered more sympathetic to natural food industry interests.
In a nationally syndicated story several days earlier, the Associated
Press reported on the flood of protest letters received by the USDA, and
highlighted a statement by George Siemon, leader of the nation's largest
organic farmers co-op, Organic Valley, based in LaFarge, Wisconsin:
"We as organic farmers and our customers will not sit idly back and have
(the rules) force-fed to us by corporate agribusiness lobbyists and
bureaucrats in Washington. The
farmers of our co-op will not lower our standards."
On Feb. 12, the USDA held the first of four so-called public hearings on
the proposed rules in Austin, Texas. Held in an obscure location with
very
little advance publicity, the hearing nonetheless drew 150 pro-organic
protestors, including members of Greenpeace and the Sierra Club, who
rallied outside the building and then moved into the meeting room to
offer
criticisms one-by-one to a panel of rather reticent USDA officials,
accompanied by members of the National Organic Standards Board.
Apparently
the biotech and agribusiness corporations are so confident that the
USDA's
final rules, expected to be issued later this year, will reflect their
interests, that they didn't even bother to send a single representative
to
the meeting.
Following the meeting Eileen Stommes, Deputy Administrator of the USDA,
the
official in charge of receiving public comments on the issue, confirmed
the
Clinton administration's "smokescreen strategy" for implementing their
final rules on organic standards. This strategy basically involves
utilizing three of the most controversial issues (genetic engineering,
sewage sludge, and food irradiation)--which the USDA will temporarily
postpone putting into the first set of final rules--as a lightening rod
and
diversion to distract and divide the opposition. This "big three"
diversion
is intended to coopt grassroots anger, create the false impression the
USDA
is willing to compromise, allow opportunist activist organizations to
"claim victory," and to lull the natural food industry and consumers
into
swallowing the scores of "poison pills" embedded in the rest of the
proposed rules. As the Austin, Texas meeting ended, Stommes was
overheard
telling a rather incredulous member of the NOSB that "If we just
postpone
or get rid of these three big issues, everything else will be O.K.,
right?"
Further public hearings and protests are scheduled for Ames, Iowa (Feb.
18); Seattle, Washington (Feb. 26); and New Brunswick, New Jersey (March
5).
International criticism of the USDA has also begun to develop. In a Jan.
5
press release, Linda Bullard, Vice-President of IFOAM, the International
Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements, representing 570 member
organizations in more than 100 countries, denounced the U.S.
government's
rules. The rules, according to Bullard, "if allowed to stand will drive
a
wedge through the heart of the U.S. organic movement and effectively
destroy the hard-won consumer confidence in organics... In criminalizing
the use of private organic seals based on adherence to higher organic
standards than its own, the USDA has lost sight of its proper role. It
is
indeed ironic that the United States, the home of free enterprise, is
the
only country in the world which proposes to restrict the enterprise of
private certification bodies in this way. IFOAM is convinced that a
dynamic
development of organics rests on maintaining this right, in conjunction
with a provision for delegation of accreditation to private programs
which
fulfill international accreditation norms..."
National Organic Standards Board member and organic farmer Fred
Kirschenmann recently pointed out in Rachel's Environment & Health
Weekly
(#583 Jan. 29, 1998) that there is, however, at least one sector in
America
that loves the new proposed organic standards:
"Who would benefit from this rule? It would be a boon for the
conventional
agribusiness food system which has, for years, sought to eliminate any
differentiation in the marketplace that threatens their market share.
This
rule would simultaneously erase most of the major distinctions between
organic and conventional food, make it illegal to use any other
eco-labels,
and prevent private certifiers from certifying to any standard other
than
the one proposed by the USDA. One could hardly imagine a single piece of
regulation that could bring more joy and comfort to the agribusiness
food
industry."
In an interview with the St. Louis Post Dispatch on Jan. 15, A
spokeswoman
for Monsanto, Lisa Drake, made it clear that Monsanto expects the
Clinton
administration to allow genetically engineered crops, such as their
Bt-spliced potatoes and cotton, to be allowed, at least eventually,
under
the organic label. Monsanto's major concern is that there be no overt
prohibition on genetically engineered inputs in the first set of final
rules. According to Drake "We think biotechnology fits quite well (under
the organic label)." Giant industry trade associations--whose members
are
heavy financial contributors to the Clinton-Gore administration--such as
the Biotechnology Industry Organization, the Grocery Manufacturers of
America, and the National Food Processors Association, have also lobbied
heavily for implementation of the controversial USDA proposals.
But besides the gene engineers and corporate agribusiness, it is
generally
agreed that these standards are totally unacceptable, that the hundreds
of
pages of proposed regulations issued on Dec. 16, 1997 are fatally
flawed,
cannot be fixed, and need to be withdrawn (See Food Bytes #6 Jan. 20,
1998). Everyone also seems to agree that the battle over these rules is
a
crucial battle, the outcome of which will decide, not only if the word
"organic" will totally lose its meaning and integrity in the United
States,
but, in the larger global picture, will determine to a significant
extent
if any alternatives to the globalized industrialization of agriculture
will
be allowed to legally exist, period.
If the Clinton administration succeeds in outlawing real organic
standards
and forcing mis-labeled agribusiness style "organic" food down the
throats
of American consumers, a global "race to the bottom" will surely follow.
With literally no practical marketplace alternative to genetically
engineered, chemically contaminated, and factory farmed food, consumers
will almost inevitably become fatalistic and immobilized--with grave
consequences for public health, biodiversity, small farmers, and
economic
sustainability.
SOS: A Warning from the Save Organic Standards Movement
As reported in Food Bytes #6 (Jan. 20, 1998) most public interest
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the U.S. have supposedly
already
gone on record as supporting a complete withdrawal of the USDA's
proposed
rules. On Jan. 15-16 the National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture
(NCSA), composed of 38 leading NGOs concerned about the rules, met in a
closed-door session in Washington where consensus was reached that the
rules needed to be completely withdrawn; that if necessary the battle
needed to be extended to Congress to kill the rules--if the USDA refused
to
withdraw them; and that, as a final fall-back plan, an alternative
non-governmental system of certification and labeling needed to be
developed as soon as possible.
Unfortunately Food Bytes has learned this week that some NCSA groups and
a
number of influential "inside the Beltway" players are apparently
starting
to back-off from the demand for complete withdrawal. These "backsliders"
are arguing that the USDA has changed their attitude, as evidenced by
more
conciliatory rhetoric coming from USDA Secretary Glickman and the
appointment of the new National Organic Program Manager, Keith Jones.
The
"backsliders" argue further that the final rules will not incorporate
the
"big three" (biotech, sludge, and irradiation) and will generally be
rules
that we "can live with."á Finally they argue that, if worse comes to
worst,
and the USDA issues unacceptable final regulations, liberal Democrats,
such
as Senator Patrick Leahy from Vermont, will ride in on a white horse and
make everything O.K.
Without naming the names of these "backsliders" for the moment, Food
Bytes
and the Save Organic Standards movement urges every consumer, organic
farmer, and retailer in the country to be vigilant. Make certain that no
"backroom" deals or "inside the Beltway" compromises are made in your
name.
The USDA rules must be withdrawn, or else killed, period. Every NGO,
natural food business, certification organization, and organic farmers
group in the country needs to hear from the grassroots. Each of these
groups, if they haven't altready done so, needs to state their position
on
withdrawal in clear and unequivocal terms. And of course it is equally
important for IFOAM and other international NGOs such as Greenpeace to
clearly state their position on withdrawal as well.
With public disgust and anger over the scores of irregularities,
illegalities, and downright totalitarianism contained in the USDA's
standards, the strategic political question becomes: How can consumers
and
the global organic food movement force the USDA to completely withdraw
these rules? How can public pressure be mobilized to force Agriculture
Secretary Glickman and the White House to resubmit new rules which
reflect
traditional organic practices and values--rules which strictly adhere to
the recommendations of the National Organics Standards Board and the
internationally recognized standards of IFOAM? The obvious answer to
this
question is for concerned people all over the world to continue doing
what
they're already doing--to literally bury the Clinton administration in a
mountain of protest letters, emails, and faxes during the official
comment
period which ends April 30.
But what if, in spite of receiving an anticipated record-breaking
50,000-100,000 official public comment letters, the USDA still refuses
to
withdraw the rules?
The Clinton administration and the USDA's public relations operatives
are
masters at manipulating public opinion and the media. We should
anticipate
that the USDA will very likely postpone the implementation of some of
the
most outrageous of its proposals so as to divide and conquer its
consumer
and natural food industry critics. It will likely put off for the moment
completely giving the green light to genetically engineered foods (while
nonetheless leaving the door open to the gene engineers by giving the
O.K.
to gene-altered enzymes such as chymosin, a cheese rennet, and Bt
insecticide sprays produced through genetic manipulation); toxic sludge,
and food irradiation. But the final rules issued by the USDA in 1998
will
undoubtedly allow all the other things that agribusiness needs to stage
a
hostile takeover of the natural food industry: intensive confinement of
farm animals; factory farm-style production methods; toxic inerts in
pesticides; use of antibiotics; use of non-organic feed; use of rendered
animal protein (animal cannibalism); use of an expanded list of
synthetic
ingredients; elimination of small certifiers, farmers, and processors,
and
so on.
This type of compromise will pose a major threat to the resolve of our
growing pro-organic coalition. What if some of the less reputable
private
certification groups, members of the Organic Trade Association, or giant
companies like Whole Foods, Heinz (Nature's Best baby foods), and
Cascadian
Farm fall into the USDA's trap? What if some of the more naive and
trusting
in our ranks proclaim that minor USDA modifications are sufficient, that
the USDA has begun to operate in good faith. What if others panic or
lose
hope and argue that we don't have any other practical choice other than
to
accept a set of compromised rules? What if even the National Organic
Standards Board fails to achieve unanimous consensus at its upcoming
meeting in mid-March at the Natural Products Expo in California to call
for
a total withdrawal of the proposed rules?
No matter what other minor compromises the Clinton administration are
willing to make, we can be certain that the USDA's forthcoming final
rules--unless they are withdrawn or killed--will contain the
sugar-coated
"poison pills" that agribusiness requires and fully expects the American
natural food industry to swallow. Poison pill number one, the final
rules
will make it a crime for private organic certifiers to uphold standards
stricter than the USDA's. Poison pill number two, the final rules will
be
worded so as to weaken and ultimately take away the statutory power of
the
NOSB to decide what is synthetic and what is natural, what's allowed and
what's prohibited under the organic label. Although these two pills
alone
will constitute a fatal dose, additional poison pills will allow
genetically engineered inputs to be decided on a "case-by-case" basis,
will
allow intensive animal confinement, factory farming, non-organic feed,
antibiotics, animal cannibalism, additional synthetic and toxic
chemicals,
etc. Within 18 months from today we can expect to see bogus, relatively
inexpensive, organic food bearing the USDA label flooding the nation's
supermarkets. Small and medium-sized farmers, processors, and retailers
who
refuse to lower their standards will face unfair economic competition.
Many
if not most can gradually be expected to be driven out of business by
the
new green giants of Organic Inc.
Visit the Pure Food Campaign's web site and its links for the full
litany
of horrors contained in the USDA's proposed rules:
http://www.purefood.org
HOW TO WIN THE ORGANIC BATTLE: A THREE TRACK STRATEGY
But enough of this negative thinking. Campaigners must keep in mind that
99% of natural food consumers want strict organic standards such as
those
recommended by the NOSB and IFOAM. In addition nearly all the small and
medium-sized farmers, processors, and retailers are on our side. In
addition the entire global organic movement are our allies. We can win
this
battle and defeat the USDA if we move beyond naivete and illusions, if
we
formulate a clear, bold grassroots plan of action and stick to it. The
following represents the current "battle plan" of the SOS (Save Organic
Standards) campaign as well as the plan endorsed by leading activists in
the Organic Watch coalition. This multi-faceted plan has arisen out of
numerous conversations with organic farmers, food co-ops, natural food
stores, attorneys, organic certifiers, consumers, lobbyists, and public
interest campaigners across the U.S. It has the support of international
campaigners as well.
Strategy Track One: Force the USDA to Withdraw the Rules
The key tactic here is to keep flooding the USDA with thousands of
protest
letters every week while simultaneously building up a new, streamlined,
and
efficient grassroots activist network that can be mobilized for action
on
the other strategy tracks (grassroots lobbying of Congress and state
legislators and development of our own non-governmental national organic
rules and eco-label) as well.á The bottom line is that there are several
million people in the U.S. who buy or consume organic food every week.
This
is the primary group that we must mobilize. These consumers purchase or
consume their organic food at three or four thousand different locations
across the U.S.: farmers markets, food co-ops, natural food markets,
community restaurants, Community Supported Agriculture networks, organic
bakeries, etc. These organic consumers also tend to patronize holistic
medical practitioners and green or eco-label stores. It's important that
we
get our views aired in the local and national media (both alternative
and
mainstream), but it's even more important that we inform and mobilize
these
several million organic consumers at the point of purchase, where they
shop
and eat.
The SOS campaign now has in-store displays (with ballot boxes for
activist-inclined consumers to sign-up as volunteers in the campaign) or
literature at over 600 locations across the country. This is a good
beginning, but it is just a beginning. Every retail outlet or restaurant
in
America that sells or serves organic food needs to be approached and
recruited into the campaign. This is one of the primary tasks for local
activists. Any store that wants an SOS display can call the SOS campaign
office in Minnesota at 218-226-4164á and leave a message, or send an
email
to alliance@mr.net and place their order. SOS also needs volunteer city
or
town coordinators. Last but not least the SOS campaign needs money--lots
of
it--to fight and win this battle.
In addition to organic food consumers, we estimate there are
approximately
100,000 farmers and workers who are employed in the U.S. organic
industry.
These organic industry workers must be recruited and mobilized as well.
Those retail stores with mobilized workers are the ones that can
mobilize
their customers most effectively. Natural food industry workers need to
talk to consumers every day as well as write protest letters to the
USDA.
Hopefully these workers can write more elaborate letters than the
general
consumer, including page numbers and section numbers of the proposed
rules
under discussion (See the Pure Food website for the Special Supplement
to
Food Bytes #6, prepared by attorneys for Organic Watch). While irate
consumers bury the USDA with thousands of general protest letters,
industry
workers can write even more substantive letters which will provide
valuable
evidence and ammunition for future Congressional hearings or Federal
court
battles.
Strategy Track Two: Get the U.S. Congress to Hold Hearings and Kill the
Proposed Rules
The key tactic here is to get thousands of constituents, registered
voters,
to contact their Congressional Representative and U.S. Senators. Each
local
district office of Representatives and Senators need to get hundreds of
letters (including copies of your letters to the USDA), faxes, phone
calls,
and emails from concerned voters in their district. Comment letters from
constituents can be downloaded directly from the USDA web site
(www.
ams.usda.gov/nop), bundled together, and delivered in-person to home
district Congressional and Senator's offices by pro-organic
spokespersons.
Phone calls from "grasstops," organic food supporters with special
political or economic clout, are especially important. Delegation
meetings
can also be arranged whereby groups of concerned citizens and natural
food
industry workers and businesspeople visit their Congressperson or staff
members in their local district offices. The bottom line is that 200-500
phone calls or letters over a two-week or four-week period will alert
even
the most uninformed Congressman or woman that this is an issue of
serious
concern to their constituents. If several hundred Congressional
Representatives get a steady dose of grassroots lobbying, if every U.S.
Senator's office receives hundreds of phone calls, letters, and
constituent
delegations, there's at least the possibility we'll see high-profile
Congressional hearings, followed by the death of the proposed rules.
Industry workers and consumers who sign-up as volunteers by placing
their
names in the SOS ballot boxes need to be organized into district
"telephone
trees" to lobby their Representative and Senators. It doesn't hurt to
call
state and local legislators and the Governor's office as well. Each
grassroots volunteer should recruit five others to make phone calls as
well. The SOS campaign recommends a bi-partisan approach. Do not assume
that progressive Democrats are our only allies. In many cases Democrats
are
firmly in the USDA camp, and many as well are afraid or else are
reluctant
to oppose the President. Many Republicans, on the other hand, believe
that
the private sector (in this case private organic certifiers and the
organic
industry itself) and the states can do a better job of regulation than
federal bureaucrats. Many Republicans also believe that commercial free
speech (in this case the right of certifiers to uphold and label organic
products under higher standards than what the USDA requires) is very
important. And of course many Republicans will be happy to oppose the
President and the USDA on this issue and make the Democrats look bad. On
the other hand we will likely find a number of Democrats sympathetic to
our
side as well. It's important to approach legislators with an open mind.
Be
courteous, but firm and persistent.
Strategy Track Three: Publish Our Own National Rules and Start
Certifying
and Labeling Organic Products Under a National Eco-Label that Meets NOSB
&
IFOAM Guidelines
Since everyone agrees that the USDA has proved themselves incapable of
respecting traditional organic practices and values, we have a
significant
moral and political advantage. Since the feds have shown themselves
unable
to listen to consumers and to the recommendations of respected
organizations such as the National Organic Standards Board and IFOAM,
the
organic movement has no real choice to avoid economic ruin other than to
issue our own alternative, non-governmemtal rules and start certifying
and
regulating ourselves. Under current U.S. law this is perfectly legal,
especially so prior to the issuance of final rules by the USDA, expected
some time toward the end of the year.
Moreover even after the USDA issues its bogus final rules there will
very
likely be another six month or longer "grace period" before final
implementation. That is, we're not going to see any products labeled as
"USDA Organic" for 18 months or more. Our task in the meantime is to get
out our own alternative eco-label, inform and train every natural food
consumer in the country and the world to look for this label and to buy
or
give preference to products bearing this label, and to warn everyone
about
the forthcoming bogus USDA label. In addition to these important
tactical
advantages, if our product labels simply say "eco-certified" or
"produced
according to NOSB & IFOAM recommendations," the USDA will be on very
shaky
legal (outlawing eco-labels that don't even explicitly use the word
"organic") and political ground (suppressing commercial free speech and
private enterprise) should they be foolhardy enough to try to suppress
an
entire national movement supported by millions of Americans. In addition
our side will be able to point to the fact that our alternative,
non-governmental eco-labels are welcome all over the world, in the 100
nations where IFOAM has influence, whereas the fraudulent USDA labels
are
likely to set off a global boycott.
The first step is to issue our own alternative rules. Spokespersons for
organic farmers and the organic movement should announce that we are
beginning this process as soon as possible. At the national Natural
Products Expo in Anaheim, California March 13-15 we should begin to
spread
the word of this strategy, not only to the 26,000 attendees at the Expo,
but to the media and the public at large. The publishing of our own
non-governmental "final rules" will be fairly simple since we already
have
the recommendations of the NOSB, IFOAM, and other respected
non-governmental organizations to draw upon. Attorneys from Organic
Watch
and other organizations will only need to act in the capacity of "legal
transcribers" to codify these recommendations into the proper commercial
and legal language.
Some private organic certifiers already have rules that are basically in
line with what the NOSB and IFOAM recommend. Thousands of organic
farmers
and hundreds of organic manufacturers and processors are either already
operating under these rules or under similar rules.á Businesses and
farmers
outraged by the USDA proposals will undoubtedly be willing to adjust
their
practices and labels a bit to conform to our new national eco-label
standards. The organic movement around the world will likely be glad to
express their solidarity and support for our new eco-label.
Once we have publicized new national rules we can begin to recruit
private
certifiers who will begin to certify under these rules.á Of course not
every organic certification group will agree to endorse our national
eco-label, at least initially. But we can expect rather quickly that a
number of the most reputable certifiers will agree to certify under this
new eco-label, and the groundswell generated by mass consumer enthusiasm
over these new rules will create a marketplace pressure that even the
most
"bottom line" certifiers and retailers will find hard to resist. After
all
what food producer or retailer will really want to market their products
branded with a controversial and disreputable USDA label, especially
when
they start to realize that at least some of their competitors will be
selling products with a respected national eco-label? By the time we
have
5-10% of the U.S.'s organic produce branded with our label, there will
be a
marketplace momentum that is unstoppable.
As we begin to roll out our new alternative labels we will need to mount
a
national publicity and public relations campaign. This publicity
campaign
needs to reinforce the same message over and over again: since the
federal
government failed us, the organic food movement has decided to take an
alternative, non-governmental regulatory approach, analogous to the
approach that the Jewish community has developed in regard to the
certification and labeling of Kosher foods. Because Washington
bureaucrats
have proven themselves once again to be incompetent, we have no choice
but
to regulate and police our industry on a national basis, in accordance
with
strict national and international standards. Certifiers and retailers
who
support our label will gain credibility, while those who back the USDA
and
the biotech-agribusiness label will tend to become suspect. Recent
indications are that both the alternative and mass media will be
sympathetic to broadcasting this message for us, since many journalists
and
media workers are apparently not that thrilled by the thought of paying
premium prices for bogus "USDA certified" organic food either.
Once a critical mass of certifiers, manufacturers, and retailers begin
to
use our national alternative eco-label, government authorities and
corporate agribusiness will find themselves in a difficult situation.
Until
the government issues its final rules, and even afterwards, there is
very
little they can do to try to stop us. And by the time they review 75,000
hostile comments, issue final rules, and then designate a final day for
compliance, our non-governmental eco-label will likely already have
achieved great popularity and market penetration. Once the deadline for
compliance come into effect, some 18 months from now, the organic
impostors
will face a terrible dilemma. Do they dare try to prosecute an entire
nationwide network of respected certifiers, manufacturers, and retailers
for marketing and advertising a line of products which millions of
consumers obviously want? And in strictly legal terms how can they
justify
suppressing our labels while allowing similar non-governmental Kosher or
Hallal (Muslim) food certification networks to continue functioning?
Like the McDonald's McLibel trial in Britain or the recent persecution
by
the beef industry of Oprah Winfrey and Howard Lyman under the Texas
"food
slander" laws, there is no way that the USDA can defeat us in the
national
and international court of public opinion. And if we follow the
alternative, non-governmental regulatory and labeling strategy outlined
above, according to top legal analysts, it is highly unlikely that we
can
be defeated in the federal courts either. But the time to begin to
implement this three track strategy is now. This is a battle we can win,
but it is also a battle that we absolutely cannot afford to lose.
###
People who are not already receiving Food Bytes on a regular monthly
basis
can get a free subscription to this electronic newsletter by sending an
email to:
majordomo@mr.net
with the simple message:
subscribe pure-food-action
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 01:12:43 -0500
From: Vegetarian Resource Center
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: HUMANE - "Compassion Is The Fashion"
Message-ID:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
We are developing a discussion list for members of
the fashion industry who are committed to implementing
humane values in their enterprise.
While we hope that this will complement the work of
our Veg-Biz e-mail discussion list, which brings together
entrepreneurs who market to the vegetarian community,
as well as vegetarians who are entrepreneurs,
in whatever field, the HUMANE list -
or "Compassion Is The Fashion" (CIFT@vegetarian.org)
will focus on how bet to implement the humane perspective
in all areas of enterprise, specifically the business of
clothing and fashion, and how to promote humane values
regarding apparel among the general population.
Anyone interested in this list -
please contact the Vegetarian Resource Center at vrc@tiac.net
and tell us how you would benefit from this list, and how
your participation with the list would benefit the list and its
other subscribers.
⌐1998áá Maynard S Clarkááá Vegetarian Resource Centerááá info@vegetarian.org
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 1998 23:33:26
From: David J Knowles
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: [UK] Sergeant's sandwiches tame dogs
Message-ID: <3.0.3.16.19980215233326.29af8748@dowco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>From The Electronic Telegraph - Monday, February 16th, 1998
Sergeant's sandwiches tame dogs
A POLICE officer called to help a colleague whose patrol car was hijacked
by two alsatians told how he fed the dogs his beef sandwiches to end the
siege.
Sgt Ewen Wilson, 26, said: "I sidled in beside them and while the mad one
was barking and howling I was slipping pieces of my beef sandwiches into
his mouth. That kept him quiet."
The siege began when a woman police officer was flagged down in Tilbury,
Essex, by a woman who reported seeing two aggressive dogs on the loose. The
officer got out of her car, leaving the door open. Sgt Wilson said: "The
dogs jumped in. One deposited himself in the
driver's seat while the other climbed in the back."
Sgt Wilson arrived at the scene "armed" with two leads and his packed
lunch. He said: "What I didn't want was the dogs to get out of the car in
the mad state they were in, in case they attacked someone." The dogs, whose
owners have yet to be traced, were taken to the pound.
⌐ Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1998.
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 1998 23:36:58
From: David J Knowles
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: [UK] Firms facing stiffer fines for pollution
Message-ID: <3.0.3.16.19980215233658.217f26e6@dowco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>From The Electronic Telegraph - Monday, February 16th, 1998
Firms facing stiffer fines for pollution
By Robert Shrimsley, Chief Political Correspondent
COMPANIES found guilty of damaging the environment could face a massive
increase in fines under plans being discussed by ministers to reduce
industrial pollution.
The move could see serious offenders routinely fined hundreds of thousands
of pounds when they are convicted of polluting the environment.
Ministers are concerned that courts are not using their full powers to
punish firms convicted of pollution offences. They are discussing ways to
ensure that companies no longer escape with fines that they consider to be
negligible when compared with their annual profits.
While polluters in America face multi-million-dollar fines, the largest
fine by a British court was for ú175,000 against Severn Trent Water in
1996. But the Environment Agency said this seemingly substantial punishment
was akin to a man on a salary of ú30,000 being fined ú15.
A spokesman said that, in the agency's two-year history, this was the only
case where a fine had exceeded ú100,000. He said: "We would like the courts
to reflect the gravity of the offence."
The agency's view is understood to have found favour with Michael Meacher,
the environment minister, who has told colleagues that, if the Government
is serious about its commitments to tackle pollution, it must be seen to be
imposing effective punishments upon those companies breaking the law.
Ministers believe that there is no need to change the law and that
punishments are already severe. Crown Courts already have the power for
unlimited fines and prison sentences of up to two years for the most
serious cases.
Their concern is that the judges, unused to tackling the issue of
environmental damage, are "too sympathetic" to the polluters. Mr Meacher is
now in discussion with Lord Irvine, the Lord Chancellor, about toughening
the sentencing guidelines.
⌐ Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1998.
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 1998 23:42:29
From: David J Knowles
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: [FR] Hunters' march marred by drunkenness
Message-ID: <3.0.3.16.19980215234229.217f4af8@dowco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>From The Electronic Telegraph - Monday, February 16th, 1998
Hunters' march marred by drunkenness
By Julian Nundy in Paris.
FRENCH field sports groups mustered 150,000 demonstrators at a Paris march
this weekend for an occasion that confirmed the view of many Parisians that
their country cousins are uncouth and drunken.
Sounding hunting horns and mainly dressed in their khaki hunters' gear,
they carried banners proclaiming their pet hate, Dominique Voynet, the
Environment Minister, to be "an unprotected species" and dubbing her "the
green plague". Effigies of the minister, the leader of the Greens, swung
from gallows.
Near the end of the route, a young woman, reminding the marchers that it
was also St Valentine's Day, held a heart-shaped placard stating "We have
heart. Do you?" The marchers pelted her with empty beer-cans.
Many demonstrators were drinking beer and wine. "They were staggering, not
marching," said Francis Apesteguy, a photographer.
"What a bunch of bozos," said an American resident of the Boulevard Port
Royal along the route. "They were catcalling and whistling after all the
girls. What does it say about this country?"
The march was also marred by an accident. Seventeen coaches bringing
protesters to Paris from Brittany were among 40 vehicles in a crash caused
by fog on the motorway near Chartres. A seven-year-old child and a
middle-aged hunter were killed and 73 others injured.
The protesters were galvanised into action by EU legislation, signed by Mme
Voynet but not yet applied, that will stop the shooting of wildfowl in
February.
Reminding local politicians that the 1.5 million French hunters have
political clout, some posters said: "We hunt in February and vote in
March." Next month, elections will be held to the local departmental
councils and important regional councils. A pro-hunting party, called
Hunting, Fishing, Nature and Tradition, has a number of councillors
throughout rural France.
There was a sprinkling of politicians of all parties among the
demonstrators, but the only nationally-known figures came from the
Communist Party and the extreme-Right National Front.
Michel, a marcher from Brittany, said Mme Voynet "must understand that
nature belonged to those who lived among it and not to those people, like
her, who are shut up in offices all day".
Alain Genestar, editor of the weekly Le Journal du Dimanche, said history
would record that the biggest demonstration in France for several years was
about the right to shoot migrating - and therefore foreign - birds. The
image of the day would be of demonstrators carrying placards insulting a
woman.
⌐ Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1998.
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 1998 23:47:21
From: David J Knowles
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: [IT] EU adviser on BSE arrested in Italian corruption inquiry
Message-ID: <3.0.3.16.19980215234721.0e3727b2@dowco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>From The Electronic Telegraph - Monday, February 16th, 1998
EU adviser on BSE arrested in Italian corruption inquiry
By Toby Helm, EU Correspondent, in Brussels and Bruce Johnston in Rome
A LEADING European scientist who was chosen by Brussels last year to give
expert advice on the "mad cow" crisis and other consumer health issues has
been charged by Italian police investigating corruption.
Professor Vittorio Silano has resigned his job in the Italian Health
Ministry after a lengthy investigation, government officials in Rome said
yesterday Ansa, the Italian news agency, has reported that, 24 hours before
his resignation, Silano was charged and ordered to stand trial for abuse of
office, with the disgraced former health minister, Francesco de Lorenzo.
But, so far, Silano had received no order to quit his three-year post on
the European Commission's Scientific Steering Committee - a group of
experts set up as part of the Brussels consumer safety reforms.
The disclosure is an embarrassment to the commission and in particular to
Emma Bonino, the Italian commissioner for consumer affairs, who is in
charge of the new food safety regime in Brussels. European Union sources
said Ms Bonino had been instrumental in Silano's appointment to the
committee, partly because the commission wanted a "heavyweight" from
southern Europe on the eight-strong team.
They claim that she was warned that he was under suspicion in Italy last
summer and that his candidacy should be scrutinised thoroughly. Italian
government officials confirmed that Silano had left his post as
director-general of pharmaceutical services in the Health Ministry. The
ministry said that he had asked "to be relieved of his position", but did
not say why.
A ministerial spokesman said yesterday: "We have issued a statement saying
that Dr Silano asked the health minister to be relieved of his job as
director of the department of medicinal evaluation and pharmaceutical control.
"The minister has accepted his resignation on Feb 6. I imagine that the
information as to why he resigned is something of rather a reserved nature,
between the director and the minister."
The committee was set up after concerns that the commission mishandled the
BSE affair and amid allegations from Euro-MPs of a Brussels cover-up over
"mad cow" disease. The European Parliament had threatened to censure - or
sack - the entire commission over its handling of the BSE affair since the
late Eighties but was mollified after the shake-up of the
committee system.
The steering committee is expected to provide independent scientific advice
to the commission, which is responsible for making recommendations on food
safety issues to the Council of Ministers.
Last night, a commission official close to Ms Bonino confirmed that police
in Brussels were aware of the investigation into Silano's activities. But
the official said: "The inquiry in Italy has nothing to do with his
activities here."
Silano is charged with alleged abuse of office while working for Prof de
Lorenzo in December 1990 as director general of the hygiene division of
food and nutrition at the Health Ministry. Prof de Lorenzo, a powerful
Liberal politician and a doctor, was made to resign from his position as
health minister in 1993 over corruption charges in his native Naples,
including purchasing votes.
ááááááááááááááááá The same day he resigned, his 87-year-old father,
Ferruccio de Lorenzo,
ááááááááááááááááá also a professor and a former Health Ministry
under-secretary, was
ááááááááááááááááá charged with extortion and misappropriation of public
funds, and arrested.
⌐ Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1998.
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 00:46:16
From: David J Knowles
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Re: Circus abuse in UK
Message-ID: <3.0.3.16.19980216004616.0e374bd4@dowco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I have received several e-mails requesting information regarding video
footage of the circus abuse in the UK.
Unfortunately, there appears to be a problem with at least one server,
where I keep getting mail returned.
With this in mind, and in order to assist others with this information, I
don't have a copy of the video myself. The group which obtained the footage
is called Animal Defenders.
Their contact info. is as follows:
Animal Defenders
261 Goldhawk Road
London, W12 9PE
UK.
Tel. (+44) 181 846 9777
Fax. (+44) 181 846 9712
E-mail: navs@cygnet.co.uk
Website URL: www.cygnet.co.uk/NAVS/
Hope this is of use.
David
At 12:03 09/02/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Dear Friends,
>We found an article on the internet regarding "Circus men beat their
>animals on secret video"
>We are extremely interested in obtaining a copy of this video.á PAWS
>(Performing Animal Welfare Society) is a leading animal rights organization
>in the United States and we are spearheading a campaign to free animals
>from traveling/circus shows!!
>Please respond immediately, this is most urgent for us!á Our Federal
>Express Account # is 1871-3455-2. We would gladly pay for any other
>expenses in incur. If you do not have copy of this video, do you know who
>we need to contact in order to get a copy??
>Kindest Regards,
>Pat Derby
>President and Founder
>Performing Animal Welfare Society
>
>
>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 03:11:49 PST
From: "Cari Gehl"
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) Two Wolves Run Wild On Island
Message-ID: <19980216111150.19570.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
THE MIAMI HERALD
TWO WOLVES RUN WILD ON ISLAND
Monday, February 2, 1998
Section: Local
Page: 5B
SOURCE/CREDIT LINE: KATHLEEN LAUFENBERG Tallahassee Democrat
It's official: Red wolves No. 847 and No. 850 are now a couple of
beach bums.
Biologists have released the young red wolves -- one of the world's
most endangered species -- on a small, uninhabited, state-owned island
about 80 miles southwest of Tallahassee.
Their liberation on Cape St. George marks the beginning of an
experiment wildlife experts have struggled to bring about for more
than a year. It's a calculated gamble, because the island is already a
springtime home for endangered turtles and a year-round home for a
pesky coyote that evaded capture late last year.
No one's sure exactly how these new neighbors will get along.
``It's a big test,'' biologist Terri Calleson said. ``Seeing how these
two do will determine if red wolves will remain on this island.''
Both the male and female have been sterilized so they cannot
reproduce. Both are also wearing collars that emit radio signals,
allowing biologists to track their whereabouts.
Officials had hoped to release them there last summer but ran into a
roadblock when they learned the coyote had set up housekeeping.
Because wolves and coyotes are territorial, experts feared a showdown.
They worried that the coyote, considered a nuisance animal in Florida,
might chase the wolves into the Gulf -- where they might drown or, if
not, possibly swim across Sikes Cut and end up in the exclusive St.
George Plantation.
So for more than six months, trappers unsuccessfully tried to
eliminate the coyote. Now that the wolves are on the island, however,
trapping will cease.
``We still wish the coyote wasn't there, because that confounds what
we're doing,'' said Thom Lewis, a wildlife biologist with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service. Lewis cared for the wolves while they were
confined to a 50-by-50-foot cage on nearby St. Vincent Island.
The wolves couldn't be held in that cage any longer, Lewis said, and
there was no available space at zoos or elsewhere. So the experts
decided to release them on Cape St. George, coyote or no coyote.
While in the pen, the young wolves were repeatedly harassed by a
family of wolves living free on St. Vincent. But they stood their
ground, giving Lewis hope that they'll fight the coyote.
Another possibility, however, is that the wolves and coyote may join
forces. That's why the wolves were sterilized, Lewis said.
Despite their inability to have pups, Lewis hopes they'll remain
bonded. Wolves are believed to mate for life and form strong family
alliances. When gray wolves in the North have been sterilized and
released as a pair, he said, the bond between them has remained.
Lewis hopes the wolves, working together, will chase the coyote off
the Cape by spring.
That's when scores of threatened loggerhead sea turtles make their
annual migration there to lay eggs. More threatened turtles now nest
on the island than anywhere else in the Panhandle, Calleson said.
Last year, the coyote slurped down more turtle eggs than any other
predator. That penchant for eggs is a learned behavior -- one the
coyote could teach the wolves, Lewis said.
But for now, biologists intend to monitor the wolves, provide road
kill as needed to supplement their diet, and wait to see what happens.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at
http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 03:14:39 PST
From: "Cari Gehl"
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Predator Friendly Beef?
Message-ID: <19980216111440.12358.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
An idea whose time has come?á How very bizarre.....
-----------------------
"Red Meat Can Be Green!"
Article on Predator Friendly Beefá from the February 2, 1998 issue of
"High Country News."
The "dolphin-friendly" label gave tuna an environmental face-lift in
the 1980s; now, a "Wolf Country Beef" label may do the scene for
hamburger.á The label is the brainchild of Jim Winder and Will Holder,
ranchers who have teamed up with the nonprofit Defenders of Wildlife.
They're developing the sea]-of-approval so that bee coming from
ranchers who avoid killing predators will stand out in stores.á The
beef label will appear in March.
Winder's ranch sits on the edge of the Gila National Forest in New
Mexico, and while wolves have not yet been restored to the area, he
regularly sees coyotes and mountain lions.á Winder says his grazing
methods require lots of herding time but they pay off.á Coyotes have
taken only two calves since he began what he calls "predator-friendly
ranching" 10 years ago.
Across the state line on the edge of Arizona's Apache National Forest,
fourth generation rancher Will Holder hasn't had quite the same
success.á Holder says he loses on average four-to-six cattle per year
and once lost eight in a week to a young mountain lion.á But Holder
accepts predator loss as natural.
Both ranchers say the trick is imitating the predator role so that
cattle stick together.á Any animal separated from a herd is more
likely to become a lion's or coyote's next meal, they say.á Their
methods include training cows to group around hay and conditioning
them to bunch up at the sound of a whistle.
Wolves could play a significant role in the ecosystem by helping to
prevent overgrazing, the two ranchers say.á When cattle are threatened
by predators, they keep moving, and the presence of lions and coyotes
has improved grass re-introduction on their range, they point out.
In late January, the U.S. and Wildlife Service re-introduced a family
of Mexican gray wolves to the Apache National Forest, which borders
the Gila National Forest.á Craig Miller, Southwest representative for
the Defenders of Wildlife, hopes the program will "counter the myth
that the recovery program would force ranchers off the land."
Wolves can be an economic asset to the region, says Holder, who hopes
the Wolf Country Beef program demonstrates that ranchers can live with
wolves and still make money.á Winder adds that ranchers "are not going
to blast a wolf if they see them as an economic incentive." They hope
meat shoppers will vote with their dollars for this kind of
public-land management.
For more information, contact Jim Winder at Lake Valley Ranch, HC 66,
Box 38, Deming, NM (505/267-4227); Will Holder at 800/977-0065; or
Defenders of Wildlife Southwest office at 520/578-9334.
- Sara Phillips
"High Country News" can be accessed at:á
http://www.hcn.org
It presents new of the West!
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at
http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 03:17:38 PST
From: "Cari Gehl"
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Symposium: CANADIAN PERSPECTIVES ON WILD ANIMALS
Message-ID: <19980216111738.17636.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
This might be of interest to anyone that's in the area.
Best wishes,
Cari
-------------
Presenting....
CANADIAN PERSPECTIVES ON WILD ANIMALS
A One-Day Symposium on Canadian Wildlife
Saturday, February 28, 1998
McMaster University
1200 Main Street West
Hamilton, Ontario
Burke Science Building
ááááááá McMasterÆs Students for the Ethical Consideration of
Animals (SECA) are holding their second annual conference,
CANADIAN PERSPECTIVES ON WILD ANIMALS, Saturday February
28, 1998. The goal of our conference is to broaden our
understanding of the human relationship with non-human
animals, with special reference to conservation biology,
animal welfare, practical and policy issues, biodiversity
conservation, environmental planning, and animal
protection. The speakers featured at this yearÆs conference
are listed at the end of this e-mail. Everyone is welcome
and encouraged to come!
ááááááá Prices for unwaged conference attendants (students,
seniors, and others) are $5.00 for the full day, or $2.00
per speaker. Prices for waged conference attendants are
$7.00 for the full day, or $3.00 per speaker. A vegan lunch
will be available on a donations basis. If your group or
organization would like to discuss group discount rates,
please contact us at the phone number or e-mail address
below.
ááááááá We encourage you to pre-register for CANADIAN PERSPECTIVES
ON WILD ANIMALS by leaving a brief message at:
ááááááá phone: (905) 528 - 4501
ááááááá or e-mail: seca_mcmaster@hotmail.com
Feel free to contact us for more information.
ááááááá Please spread the word about CANADIAN PERSPECTIVES ON WILD
ANIMALS to your friends, family, co-workers, and anyone
else you know interested in Canadian wildlife.
ááááááá We look forward to hearing from you soon!
ááááááá - Students for the Ethical Consideration of Animals
----------
Speakers at CANADIAN PERSPECTIVES ON WILD ANIMALS
include...
David Lavigne (Executive Director, International Marine
Mammal Association Inc.) will be speaking on The Wise Use
Movement in Canadian Conservation
Rick Smith (Canadian Director, International Fund for
Animal Welfare) will be speaking on Canadian Seal
Conservation, Conservation versus Exploitation
Debbie Doncaster (Urban Wildlife Researcher, Animal
Alliance of Canada) will be speaking on Snow Geese, Urban
and Rural Conservation Policy
Paul Hollingsworth (Director, Native Animal Brotherhood)
will be speaking on Native Perspectives on Wild Animals
Rob Laidlaw (Executive Director, Zoocheck Canada) will be
speaking on Polar Bear Conservation in Manitoba
Brian McHattie (Habitat Restoration Specialist, Canadian
Wildlife Service) will be speaking on Marine Mammals in
Captivity
Mike McIntosh (Director, Bear With Us) will be speaking on
Bear
Rehabilitation in Ontario
Constance Russell (PhD Student, University of Toronto) will
be speaking on Whalewatchers Opinions on Whalewatching,
Implications for Policy and the Industry
Nicola Thompson (Grassroots Organizer, Canadians Against
the Commercial Seal Hunt) will be speaking on The
Grassroots Movement Against the Commercial Seal Hunt
Brad White (Biology Professor, McMaster University) will be
speaking on Forensic Science and Canadian Wildlife
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at
http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 98 07:53:16 UTC
From: SDURBIN@VM.TULSA.CC.OK.US
To: ar-news@Envirolink.org
Subject: A Life Is a Life
Message-ID: <199802161357.IAA23318@envirolink.org>
(story from Woman's World):á Kathy Ford pitched a clump of big red grapes
into the yard, as a treat for Dinah, a 130-pound potbellied pig.
"Oink!" Dinah replied eagerly, bolting after them.
But, now, as Kathy watched in horror, Dinah staggered and a terrible
gagging sound rose from her throat.
She's choking! Kathy realized, dashing to her side. She's going to die!
Kathy panicked, as Dinah sucked helplessly for air, trembled - then
collapsed to the ground!
Racing into the house, Kathy grabbed the cordless phone and dialed 911
as she ran back to Dinah.
"My pig's choking!" she cried when dispatcher Tracy Mosier answered.
"She's passed out!"
"Okay, calm down," Tracy soothed. In her nearly 14 years as an operator,
she'd never once had toá handle a choking pig!
Still, it couldn't be that different, she figured. "Let's try the
Heimlich," Tracy suggested.
The Heimlich, on Dinah? Kathy thought. But how?
Dropping the phone right beside her as Tracy shouted instructions,
Kathy hoisted up the limp, unconscious 130-pound pig enough to wrap her
arms around Dinah's middle. Then she locked her hands and jerked up
hard. Nothing!
"Try again!" Tracy ordered.
This time, as she grasped her fists and drove them into the pig's
belly, Dinah emitted a thunderous belch, and the grapes came flying
from her mouth! In seconds, she was scrambling to her feet and drawing
in deep breaths.
"We did it!" Kathy shouted - loud enough for Tracy to hear.
"All right!" Tracy rejoiced.
"Thank you!" Kathy wept, picking up the phone.
"I'm just glad I reached someone who cares as much as Tracy does,"
Kathy says today.
Tracy calls the experience "different," but....."It's my job to help
save lives," she explains. "It doesn't matter that it was a pig -
a life is a life."
-- Sherrill
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 11:48:07 EST
From: HenQuest@aol.com
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Boston BRAVE- Meatout walk
Message-ID: <77488ef.34e86dc9@aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Boston Resource for Animals, Vegetarians & the Environment (BRAVE) will be
having a Meatout Walk on Saturday March 21st. If you would like to join us and
pass out literature and carry signs,á or for more info, please call or e-mail:
617 262 5761áá or bravebos@aol.com
BRAVE is also sponsoring a "For the Birds" Walk-a-thon to benefit the United
Poultry Concerns on Sunday May 17, 1998 at 11 a.m. To participate, sponsor or
more info, please call or email the above addresses.
Thank you.
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 11:59:39 -0500 (EST)
From: "Jeffrey A. LaPadula"
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US-NJ) MAN REGRETS THROWING CARCASS AT ACTIVISTS-Star Ledger
2-13-98
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
MAN REGRETS THROWING CARCASS AT ACTIVISTSáááááá
Thomas Haydon
The Star-Ledger
February 13, 1998
An 84-year-old man who tossed a skinned muskrat carcass at animal rights
activists outside a fur shop said yesterday it was a dumb thing to do.
"I was stupid," Frank Harmis said of the incident Wednesday outside Furs by
Guarino on Route 18 in East Brunswick. "I don't know why I threw it."
Members of the Animal Defense League, who have been staging daily protests
in front of the store this week, vowed to file a complaint charging Harmis
with
harassment, a disorderly persons offense.
"It's just so disgusting. I've never seen anyone treat a once-living creature
so
callously before," said league spokeswoman Corrine Ball of North Brunswick.
Harmis, of East Brunswick, said he discovered the carcass in a plastic bag in
the store's parking lot as he was about to get in his car to leave.
"I just found it," he told The Star- Ledger. "Maybe somebody else threw it
there."
He put the bag in the car and drove to the driveway, where he stopped, took
the carcass from the bag, and hurled it toward the gutter in the street. It
landed at the feet of the protesters on a grassy strip along the road.
Since last Saturday, league members and supporters have held daily
demonstrations outside the store and plan to continue through tomorrow.
Harmis said he went to the store about 4 p.m. Wednesday to talk with the
protesters.
"I asked about their leather belts and shoes," Harmis said, adding that he
talked about the protesters' ancestors, who "depended on animal fur."
Several demonstrators have said they wear clothes that are not made from
animal products or from products tested on animals.
Ball said when Harmis first stepped from his car, he waved a fur tail in the
face of one demonstrator. When protesters ignored him, he drove off, paused
at the driveway, threw out the dead animal, and left.
Demonstrators reported the incident and the car's license number to
police,
who traced it to Harmis, authorities said.
However, no charges will be lodged against Harmis until a member of the
defense league files a complaint in municipal court. The court was closed
yesterday for Lincoln's Birthday.
"I hope I don't get a fine or something. I can't afford it," said Harmis. He
said he spends most of his time caring for his wife, who has been sick.
A disorderly persons charge carries a maximum penalty of one year in jail and
a $1,000 fine.
****************************************************************************
áááááááááááááááááááá ANIMAL DEFENSE LEAGUE - NEW JERSEY
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá P.O. Box 84ááááááá
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Oakhurst, NJ 07755ááááá
ááááááááááááááááááááááá (732)774-6432áááááááá
áááááááááááááá http://envirolink.org/orgs/adl
****************************************************************************
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 12:03:44 -0500 (EST)
From: "Jeffrey A. LaPadula"
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US-NJ) Week Long Protest in NJ ends.á
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
East Brunswick anti-fur protest ends; Highland Park store next
á Published in the Home News Tribune 2/15/98
á By GREG GITTRICH
á STAFF WRITER
Lifting white candles close to their chapped lips, 18 members of the Animal
Defense League of New Jersey blew out the flickering flames -- ending their
eight-day protest outside an East Brunswick furrier.
Corinne Ball, her face red from the blustery winter weather, peeked out from
inside her hooded sweat shirt. Looking at her fellow animal-freedom
fighters, she smiled.
"This definitely was a success," Ball said. "We gained the attention and
support of a lot of people."
Since Feb. 7, the 17-year-old animal-rights activist and other members of
the ADL, mostly from Middlesex and Monmouth counties, have protested outside
Furs by Guarino on Route 18.
Waiving placards of bloody, skinned animals, the young activists hoped to
educate passing motorists and would-be customers about the fur industry's
"barbaric slaughter of 40 million animals for vanity," Ball said.
The week leading up to Valentine's Day tends to be a busy one for pelt
peddlers, Ball said.
According to Natalia Van Doren-Shulkin, a Virginia resident who traveled to
New Jersey for the event, "random people" joined the protest and gave
donations in the form of money and food.
"But this also has been a crazy week with some confrontation," said
20-year-old Jason LeGreca of Hillsborough.
Many motorists on the well-traveled highway have honked and yelled in
support; others have shouted obscenities and chucked chicken parts out their
car windows at the protesters, LeGreca said.
And on Wednesday, an elderly East Brunswick man whipped a carcass of a
bloody, skinned muskrat at the activists from his passing car -- only to be
nabbed by police two days later and charged with harassment.
"That was a very inhumane and cowardly act," said 60-year-old Jehan Gasser,
who came to support the ADL after reading about the incident.
Despite all the media attention and the commitment of the protesters, Bill
DeGuilo, the store's vice president, said his business did not suffer.
"I'm wondering if they're even attracting more attention to our store,"
DeGuilo said. "But I guess it will be good to see them go.
"They've been fine," DeGuilo said. "They have not crossed any boundaries or
destroyed any property."
Store employees, nonetheless, videotaped the demonstrators with a hand-held
camera "as a precautionary measure" and grilled hot dogs and hamburgers in
front of the vegetarians Feb. 7 to protest their activism.
Ball, who selected Furs by Guarino because of its location on heavily
traveled Route 18, said the ADL's next stop will be Maryanne Furs in
Highland Park, where they plan a Saturday protest. But she said the decision
to go there next wasá completely random.
"And we'll be back here every two weeks," she promised.
Oscar Loewy announced the closing of his Metuchen fur shop in December after
the group targeted his store.
Source: Home News Tribune
Published: February 15, 1998
****************************************************************************
áááááááááááááááááááá ANIMAL DEFENSE LEAGUE - NEW JERSEY
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá P.O. Box 84ááááááá
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááá Oakhurst, NJ 07755ááááá
ááááááááááááááááááááááá (732)774-6432áááááááá
áááááááááááááá http://envirolink.org/orgs/adl
****************************************************************************
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 12:05:56 -0500 (EST)
From: "Jeffrey A. LaPadula"
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Overview of week long demo in New Jersey from ADL-NJ.
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Well, the end has finally come.á A little piece of animal liberation
history was made this past week as this tactic, protesting a shop the
entire time it is open for an extended period, was tried for the first
time in this hemisphere.
To say it was a sucess is understatement - we won on so many levels.
First off, we set out to be there all week, every minute they were open,
and we were.á We never backed down, and we never gave up.á To say we
didn't have a big effect on them would be foolish.á They are one of the
more prosperous shops in NJ, and this is one of their biggest weeks, yet
throughout the week they did very little business.á Their attempts to
counteract us were moronic and failed miserably.
There were unexpected rewards as well.á We saw dedication in our
activists we never would have imagined.á So many people were so willing
to commit themselves and go out of their way to make this a sucess.á We
also saw one person, Jay Lagreca mature from being an activist to be a
fully capable leader and organizer.á Without him this would have never
been possible.á We also saw great courage in all our members, to continue
fighting the good fight, no matter what they could think to throw at us,
figuratively and literally.á We saw the ADL-NJ and NJARA work together
better than we ever have before.á Throughout the week help from out of
state was practically non-existant, we had only three out of state people
show up the entire week.á While that may sound crappy, it also means the
NJ ar movement showed that not only could we do it, but we could do it on
our own.á Although there were, of course, countless people yelling stupid
things, the public support shown by the 40,000 people driving by each day
was overwhelming.á Interestingly, middle aged white males, particularly
working class (truckers, etc.) seemed to back us most.á But I think the
greatest reward came at the very end of the week.á After so much you
would expect people to be tired, physically, mentally, emotionally...
But instead I sensed a feeling of hope - and a feeling of power.á A
feeling that we WERE making a difference, that we would never give up,
that we would win.á Everyone seems 100 times more deteremined to fight
for liberation than we ever have before.
Here's a quick review of all that happened throughout the week.
We began on Saturday, having over 30 people come out over the course of
the day, many staying for most of it.á One person was simply driving by,
saw us, stopped and joined the protest, stayed all day, and returned
other days as well.á The police, who had previously tried to move us
behind a barricade some distance from the road, totally left us alone.
Guarino made a pitiful attempt to discredit us, using big wooden stands
with signs attached set up across the landscaping behind us.
Unfortunately for him the messages were written so thin and small they
were unreadable to anyone driving by - in other words, everyone but us.
The barbacue he attempted to have to show us up drew a total of 2
non-employees.
Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday came with little event, and little business
for Guarino's.á Come Wednesday the opposition seemed to increase in
action, throwing a tail, a coffee cup, and spare ribs at protestors, as
well as, most noticably, a trapper tossing a skinned muskrat towards us.
The licence plate was taken down, police located the man, and charges
have been filed.á Stuff being thrown slowed the remainder of the time,
including an egg, some change, and some ice throughout the rest of the
days.á In talking to police we found out the Guarinos were considered
more of an irritation than us, as they had been repeatedly calling the
station telling them to move us, arrest us, etc. for no reason.á More
proof we were having an effect.
Thursday night they were open late until 9PM, and we were expecting a lot
of business, as well as a lot of protestors.á Well, we did get a lot of
protestors, but the pre-Valentine's Day business rush we expected never
came.
There was rumored to be a counter-protest on Valentine's Day, but it
never came about.á After the turnout they got for the barbacue it was
probably a good idea on their part.á We had another excellent turnout,
and ended with a bueatiful candlelight vigil, despite winds making
keeping a candle lit just about impossible.
We will win,
Dari
*****check out the Animal Defense League - New Jersey web page at:
http://www.envirolink.org/orgs/adl
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 09:30:04 -0800
From: "Bob Schlesinger"
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: The Oregonian opposes changing state livestock law
Message-ID: <199802160930040080.00A5AE8A@pcez.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Note: Sorry for the repost to some of you.á Previous Subject Heading was
unclear
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reprinted from The Oregonian
Editorial Page
February 15, 1998
Portland, OR
PUT A MUZZLE ON IT
All this woofing over Oregon's dog law is unnecessary;
counties can write ordinances to quickly resolve disputes
Natas lives, Jessie is outside running after sticks, and that cuddly
Chase is in beagle heaven, a victim of epilepsy, not euthanasia.
That's the latest word on Oregon's death-row dogs.
And, if we're lucky, the last word.á Jackson County commissioners
finally may have quelled an international barking chain set off by their
decision to order the death of Natas, a dog caught chasing a horse
in 1996.
The commissioners were flooded with mail and phone calls after
"Hard Copy" and "The National Enquirer" did sob stories on the
condemned dog.á Death sentences for Chase and Jessie, two
Deschutes County dogs that harassed a herd of sheep, prompted
a similar outcry.
The uproar prompted the Legislature to consider altering the state
law requiring that dogs caught chasing livestock be put to death.
But farm groups growled, and Legislators pitched the issue back
to the counties where it belongs.
One dog-livestock law can't fit all Oregon counties.á In urbanizing
counties such as Jackson and Deschutes, where new subdivisions
bump up against farms, it makes sense to allow some leniency in
cases where dogs chase livestock.á In the farm country of Eastern
Oregon, it's still goodbye dog.á If Natas had run a horse in Harney
County, the dog wouldn't have lived long enough to become an
Internet cause celebre.
That's as it should be.á Oregon counties should craft their own dog
ordinances, as Jackson and Deschutes have done, and then act
quickly and humanely to enforce them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
My Comments:
To anyone outside of Oregon, it should now be even more clear
why we have such problems with attitudes about animals in this state.
The Oregonian has either ignored or trivialized the story of Nadas from the
beginning.á However, now,
after being upstaged by the LA times in their own backyard, the editorial
staff
feels a need
to fight back.á They have refused to cover the issues of how the livestock law
violates constitutional
equal protection clauses and how it is implemented locally without fair and
legal hearings.
Editorials such as these short-circuit attempts to free other dogs currently
sentenced to die
in Oregon for chasing livestock.á The local ordinances still put the burden of
proof on the
dog owner even when claims made about livestock chasing are without merit.á
Only
the high profile cases or those dog owners with the money to arrange out of
state adoption
by sanctuaries will result in a non-lethal alternative.
By the way, the Oregonian now insists on spelling Nadas' name N-A-T-A-S
because
that
way it can make a big deal about it being satan spelled backwards, which seems
to be of
importance to this paper.
You can write to the Oregonian and/or call the members of their editorial
board:
letters@news.oregonian.comááá (for letters to the editor)
oped@news.oregonian.comááá (direct email to the editorial board)
Or write to:
Letters,
The Oregonian
1320 SW Broadway
Portland, ORá 97201
FAX:á (503) 294-4193
Or call:
Robert J. Caldwell, Editorial Page Editorááá (503) 221-8197
Sample letters will be posted today at Ark Online
http://www.arkonline.com
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 98 11:51:22 PST
From: "bhgazette"
To: "AR News"
Subject: e-mail/letters needed
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Please respond to RadFem@aol.com
Date: 98-02-13 23:47:04 EST
From: RadFem
To: BHGazette
Dear Bunny Huggin' People,
I am requesting your immediate assistance....
Please help us spare over 600 pets from being killed (instead of adopted out)
every year.
Please sign our Ballot to shut down the Augusta
County Dog Pound in Virginia, and have the local S.P.C.A. handle all local
animals.á THANK YOU!!!!!!
Most Sincerely,
Jillouise Breslauer
Charlottesville, VA
RadFem@aol.com
P.S. PLEASE PASS THIS ALONG, THANK YOU!!!!
_______________________________________________
á YOUR HELP URGENTLY NEEDED!!!!!!
Tom-- who livesá in Staunton, Virginia--wanted to adopt a dog who had been
taken to the Augusta dog pound.áá By the time he discovered where the pound
was
located--evidently, no easy task--the dog was gone.á The pound personnel said
the dog had been euthanized.á It was three weeks before Christmas, the height
of pet adoption season.
Tom began asking questions and discovered that the pound did not have any
adoption policy.á He discovered many things about this pound which he could
hardly believe.á He is outraged.á You will be too.
Tom Rosen has launched a campaign to improve conditions for animals at the
local Augusta county dog pound.á PLEASE JOIN US, PLEASE HELP.á WE NEED YOUR
VOICE, WE NEED YOUR HELP!
----------------
What Tom discovered at the Augusta County Dog Pound:
*Pound is operated by a PRIVATE CONTRACTOR, on PRIVATE PROPERTY, accessible BY
APPOINTMENT ONLY, with no direct phone.
*No adoption policy/very few adoptions, as this pound makes little effort to
have impounded animals adoptedá (adoption rate 3-4% at best).
*95% of these dogs are euthanized.
*Medical care only provided for adult dogs with tags, not for any other
animals.
*Poor description of collected animals/Tracing a lost pet would be impossible.
*One Euthanasia competancy-certified Animal Control Officer (to administer
lethal drugs) and 1 trained helper are not always present at euthanizations,
as required by law.
*In 3 years of pound records, there are no adequate follow-ups on spay/neuter
agreements.
*Spay/neuter records DO NOT coincide with pound adoption records (records are
supposed to be signed on the day of adoption- Spay/neuter agreement allows
adoptees 30 days to spay/neuter)
*50% of pound records ARE NOT LEGIBLE.
-------------------------
WHAT DO WE WANT?
We want this shady Augusta County Dog Pound-- with it's pathetic 3% adoption
rate--SHUT DOWN.á NOW!
We want the nearby Augusta County S.P.C.A. to provide shelter, assistance and
adoptions for ALL companion animals of Augusta County (Augusta County S.P.C.A.
has a great adoption rate of over
75%, regular business hours, a direct business telephone staffed by
knowledgeable help, etc)
-----
WHAT YOU CAN DO TO HELP:
1. Mail in your ballotsá
Ballots sent in by EVERYONE, urging county officials to contract with the
Augusta County S.P.C.A., and to SHUT THE AUGUSTA COUNTY DOG POUND DOWN
NOW.
PLEASE, PLEASE SIGN OUR BALLOT BELOW
(or e-mail it to RadFem@aol.com and it will be mailed for you).á THANK YOU!
Letters expressing your outrage at the Augusta County Dog Pound's shameful
lack
of adoption policy; its unacceptable, routine killing of dogs; and overall
alleged suspicious involvement in the collection and euthanasia/disappearance
of dogs ( In 1996: 675 killed, 38 adopted.á In
1997:681 killed, 35 adopted.)
The Augusta County Board of Supervisors should be ashamed of the adoption rate
at the Augusta County Dog Pound.á Tell them to GIVE THE DOGS A CHANCE FOR
LIFE, CONTRACT WITH THE S.P.C.A.
Write:
J. Donald Hangar, Chairman
Augusta County Board of Supervisors
Route # 1, BOX 149
Staunton, Virginia 24401
(Please c.c. to: Tom H. Rosen, 2212 West Hill Farm Drive, Staunton, Virginia
24401)
2. Legal questions answered by an attorney knowledgeable in Virginia law.
3. Donations for future legal aid (sorry, not tax deductible)
Tom Rosen has already spent $5,000 of his personal funds on this project in
the last 2 years.á Contributions of any amount would be most gratefully
appreciated.
Tom H. Rosen
2212 West Hill Farm Drive
Staunton, Virginia 24401
Some additional questions you may wish to ask of the Augusta County Board of
Supervisors about their 'Augusta County Dog Pound';
*What happens to all these "euthanized" dogs?
*ARE ANY DOGS BEING SOLD TO LABORATORIES?á ELSEWHERE?
*What does the (Winchester) Company do with all the dog carcasses being picked
up from the Augusta County Dog Pound?á -What do they use them for?á -How much
money does this company make or give the Augusta County Dog Pound for these
bodies?
*Who, if anyone, is profitting off the "euthanized" pound dogs?
*WHY IS THE COUNTY OVERLY PROTECTIVE OF THIS SHELTER, WITH IT'S
SHOCKINGLY LOW
3% ADOPTION RATE?
(The nearby Augusta County S.P.C.A. has an adoption rate of well over 75%)
AND ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTIONS:
*WHY has the owner of the land andá the shelter been hired as an animal
control
officer at the Augusta dog pound?á (He is a former farmer, leasing the
land/shelter to Augusta County under a 10-year contract).á Is this an obvious
conflict of interest?
Your assistance and support is greatly appreciated.
RadFem@aol.com
______________________________________________
--------------OFFICIAL BALLOT----------------
__________________________________________
YOUR HELP URGENTLY NEEDED! *PLEASE HELP THESE ANIMALS!
ááááááááááááááááááááá "MY DOG VOTES"
ááááááááááá (ALL READERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE)
THE AUGUSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THE
ADOPTION RATE
AT THE AUGUSTA COUNTY DOG POUND
1996=675 DOGS KILLED
áááááááááá 38 ADOPTED
PLEASE GIVE THE DOGS A CHANCE FOR LIFE AND CONTRACT WITH THE SPCA.
_____á I AGREE
NAME:
ADDRESS:
E-mail address:
Please print out and mail to:á J. Donald Hangar, Chairman , Augusta County
Board of Supervisors, Route # 1, Box 149, Staunton, Virginia 24401á (Please
c.c. to: Tom H. Rosen, 2212 West Hill Farm Drive, Staunton, Virginia 24401)
OR: FAX to 804-923-8441 or e-mail toá RadFem@aol.com and it will be printed
out and mailed for you.á Cut and paste Ballot into e-mail, fill in information
and e-mail to
RadFem@aol.com
THANK YOU!
_________________________________________
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 13:56:59 -0500 (EST)
From: " North American A.L.F. Supporters Group"
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: N.AMERICAN A.L.F. PRESS OFFICE
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
ANNOUNCING THE FORMATION OF THE NORTH AMERICAN A.L.F. PRESS OFFICE
What does the Press Office Do?
Similar to the ALF Press Office (UK), the NA-ALF Press Office has several
basic fuctions, all of which are designed to explain why the A.L.F.
carries out actions, how it does, and how non-human animals are treated by
our species.
Any anonymous information received by the press Office which details
ALF-style actions will be communicated to the media. The Press Office will
be available as part of the network of contacts for the media, able to
confirm actions that fall within ALF policy and explaining the suffering
that necessitates such actions.
The Press Officer, as a public face for the A.L.F. is available for
interviews, phone-ins, news reports, etc. Any reporters or interested
parties may contact the NA-ALF Press Office at:
NA-ALF Press Office
Box 103,
Osseo, MN
55369, USA
phone: 612-601-0978
The NA-ALF Press Office is an independant pro-ALF organization working
closely with the NA-ALFSG and other above-ground animal liberation groups.
NORTH AMERICAN A.L.F. SUPPORTERS GROUP
Box 69597, 5845 Yonge St.
Willowdale, Ont. Canada M2M 4K3
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 98 12:59:29 UTC
From: SDURBIN@VM.TULSA.CC.OK.US
To: ar-news@Envirolink.org
Subject: This Dog Would Rather Nurse a Cat Than Chase It
Message-ID: <199802161903.OAA10257@envirolink.org>
(Woman's World): "Come on, girl," Jackie Bess of Grand Rapids called to
her Labrador Bailey one day. But Bailey just stood by the fence, whining.
Walking over, Jackie spotted an emaciated kitten. Bailey wanted me to see
it! she realized, carrying the sickly, terrified cat inside. As she lined
a box with a towel and laid him down, Bailey gave the kitten a gentle kiss.
But the cat would need more than love, the vet said. His leg was broken
and badly infected. "He may not make it," she added.
Jackie felt a pang. I just can't leave him to die, she thought. Besides,
if Bailey took the time to care, so can I.
Back home with the stray - his leg in a splint - and a supply of
antibiotics, Jackie planned to nurse the kitten back to health, then
find a home for him. But she found an assistant nurse - Bailey!
First, as Jackie set up a room for the cat, Bailey whined at the door.
"He's too sick to play," Jackie warned. But Bailey just licked the
kitten's face and sat protectively by his side. The next day, Bailey
came to visit with a ball.
"Meow!" the kitten, now named George, cried.
And in the days that followed, George seemed to perk up, crawling
over Bailey and snuggling with her at night. After a week, he could get
around in spite of his leg cast.
Once, as if testing his friend, George leapt across the room, soared
over Bailey and pounced with a thud. Bailey didn't move. The gentle Lab
even sat with George while he ate.
"Bailey wanted that food so badly," Jackie says. "But she just watched
while George ate. When George was finished, she'd lick the plate."
When George was getting better, Jackie brought him to her bookstore,
where Bailey was already a fixture. Soon the customers got used to the
duo, who lay in sunspots on the floor.
Today, George is a healthy cat, full of mischief. "Thanks to Bailey,
the best friend a cat could have," Jackieá smiles.
-- Sherrill
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 11:05:38 -0800
From: "Eric Mindel @ LCA"
To:
Cc:
Subject: LA Times still giving attention to Nadas
Message-ID: <199802161902.OAA10229@envirolink.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi all,
In today's LA Times, TV critic/columnist Howard Rosenberg talks about Nadas
and how media attention played a role in saving his life.á
This is the second prominent piece LA Times has done in response to the
Nadas situation.á I guess the L.A. Times is one of those sensationalistic
"tabloids" to which Jackson County refers.
It's a nice piece, giving significant recognition to the shows that really
help animals.
Eric
____________________
LA Times
Page F1
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1998
HOWARD ROSENBERG
"In Praise of 'Hard Copy' (Sort of)"
Nadas, the Oregon dog whose death sentence for chasing a neighboring horse
has been commuted to life imprisonment without possibility of parole, has a
friend in "Hard Copy." As do all animals.
The plight of Nadas has resonated in media just about everywhere, including
a recent front page story in The Times. However, the syndicated "Hard Copy"
has been the loudest and most persistent crusader regarding this cause,
siring a spate of tough, persuasive, lump-in-thethroat stories on behalf of
the 3-year-old collie-malamute mix, who had been scheduled to die Tuesday
under an Oregon law that mandated capital punishment for dogs that kill,
injure or, in the case of Nadas, merely chase livestock.á
Wilting to growing pressure and widespread ridicule, Oregon's Jackson
County Board of Commissioners on Thursday adopted an emergency ordinance
under which
the dog's life will be spared. Not that the farce ends here with Nadas
being returned to his owner, 21-year-old Sean Roach.
Hardly, for Nadas is now to be transported (not in shackles, one hopes)
from a kennel--where he has been detained since the 1996 chasing
incident--to the Best Friends Animal Sanctuary in Utah, where he is to
remain the rest of his natural life without the possibility of being
adopted by a family and without contact with Roach. Sort of the way Mary
Kay Letourneau and the 14-year-old father of her son have been forbidden to
have contact.
The insanity of the Nadas episode speaks for itself, as does its surreal
resolution. If this surfaced in a TV or movie script, you'd immediately
label it too ludicrous to be credible.
Please see ROSENBERG, F12
At least Nadas is being allowed to live, however, a
better-thanthe-alternative outcome in which publicity generated by
animalsupporting "Hard Copy" surely played a pivotal role.
Tabloids are not known for consistency, which is a glass half full or half
empty, depending on your outlook.
Half empty: They are not always sensible.
Half full: They are not always absurd.
Far from it, in fact; one of the biggest chinks in the foolishness of
"Extra." "Inside Edition." "Hard Copy, and even that print bad actor, the
Enquirer, is their consistently brawny coverage of animal abuse. The link
is logical, given the stirring nature of the material and the extent to
which tabloids nourish and thrive on emotionalism.
In this case, it's not adrenaline squandered on the titillating adventures
of President Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, happily, but emotionalism for a
righteous cause.
A trio of segments on animal cruelty that aired in 1997, for example, has
earned "Hard Copy" a third Genesis Award from the Ark Trust, a
media-watching animal rights group in Los Angeles. "Hard Copy" and other
Genesis winners will receive their awards in ceremonies on March 28.
One of the cited "Hard Copy" stories involved the continued slaughter of
African elephants for their ivory. Another included devastating footage of
suffering rodeo animals ("A terrified little calf has her sensitive tail
raked over a post so she'll burst out .... ").
The third, and most powerful, featured gruesomely graphic undercover
videotape of a kind rarely aired on TV. It showed Montana mink farmers
strenuously wringing the necks of the struggling, biting animals, then
tossing them into a bucket where they continued to writhe for a couple of
minutes, seemingly still alive and suffering. "And we're not even airing
the screams of these little creatures," a reporter added about the minks,
whose grimly demise was juxtaposed with footage of glamorous models wearing
fur on a runway. No one ever accused "Hard Copy" of taking any prisoners.
It's in 1998, however, that "Hard Copy" may have scored most indelibly on
behalf of animals by aggressively leafling the charge this month for Nadas,
largely in collaboration with Chris DeRose ot Last Chance for Animals, all
the while deploying manipulative music and some of the other took, typical
of tabloid journalism.
The glass-half-empty crowd would call it unfairly stacking the deck, the
half-full crowd advocacy journalism in service of a noble end.
áááá
Oregon can be the cruelest place on Earth if you have four legs and wag
your tail," Doug Bruckner reported in the initial "Hard Copy' piece on
Nadas. Featured in another story last week was Buster, a livestock-chasing
Oregon dog whose owner, "Hard Copy" said, sprang him from death row and
then fled with him. "In order to kill my dog, they'd have to kill me
first," said the man when interviewed at his "mystery location" by Ed
Miller.
"Hard Copy" is not being seen by its usual audience in Los Angeles where
KCBS-TV Channel 2 recently juggled some of its lineup to accommodate Winter
Olympic coverage, thereby bumping "Hard Copy" to 3:30 p.m. weekdays from
its usual 7:30 p.m. slot. Even with reduced audience in the nation's
second-largest TV market, though, the show reports getting roughly 500,000
hits on its website in support of Nadas, plus thousands of positive e-mail
messages and average of 500 supportive phone calls after each of its Nadas
piece. That's more than five times the show's usual phone response.
Not surprisingly, "Hard Copy" vows to keep on the story even after Nadas
arrives in Utah, this being one of those times when good works and good
business coincide.
__________________________
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 15:46:04 -0600
From: paulbog@jefnet.com (Rick Bogle)
To: "AR-News Post"
Subject: More Vilas Stuff
Message-ID: <19980216154701867.AAA220@paulbog.jefnet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
As you might remember, Resolution 241 is slated to be considered before the
entire Dane County Board of Supervisors on Thursday, February 19 at 7:30
p.m.
For those in the area, the meeting is in room 201 of the City / County
Building at 210 Martin Luter King Blvd.
The resolution to find humane options for these 150 macaques has passed
three committees by unanimous decision each time in spite of the Wisconsin
Regional Primate Research Center staff being on hand at each meeting to
loby for the monkeys to go to Tulane.
(Sick joke: What do you call monkeys that get sent to Tulane? Rhesus
pieces.)
To a large degree, the success up to this point has been a group effort
which has come from all over. Once again, the hurdle has been raised and
your calls and e-mails are needed again.
I was asked to create a sting of addresses in addition to the ones attached
to the board members' personal data. I hope this helps.
R
Dane County Board Supervisors
1996-1998
Lyman F. Anderson
31875 Union Rd, Oregon 53575, B/H: 835-3272
anderson.lyman@co.dane.wi.us
Jonathan Becker
11509 N Meadow Ln, Madison 53705 B: 266-4360 H: 238-7076
becker.jonathan@co.dane.wi.us
Terese Berceau
204181 Cherokee Dr, Madison 53711 H: 233-8809
berceau@co.dane.wi.us
David J. Blaska
75213 Loruth Terr, Madison 53711 H: 271-4882
blaska@co.dane.wi.us
J. Michael Blaska
385972 CTH VV, Marshall 53559 H: 837-2652
blaska.michael@co.dane.wi.us
Stephen Braunginn
195220 Langlois St, Madison 53705 H: 233-3820
braunginn@co.dane.wi.us
Brian Butler
252607 Middleton Beach Rd, Middleton 53562 H: 836-9137
butler@co.dane.wi.us
Thomas Clauder
332583 Norwich St, Fitchburg 53711 H: 276-9109
clauder@co.dane.wi.us
Karen Cornwell
102622 Van Hise Ave, Madison 53705 H: 233-1355
cornwell@co.dane.wi.us
Eugene Craft
30606 Birchwood Tr, Mt. Horeb 53572 H: 437-5652
craft@co.dane.wi.us
Leslie "Buzz" Davis
361021 Riverview Dr, Stoughton 53589 H: 873-4886
davis@co.dane.wi.us
David M. Gawenda
161004 Douglas Tr, Madison 53716 H: 221-4021
gawenda@co.dane.wi.us
David Hanneman
391845 Wisconsin Ave, Sun Prairie 53590 H: 837-7576
hanneman@co.dane.wi.us
Donald Heiliger
352433 Leslie Rd, Stoughton 53589 H: 873-8613
heiliger@co.dane.wi.us
Helen Hellenbrand
275623 S. Woodland Dr, Waunakee 53597 H: 849-8451
hellenbrand@co.dane.wi.us
John Hendrick
61315 Spaight St, Madison 53703 H: 257-1409
hendrick@co.dane.wi.us
Andrew T. Janssen
5402 Paunack Pl. #1, Madison 53705 B: 266-0650 H: 238-9396
janssen@co.dane.wi.us
Kevin R. Kesterson
346115 South Court, McFarland 53558 H: 838-9518
kesterson@co.dane.wi.us
Richard Kiley
174605 Armistice Ln, Madison 53704 H: 241-0880
kiley@co.dane.wi.us
Darold Lowe
3205 Crystal Ln, Madison 53714 H: 249-5693
lowe@co.dane.wi.us
Scott McCormick
8509 N. Lake St #503, Madison 53703 H: 256-1073
mccormick.scott@co.dane.wi.us
Scott McDonell
4140 W. Gilman St, Madison 53703 H: 259-9506
mcdonell@co.dane.wi.us
Mark Miller
244903 Roigan Terr, Monona 53716 H: 221-2701
miller.mark@co.dane.wi.us
James Mohrbacher
185206 Comanche Way, Madison 53704 H: 246-9153
mohrbacher@co.dane.wi.us
Larry Olson
124522 Hollow Ridge Rd, Madison 53704 H: 244-1480
olson.larry@co.dane.wi.us
Judith A. Pederson
15 New Berm Cir, Madison 53719 H: 274-4016
pederson@co.dane.wi.us
Regina Rhyne
131805 Fisher St, Madison 53713 H: 251-0420
rhyne@co.dane.wi.us
David J. Ripp
297220 Highway 19, Waunakee 53597 H: 849-7643
ripp.david@co.dane.wi.us
Gail Rutkowski
141817 Waunona Way, Madison 53713 H: 222-8737
rutkowski@co.dane.wi.us
Philip H. Salkin
32127 N. Main St, Verona 53593 H: 845-9849
salkin@co.dane.wi.us
Bob Salov
372103 Pleasant Dr, Cambridge 53523 H: 423-4358
salov@co.dane.wi.us
John Scepanski
22544 Flambeau Pkwy, DeForest 53532 H: 846-3678
scepanski@co.dane.wi.us
Ruth Ann Schoer
97498 Old Sauk Rd, Madison 53717B: 836-0191 H: 836-1312
schoer@co.dane.wi.us
Samuel J. Simon
261210 Falcon Ct, Middleton 53562 H: 836-1514
simon@co.dane.wi.us
Thomas Stoebig
154309 Hegg Ave, Madison 53716 H: 222-6429
stoebig@co.dane.wi.us
Michael Theisen
23951 Burr Oak Ln, Madison 53713 H: 251-4234
theisen@co.dane.wi.us
James Van Deurzen
2810250 Mathewson Rd, Mazomanie 53560 H: 795-2336
vandeurzen@co.dane.wi.us
David E. Wiganowsky
213363 Burke Rd, Sun Prairie 53590 H: 837-8604
wiganowsky@co.dane.wi.us
Judith M. Wilcox
2620 E Dayton, Madison 53703 B: 266-9388 H: 255-8913
wilcox@co.dane.wi.us
anderson.lyman@co.dane.wi.us,becker.jonathan@co.dane.wi.us,
berceau@co.dane.wi.us,blaska@co.dane.wi.us,braunginn@co.dane.wi.us,
butler@co.dane.wi.us,clauder@co.dane.wi.us,cornwell@co.dane.wi.us,
craft@co.dane.wi.us,davis@co.dane.wi.us,gawenda@co.dane.wi.us,
hanneman@co.dane.wi.us,heiliger@co.dane.wi.us,hellenbrand@co.dane.wi.us,
hendrick@co.dane.wi.us,janssen@co.dane.wi.us,kesterson@co.dane.wi.us,
kiley@co.dane.wi.us,lowe@co.dane.wi.us,mccormick.scott@co.dane.wi.us,
mcdonell@co.dane.wi.us,miller.mark@co.dane.wi.us,
mohrbacher@co.dane.wi.us,olson.larry@co.dane.wi.us,pederson@co.dane.wi.us,
rhyne@co.dane.wi.us,ripp.david@co.dane.wi.us,rutkowski@co.dane.wi.us,
salkin@co.dane.wi.us,salov@co.dane.wi.us,scepanski@co.dane.wi.us,
schoer@co.dane.wi.us,simon@co.dane.wi.us,stoebig@co.dane.wi.us,
theisen@co.dane.wi.us,vandeurzen@co.dane.wi.us,
wiganowsky@co.dane.wi.us,wilcox@co.dane.wi.us
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 14:30:40 -0800
From: Bob Chorush
To: "'ar-news@envirolink.org'"
Subject: FW: circus animal info requested
Message-ID: <0036E62F4D76D111AD4B004095020B3601E6E2@EXCHANGE>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Please reply to original sender.
> ----------
> From: CF Inman, D100[SMTP:ci7761@bristol.ac.uk]
> Reply To: ci7761@bristol.ac.uk
> Sent: Monday, February 16, 1998 4:51 AM
> To: info@paws.org
> Subject: circus animals
>
> Dear Sir/ Madam,
> We are veterinary students at Bristol university and are
> currently carrying out a project on the welfare and ethics of
> circus animals. If you could send us any information on this
> topic, it would be much appreciated.
> Yours faithfully,
> Charlotte Inman
>
> ----------------------
> CF Inman, D100
> ci7761@bristol.ac.uk
>
-----reply to above--------
Bob Chorush, Web Administrator
Progressive Animal Welfare Society (PAWS)
15305 44th Ave W. Lynnwood,WA 98046
425-787-2500 ext 862 fax 425-742-5711
bchorush@paws.org
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 06:36:09 +0800
From: bunny
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (NZ)Child's beloved pet rabbit dies of RHD
Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19980217062822.36270e66@wantree.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>From The Southland Times - February 13, 1998
(New Zealand)
First RCD victim in Te Anau a beloved pet
from
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá
TE ANAU -- An autopsy late last month on a dead
pet rabbit found on a farm in Sinclair Road confirmed the
arrival of RCD in the Te Anau basin.
The five-year-old domestic breed rabbit named Mischief
belonged to Sarah Chaloner, 12.
Te Anau Pest Destruction Group chairman Ross
Cockburn had said earlier he was disappointed the virus
had been brought into the region before a controlled
programme had been put in place.
However, he had no idea where the disease had come
from or who had released it.
Dead rabbits have been found in various parts of the
basin and the disease appeared to be spreading rapidly.
Sarah was heartbroken over the death of her pet and put
pen to paper to describe the agony she watched the
rabbit go through.
Her letter to The Southland Times is:
"My name is Sarah Chaloner, I am 12 years old and I live
in Te Anau. I am writing about the article (on January 31)
about RCD in Te Anau.
"It was my pet rabbit, Mischief Thumper Chaloner, that
died of RCD and I think it was really cruel. Brian Vidler,
our vet, did an autopsy the next day.
"I was devastated, as I was with her when she was dying
and I was telling her she'd be all right. She had blood
coming out of her nose and she kept throwing little fits.
"Mum rang the vet to see if we could help Mischief. But
when Mum got off the phone, Mischief had stopped
breathing, I could tell. We buried her in our garden and
we made a headstone for her.
"I had a rabbit leash, so I could take her walkies and she
loved it.
"Mischief was white with a brown stripe down her back
and brown spots. We had Mischief for five years. We
got her when she was six weeks old. Mischief died on
January 21.
"I think RCD is an extremely cruel way to kill rabbits,
especially pet rabbits, and I think they shouldn't have
released it in Te Anau. I hope all the rabbits that are left
develop an immunity to RCD and the person that
released it early feels really stupid, because I think he is.
"Whoever released RCD in Te Anau without permission
and killed my rabbit, Mischief, is a murderer. I hope
everyone agrees with me."
End
=====================================================================
========
áááááááááááááááááá /`\áá /`\ááá Rabbit Information Service,
Tom, Tom,áááááááá (/\ \-/ /\)áá P.O.Box 30,
The piper's son,áááá )6 6(ááááá Riverton,
Saved a pigááááááá >{= Y =}<ááá Western Australia 6148
And away he run;ááá /'-^-'\á
So none could eatá (_)áá (_)ááá email: rabbit@wantree.com.au
The pig so sweetááá |á .á |á
Together they ranáá |áááá |}ááá
http://www.wantree.com.au/~rab
bit/rabbit.htm
Down the street.ááá \_/^\_/ááá (Rabbit Information Service website updated
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá frequently)ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá
Jesus was most likely a vegetarian... why aren't you? Go to
http://www.geocities.c
om/RainForest/4620/essene.htm
for more information.
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
áááááá - Voltaire
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 17:55:02 -0500
From: allen schubert
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) Judge to hear arguments for dismissal
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980216175500.00767cd0@pop3.clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
from Amarillo Globe-News
http://www.amarillonet.com/oprah/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web posted Sunday, February 15, 1998 6:43 a.m. CT
Judge to hear arguments for dismissal
By CHIP CHANDLER
Globe-News Staff Writer
ááááááááá EDITOR'S NOTE: Plaintiffs in the area cattlemen vs.
ááááááááá Oprah Winfrey trial rested their case on Friday. U.S.
ááááááááá District Judge Mary Lou Robinson will hear arguments
ááááááááá Tuesday related to a defense motion for dismissal of
ááááááááá the case. Following are some highlights from the first
ááááááááá four weeks of the trial.
Though defense attorneys have not officially begun their case in the
cattlemen vs. Oprah Winfrey trial, jurors by now likely have a pretty clear
understanding of why the lawyers argue that their clients are innocent.
Winfrey's show is a talk show, not a news magazine, the host turned
defendant argued when she took the stand earlier this month.
Harpo Productions, Winfrey's production studio, tried to present a balanced
show on April 16, 1996, Winfrey testified. The show's topic was "Dangerous
Foods" and included a segment on mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform
encephalopathy.
But while she wanted to do a balanced show, she said, she didn't feel it
had to end in a draw.
"I hold myself to that standard," she said, "but because I choose to be
balanced doesn't mean every show will end in a tie."
One key to Winfrey's defense is the claim that a representative of the beef
industry was allowed to make four points:
* BSE does not exist in the United States;
* the U.S. beef supply is safe;
* the government has a 10-year history of screening the country for BSE;
and,
* the government continues to monitor the situation carefully.
This defense argument centers on quality vs. quantity: Dr. Gary Weber said
what he came to say, even though he spoke for less time on the edited
version of the show than did beef critic Howard Lyman.
"I was there to provide both sides. There's no law that said I had to do
that," Winfrey said.
Other vague references to the First Amendment protection of free speech and
a free press have also dominated the defense.
"This is the United States of America," Lyman said when he was on the
stand. "Do I not have the right to express opinions?"
The cattlemen also have a beef with the editing of the show, claiming it
made the show biased against the American cattle industry. They presented
one witness who said the editor of the show was told by Winfrey to "cut the
boring beef guy (Weber) out."
But Winfrey and James Kelley, the show's editor, both denied that. And the
plaintiffs' witness, LaGrande Green, had his credibility called into
question when he said he was fired by Harpo in part because he is a
self-described sex addict.
Last week, the defense introduced another prong of attack, this time
against the plaintiffs' claims that Winfrey's show caused the market to
decline.
Two brokers from Chicago testified that they chose to start selling cattle
futures on the morning of Winfrey's show before they watched it. The
defense seems to be arguing that the traders are at fault for jumping to
the conclusion that Winfrey's show would cause any damage.
They bolstered that with a National Cattlemen's Beef Association survey
that showed a statistically insignificant decline in consumers' confidence
in beef after the show. The defense attorneys have also argued that several
other factors - including drought and feed prices - contributed to the
market crash.
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 18:01:25 -0500
From: allen schubert
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) Attorneys debate judge's actions
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980216180123.00767cd0@pop3.clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
from Amarillo Globe-News
http://www.amarillonet.com/oprah/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web posted Sunday, February 15, 1998 6:50 a.m. CT
Attorneys debate judge's actions
Robinson seen as giving due consideration to
legal points of important test case
ááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá
Cattlemen vs. Oprah Winfreyááááááááááá
áááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááááá
By KAY LEDBETTER Globe-News Farm and Ranchááá
Editor
AND CHIP CHANDLER Globe-News Staff Writer
Standard operating procedure in Amarillo's federal court: The plaintiffs
rest; the defendants ask the judge to dismiss the case; the judge rules
quickly.
Not standard: U.S. District Judge Mary Lou Robinson sets aside a full day
for oral arguments on the matter.
That's according to Amarillo attorneys who've practiced in Robinson's
courtroom.
Robinson's announcement Friday that she will listen to arguments related to
dismissing the case of area cattlemen vs. Oprah Winfrey may bode ill for at
least some of the plaintiffs, Walter Wolfram said.
"It looks to me that she believes there is a serious issue at stake . . .
at least as to some of the parties," he said.
Plaintiffs in the closely watched food disparagement lawsuit rested Friday
afternoon and immediately the defendants filed their motions. Robinson told
attorneys to be prepared to make oral arguments on Tuesday and told jurors
to not return until Wednesday. Monday is a federal holiday.
Wolfram is not alone in his opinion.
"If I were representing the plaintiffs, I'd be a little bit disheartened,"
Jack Hazlewood said.
It is normal procedure for defendants to file for a "judgment as a matter
of law" at the end of a plaintiff's case, Mark White said. Typically, he
said, it is either granted or denied fairly quickly.
"If it's a close question, it's usually just denied," White said. "My read
on it, if she's reserving a whole day for argument, is that she has some
serious questions about the plaintiffs' case."
Wolfram said the judge may be specifically interested in Texas Beef Group's
adoption of a new damage theory last week, one that could reduce their
damages from $4.5 million to about $525,000.
"The plaintiffs might have a problem with their damage theory . . . a fatal
flaw. . . . Shifting gears in the middle of the trial indicates they have a
serious technical problem," Wolfram said.
Paul Engler and his companies, the other plaintiffs in the case, have not
introduced a new damage theory.
While many agree Friday's decision is significant, theories about why
Robinson wants to hear arguments are wide ranging.
A gag order in the case prevents both parties from speculating.
Marty Rowley said the judge may be questioning the law under which the case
was filed.
The food disparagement law is being tested for the first time.
After hearing arguments, Rowley said Robinson could determine the law is
valid, but that the law does not apply to the plaintiffs' case. She could
also rule the law is unconstitutional.
Robinson could also deny the defendants' motion after hearing arguments.
Rowley said if Robinson allows the case to go to the jury, the jury will
decide the facts based upon the law.
Generally the judge will let a case go to the jury, White said, because "if
the jury finds in favor of the defendant, then the judge is protected on
appeal. It's harder for the plaintiffs to bust a jury verdict (on appeal)."
White said Robinson typically denies motions like those filed Friday
because there is no error in initially denying them.
"She can always come back and rule on it later. The way I view it really is
that she's giving it more consideration," White said. "She's a very careful
judge."
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 15:49:20 -0000
From: "David Meyer"
To:
Subject: USA-Los Angeles- Political Rally
Message-ID: <199802170009.QAA00564@mail.instanet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Senator Barbara Boxer is holding a spirit rally to kick off her re-election
campaign.á She has been good on animal issues, and some animal supporters
would be good for her and good for the animals.
The event will be at 8:30 a.m., Tuesday Feb. 17 at 1301 W. Olive in
Burbank.á For more info, contact Animal Legislative Action Network at
213/662-6728.á Every body counts, so stop by on the way to work and let it
be known that you support the animals.
David Meyer
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 20:56:20 -0600
From: Steve Barney
To: AR-News
Subject: [US] "'63 UW-zoo lease brings city into monkey debate"
Message-ID: <34E8FC54.52D902EC@uwosh.edu>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
"'63 UW-zoo lease brings city into monkey debate"
By Jason Shepard
Correspondent for The Capital Times
The Capital Times
Madison, WI
US
Saturday, Feb. 14, 1998
Page 7A
-- Beginning --
'63 UW-zoo lease brings city into monkey debate
By Jason Shepard
Correspondent for The Capital Times
A new interpretation of the 3-decade-old lease between the UW and the
Henry Vilas Zoo could draw the city of Madison into the heated debate
over the future of the 150 university-owned monkeys at the zoo.
Meanwhile, Dane County politicians are expressing increased skepticism
about footing the bill to keep the monkeys here.
The University of Wisconsin is abandoning its support of the monkey
house after it lost federal funding as of Feb. 1.á The UW has given the
county a March 2 deadline to decide whether it will pay for the future
upkeep of the monkeys.á If the county does not give the UW a commitment
within the next few weeks, the UW will proceed with its plan to find new
homes for the monkeys.
The language in the zoo lease could throw a monkey wrench into
negotiations, however.
A memo written by Dane County Corporation Counsel Cal Kornstedt reveals
that the 1963 lease between the city of Madison and the University of
Wisconsin is still valid and was never transferred to the county when
the county took over the zoo.
"In my opinion, the lease affords no opportunity to the county to stop
or otherwise hinder the removal of the monkeys," Kornstedt wrote.á "This
is so because the lease is one between the UW and the city of Madison.
The county of Dane is not a party to the lease."
Kornstedt said the rediscovery of the old lease language could require
City Council action on an agreement to keep the monkeys here.
City Attorney Eunice Gibson agreed, saying the City Council likely would
have to approve any changes to the lease agreement.
On Thursday, the Dane County Board is scheduled to debate whether to
launch an in depth study into the future of the UW monkeys at the Henry
Vilas Zoo.
Discussion at a Wednesday meeting of the county Ways and Means Committee
hinted at growing unease over the issue.
Several committee members said they would not support a county budget
increase to keep the 150 monkeys at the zoo and pointed out that voting
in favor of a study did not mean they would vote for a funding increase
at a later time.
Supervisor Ruth Ann Schoer of Madison said she would not support a
budget increase for the monkeys at a time when the county can't find
money to support much needed youth and elderly programs.
While all members of the committee eventually voted in favor of a
resolution to study the options of keeping the monkeys in town, several
members said they did not want to give the public a false sense of
security that the monkeys would remain.
Supervisor Larry Olson of Madison said he had received several calls in
support of the monkeys, but they were from people outside his district.
Others said they received many calls supporting the monkeys, but most
were from animal rights activists from around the country, not concerned
residents of Dane County.
Supervisor Andy Janssen of Madison said he didn't remember receiving as
many calls and letters about any other County Board issue in the past
five years.á The "world is watching for our decision," he said.
Countered Supervisor Kevin Kesterson of McFarland: "But unfortunately,
they want your constituency and my constituency to write the check."
City officials are reluctant to be drawn into a similar budget debate.
Ryan Mulcahy, a spokesman for Madison Mayor Sue Bauman, didn't learn of
the city's potential role until Thursday.á He said the mayor has no
interest getting involved in the negotiations between the county and the
UW.
"Our position is that we're not going to interfere with anything between
the county and the university that would interfere with any agreement
about the monkeys," he said.
Napoleon Smith, a member of the Zoo Commission and the City Council
member whose district includes the zoo, was slightly more open to the
prospect of city involvement: "If the city is in this, then we're in
it," he said.
Smith said he was not looking for more trouble or more work, "but I
think this means now that the city and the county are in this, at least
in some respects, together."
The importance of the 1963 lease in monkey negotiations is not fully
known.á As part of the lease, the UW is required to demolish the monkey
building and restore the landscape should it ever abandon the facility.
However, the UW is now offering the county a deal to get out of that
provision, which includes the UW caring for the monkeys until Jan. 1,
1999, if the county agrees to care for them after that.
Finding money to keep the monkeys is still the primary concern for city
and county officials.á And those officials agree on at least one thing:
They need more help from the UW than it is now offering.
"If we plan to keep any of the monkeys here, we are going to need some
outside assistance - possibly from the university - for anything to
happen," Smith said.
Topf Wells, executive assistant to Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk,
agreed.
The UW's current offer "doesn't in any way increase the university's
commitment to deal with the monkey issue," he said.á "They have to spend
that money anyway.á Keeping the monkeys, or at least some of them, is
going to take a broad partnership, and it's very difficult to see how
that can be successful without the university being one of those
partners."
At Wednesday's county Ways and Means Committee, supervisors were still
trying to determine just why the UW is moving so quickly to get rid of
the monkeys.
Under questioning by Supervisor David Gawenda, Joe Kemnitz, interim
director of the Wisconsin Regional Primate Research Center, said the
funding restrictions by the federal government came after The Capital
Times' "expose-style coverage" into the violations the UW committed in
breach of an agreement it had with the zoo not to use the monkeys housed
there for invasive research.
"I firmly believe that as a result of the publicity, (the National
Institutes of Health) made the decision that we had to cease using base
grant money for the Vilas facility," Kemnitz said.
The Capital Times reported in a series of articles in August that the UW
had improperly killed dozens of monkeys in invasive research projects,
in violation of several written promises to Zoo Director David Hall
saying that any zoo-raised monkey would be used in behavioral studies or
in breeding colonies.
Graduate School Dean Virginia Hinshaw launched her own probe into the
matter, and acknowledged that as many as 201 monkeys were used in
violation of the UW/zoo agreement.
Asked about the newspaper reports, Kemnitz admitted that "animals were
used in a manner that was inconsistent with the (UW/zoo) agreement," but
said NIH officials never approved that agreement, which was
"inconsistent with our contract with the NIH."
Gawenda said he was frustrated that because of the UW's actions -
violating the agreement with the zoo and losing funding - the county is
now forced to make a decision about the monkeys "under the gun."
-- End --
More info about this scandal is available at:
http://www.uwosh.edu/organ
izations/alag/#Issues
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 22:35:56 EST
From: SMatthes@aol.com
To: ar-news@envirolink.org, EnglandGal@aol.com, chrisw@fund.org,
ááááááá Pandini1@prodigy.net, RonnieJW@aol.com, jdanh@JUNO.com,
ááááááá dawnmarie@rocketmail.com, Chibob44@aol.com, Ron599@aol.com,
ááááááá nbgator@ibm.net
Subject: Urgent!á Exotic Animals May Die
Message-ID:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
A roadside zoo (dealer, collector, breeder and cross-breeder) in Illinois with
many problems that will be forced to close soon has the following exotic
animals that are in urgent NEED of being placed in a sanctuary:
One Liger
Two Black Bears (1 M; 1 F)
Two Tigers (1M; 1 F)
One Tiger Siberian/Bengal Mix (Neutered)
Two African Lions (1 M; 1 F)
Two Cougars (1 M; 1 F)
Several potential sanctuaries have expressed an interest in taking one or two
of the animals; however, assistance is needed i.e., fencing, funding,
transporting, and other needs.á For further information, please contact
Wildlife Coordinator, Sarasota In Defense of Animals, P.O. Box 15653,
Sarasota, FL 34277; telephone:á (941) 924-2505; fax (941)915-8388.
email:smatthes@aol.com.
PLEASE help these animals who have suffered so much already.
Thanks.
Elise Matthes, President
Sarasota In Defense of Animals
á
|
|
