AR-NEWS Digest 499 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Sharing the Skies by Andrew Gach 2) ANIMAL ACTION SHAMES HEALTH CANADA by Sean Thomas 3) [CA] ICN Corporate Sponsors by David J Knowles 4) [CA] Future red hot for meat-free products by David J Knowles 5) [UK] Fwd: BP Tries to Bankrupt Greenpeace by David J Knowles 6) [US] Fwd: Seattle:Blockade of Factory Trawler Ends by David J Knowles 7) Duck Hunting by Mesia Quartano 8) Racing camels in Europe by Vadivu Govind 9) [UK] Man jailed for microwaving kitten by David J Knowles 10) [SP] Parents to sue over puma attack on girls by David J Knowles 11) [India] Monkey business fills Punjab jail by David J Knowles 12) [UK] Man jailed for microwaving kitten by David J Knowles 13) [SP] Parents to sue over puma attack on girls by David J Knowles 14) [India] Monkey business fills Punjab jail by David J Knowles 15) More Aquariums by Ty Savoy 16) (US) Regulators Fine Egg Farm $1 Million by allen schubert 17) (US) Butterfly Popularity on the Rise by allen schubert 18) WTO Panel: Beef Hormone Ban Illegal by allen schubert 19) Bovine Growth Hormone: Mad Cow by allen schubert 20) Companies can say 'NO' to GE on labels by allen schubert 21) Companies can say 'NO' to GE on labels by allen schubert 22) EuropaBio: Plan to PR us into GE foods 2/2 by allen schubert 23) EuropaBio: Plan to PR us into GE foods 1/2 by allen schubert 24) Ottawa Citizen, letters to the editor by Sean Thomas 25) Ottawa Citizen, letters to the editor by Sean Thomas 26) Anti Fur Resources by MINKLIB@aol.com 27) WSPA Aids Animals on Volcanic Stricken Montserrat by fls@wspausa.com (Joanne deMarrais) 28) DON'T EAT, DON'T TELL, Wendy's and the USDA by "Haptas, Joe" 29) Michelle's in NYC by Michelle Sass 30) Essex Junction,Vermont: Rodeo Protest 8/27 by Mike Markarian 31) FDA Reform by DDAL@aol.com 32) [UK] Barry Horne: Prison staff back down by "Miggi" 33) [UK] Trial and Error - Taken from SchNEWS issue 130 by "Miggi" 34) Trappers Convention Article by MINKLIB@aol.com 35) Cruelty is not ELLEgant by "sa338@blues.uab.es" 36) Compassionate Living Festival by Vadivu Govind 37) Admin Note--was: Michelle's in NYC by allen schubert 38) Cats burned by "sa338@blues.uab.es" 39) (US) Dog Survives Being Dragged From Car by allen schubert 40) (UK) Report: Condemned Poultry Meat Sold for Human Consumption by allen schubert 41) (UK) Linda McCartney Has Launched an Ambitious Expansion by allen schubert 42) (AU) Dieters Need Not Shun Beef Australian Study by allen schubert 43) Fwd: Attempted Piracy in High Seas by US Coast Guard by David J Knowles 44) [UK] Anti-hunting league expels top officials by David J Knowles Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 21:04:37 -0700 From: Andrew Gach To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Sharing the Skies Message-ID: <33F91B55.5F16@worldnet.att.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Why pilots don't like sharing skies with birds The Christian Science Monitor BOSTON (August 18, 1997 11:05 a.m. EDT) -- In an era of acute concern about airline safety, on most days Northwest Airlines pilot Paul Eschenfelder is forced to give more attention to stray starlings than the unlikely threat of a terrorist bomb. "Birdstrikes" don't get much publicity. In fact, pilots have no instructions in their manuals on what to do if a bird crosses their path. But collisions with birds are a common threat that, until now, have attracted little attention. Just last week, a Delta 737 was forced to make an emergency landing at Boston's Logan International Airport because one engine ingested a bird shortly after takeoff. The plane was grounded for repairs, but none of the 59 passengers was hurt. The incident highlighted why more than 300 aviation industry representatives from around the world met at Logan last week to discuss bird-management techniques at America's airports. The threat of a birdstrike is considered more serious than ever, in part because programs designed to protect wildlife have worked, dramatically boosting populations of many birds in the U.S. That rebound comes at a time when airplane manufacturers are prone to promote two-engine - rather than four-engine - planes, like the new Boeing 777. The U.S. military is particularly concerned. Four major birdstrike crashes have occurred in the past two years, including an Air Force AWACS plane in which all 24 crew members were killed. Commercial-jet windshields and engines have been beefed up to protect against collisions with fowl, but no one has found a way to completely bird-proof an aircraft. Some 4,500 birdstrikes are still reported yearly by commercial and military aircraft, causing about $250 million in damages. "If you hit a 10-pound Canada goose on liftoff or landing, it's the equivalent of 1,000 pounds dropped 10 feet," says Richard Dobeer, a biologist at the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Wildlife Research Center in Sandusky, Ohio. "It's impossible to design an engine to withstand that kind of damage." That's why efforts to manage bird populations at airports are so important, says Dobeer. Several countries, as well one airport in the U.S., shared their successes at the conference. "It's a complex endeavor," says Dobeer. Many airports are located near wetlands, where federally protected birds proliferate. Gulls are the most serious problem; next is waterfowl - especially geese; then blackbirds and starlings. Because many of these birds are protected, the emphasis is on nonlethal ways of solving the problem. An integrated program works the best, Dobeer says, because birds adapt to some methods of control. New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport is considered a model of the multifaceted approach. In the late 1980s, Kennedy topped the list of reported birdstrikes in the U.S., with some 300 per year. It has cut that number by about 75 percent, according to Lanny Rider, manager of aerospace operations for the Port Authority of New York/New Jersey. But the numbers are slightly up again this year. Spending about $500,000 annually, Rider says the program at Kennedy focuses on the biggest threat - gulls - but also maintains an overall strategy because birds tend to return. His tactics include: Runway patrols that fire shotguns with loud shellcrackers, propane cannons, and tape recordings of different species of birds making distress calls. Tall grass. Geese feed on grass, but do not like it tall. Use of falcons to patrol the airspace. Several other countries, notably Scotland, have used this method successfully. Kennedy is experimenting with having falconers on the field from sunrise to dusk. Periodically, bird owners fly the falcons - predators to smaller birds - over the airport to scare away other species. Spraying insecticides several times per year. Gulls feed on insects. Shooting limited numbers of gulls and starlings, after obtaining a permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Cleaning up garbage and covering dumpsters. Taxicab drivers are asked not to feed gulls. Rider's staff also succeeded in getting two landfills near Kennedy closed. Canada had a "very serious birdstrike problem at several airports," says Bruce MacKinnon, a specialist in wildlife control with Canada Transport. Pilots at the conference were poring over a comprehensive Canadian manual for airports and pilots on dealing with birds. But U.S. pilots say they still lack scientific research on how birds behave when confronted with aircraft and what pilots should do when they encounter birds. "Some pilots turn their radar on when they run into birds, or descend rapidly," says United Airlines pilot George Gil. "But that probably has no effect." "One new thing I heard here," Gil says, "is that pilots should pull up, rather than descend, because birds naturally dive." By FAYE BOWERS, The Christian Science Monitor Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 00:09:52 -0700 From: Sean Thomas To: ar-news@envirolink.com Subject: ANIMAL ACTION SHAMES HEALTH CANADA Message-ID: <33F946C0.6CD0@sympatico.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Monday, August 18- Researchers at the Frederick J. Banting Research Center in Ottawa, Canada were met with a shame picket today as Animal Action conducted another protest at the Health Canada primate facility. Over the weekend the animal rights group learned of a huge sale of 500 monkeys to private institutions across Canada. This was in conflict with reports from Animal Resource Division Director, Pierre Thibert's claims that "barely any" monkeys had ever been sold. The sale took place over the past year. To mark the release of the information an activist dressed as a researcher was forced to carry a placard explaining his crime by two primate prison escapees. The monkey prisoners then condemned the researcher to the same fate that most monkeys in Health Canada face; a life of imprisonment. The researcher was thrown into a cage and loced inside for the rest of the action. To give a face to the countless monkeys sold to face certain death, a chain of 500 pictures of caged macaques was attached across the front of the building. The building was also covered in chalk slogans. The sale of the 500 illustrates what Animal Action fears the most; that the monkeys will be sold off in secrecy. PLEASE KEEP THE PRESSURE ON HEALTH CANADA TO RETIRE ALL OF ITS MONKEYS Sean Thomas Co-Director, Animal Action Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 21:32:03 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [CA] ICN Corporate Sponsors Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970818213231.099ff6cc@dowco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" VANCOUVER, BC - Vancouver recently hosted the 21st Quadrennial Congress of the International Council of Nurses. Corporate sponsorship of the event was listed in the latest edition of The Candian Nurse/L'Infirmiere Canadiene, published by the Canadian Nurses Association, was listed as follows: Gold Sponsors The Johson & Johson family of companies Johnson & Johnson Medical Products Johnson & Johnson Inc. McNeil Consumer Products Company Janssen-Otho Inc. Silver Sponsors Apotex Inc. (Canadian generic drug company) Glaxo Wellcome 'Modern Woman' Bronze Sponsors Astra Canada Becton Dicinson Canada Inc. Novopharm Limited Pfizer Canada Inc. Proctor & Gamble Inc. SmithKline Beecham Pharma Inc. Wyeth-Ayerst Canada Inc. Ministry of Health - British Columbia Other Sponsors Bristol-Myers Squibb Hoechst Marion Roussel Hyal Pharmacutical Corporation Midland Walwyn Hoffman-Laroche Ltd Medical Research Council of Canada National Tilden Special ICN Sponsors 3M Health Care Regent Medical The delegates did pass a resolution about cloning and reproduction, which reads: "Be it resolved that the ICN should take the initiative, in consultation with other international organizations concerned, to clarify and assess the ethical implications of cloning for human health and that its findings should be reflected in the Code of Ethics. Further be it resolved that the ICN should report to the Council of National Representatives at its next meeting in 1999." A planned visit to a rodeo was cancelled. (I did write a letter of protest about taking a group of so-called "caring" professionals to see an event made possible by the infliction of pain in other animals, but I am, of course, unconvinced that these two things were connected.) The ICN is made up of national nursing organizations and currently has 119 member countries. David J Knowles Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 21:31:59 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [CA] Future red hot for meat-free products Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970818213227.099fc2ae@dowco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >From The Vancouver Sun - Monday, August 18th, 1997 By Petti Fong Sun Business Reporter Soy to the world. After 12 years of hawking hot dogs made from vegetables and soy-protein, and other meat-like foods such as pepperoni, Yves Potvin is planning to sell his products to an international audience. "We are in a business that's growing every year," said Potvin, a fromer chef, who is not vegetarian. "Our American market is 50 per cent of our sales now, and it's growing at 80 per cent a year. That's where our growth potential is." The meat-substitutes category in the U.S. is growing at a double-digit rate and annual sales are in the $200-million to $250-million range. Yves Veggie Cuisine ranks in the top five for the American market and first in Canada. A new plant on Annacis Island positions the company to meet the demand, which Potvin said, is growing at 30 - 35 per cent each year. Potvin, who founded the firm in 1985, has hired a team of executives to take over the running the business, so he can concentrate on long-term plans. The company is already moving into the European market, and will target the Asian market in two or three years. "In the Asian market, they love meatballs and pork. In the Japanese market, they eat a lot of beef patties. The question is to find out what each country likes and figure out a product. Every country has a dish in which they use ground meat, ground lamb." The company is also developing a breakfast sausage and expanding into entrees such as chili and soups, along with a kosher line. It also plans to start food service for restaurants, hospitals and airlines. "We are probably touching five to 10 per cent of the market now. We could have 40 per cent, if we adapt." With offices in San Francisco, North Carolina, Toronto and one in London, England, Potvin said expansion could result in the company going public. While Potvin doesn't want to reveal sales figures, analysts predict they're well over $10 million a year. "I'm a 100-per-cent owner of a company and that'e tough to maintain. Our company is very capital intensive, therefore you need a lot of cash." A friend in a similar business in the states went public and was no longer allowed to manage the company, said Potvin. "I wouldn't want to go from becoming the CEO to a promoter," he said. "I wouldn't want to have to have director saying you're not good enough to run this company any more." Potvin said he may put Yves Veggie Cuisine on the public market if he decides to undertake major expenditures, such as buying company refrigerated units for supermarkets to place the products. That move will cost about $10 million, he says. >From a competive point of view, Potvin siad he's wary that going public would reveal the company's expansion plans. Despite the company's success, Potvin said he had trouble raising the money for the $5.5 million plant in Delta's Annacis Island. "It was very humbling to be a succesful business, then do a dog and pony show in front of the banks." The Bank of Nova Scotia planned to finance the whole project, but decided at the head-office level to provide only partial funding. Eventually, Potvin found the rest, through the help of a broker, from a pension fund. "I went everywhere to get the financing. We even had the Bank of Italy. The banker gave me his word. When it went to Toronto, the board rejected the loan. They said: ' we're not going to invest $4 million in a fake wiener factory.'" Hot dogs continue to be the company's biggest sellers, and the plant produces between 150,000 to 175,000 hot dogs and 16,000 kilograms of food each day. Vancouver health-food broker Michael Thoedor said at the rate Yves is growing, he expects the company to go public within the next 25 months. "There's good growth potential here. In the U.S., if your product is found in a big supermarket in a big urban market, you've hit a home run. Yves hit a home run with this line." If European expansion is popular, Theodor said another production or packing facillity overseas may open. The company is successful, he said, because it reinvented the wheel by replicating meat. "There was hot dog. Now you have a tofu hot dog. You have a burger, now you have a garden burger. Ice cream becomes rice cream. That's how the health-food industry grew, by replicating existing successes." There are no Canadian statistics to determine who has what market share, said Serge Lavoie, the director of the Ottawa-based Canadian Health Food Association. "But there'e no doubt, that increasingly, you can get Yves burgers just about everywhere at the same price as all the others. They're the ones with the high profile. They're in the mass market." Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 21:32:19 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [UK] Fwd: BP Tries to Bankrupt Greenpeace Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970818213247.099ff05e@dowco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >From Greenbase - Greenpeace Press Release Server BP TRIES TO BANKRUPT GREENPEACE UK, August 18, 1997 - BP has issued a summons for over a million pounds against Greenpeace and four named campaigners, over the campaign to prevent climate change on the Atlantic Frontier. A "schedule of arrestment" issued in a Edinburgh Court of Sessions today says that BP seeks the sum of "one million four hundred thousand pounds" from Greenpeace Limited, Sarah Burton, Chris Rose, Liz Pratt and Jon Castle, and "all moveable things in your hands belonging or pertaining" to them. The "schedule" is addressed to Greenpeace's bank, the Co-Op, via a branch in Scotland. A Hearing applying for an interim interdict against the company and the four, is due in Edinburgh Court of Sessions, tomorrow morning on 19 August. Chris Rose, one of the named and Deputy Executive Director of Greenpeace UK, says "BP made stlg1.5 billion profit in its first six months of the year - it makes more in profit in 48 hours than Greenpeace receives in income in a year. BP is trying to use its financial and legal muscle to crush defence of the environment. BP may try to take away our money and our supporters money - but that will not make BP right, and it will not resolve them of responsibility for their role in global environmental pollution. BP is leading the world the wrong direction by opening up fossil fuels that the climate cannot sustain - but it would rather close down Greenpeace than change direction and invest in solar power. Greenpeace appeals to the public for its support.". With the Government, BP is among 21 oil companies opposing Greenpeace in the High Court over the lack of protection for the environment in the Atlantic Frontier oil field. A hearing on leave for a Judicial Review sought by Greenpeace is due in the London High Court 23/4 September. Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 21:32:22 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [US] Fwd: Seattle:Blockade of Factory Trawler Ends Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970818213249.099f88b6@dowco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >From Greenbase - Greenpeace press release server GREENPEACE ACTIVISTS END BLOCKADE OF FACTORY TRAWLERS Climbers Begin Long Ascent After 45 Hours on the Aurora Bridge Seattle, WA, August 18, 1997 (GP) - Seven Greenpeace activists have decided that they stayed as long as they safely can on the Aurora Bridge in their bid to blockade factory trawlers in Lake Union. All the climbers agreed that their protest has been an unqualified success. After making good on their promise yesterday to rappel down and block any factory trawler that would try to leave the lake by successfully blocking the Elizabeth Ann, no other factory trawler has attempted to run the blockade. "We've done more in the last two days and nights to stop overfishing in the North Pacific and protect the Steller sea lion than the Fisheries Service has done in the last 5 years," said Katie Flynn-Jambeck, one of the Greenpeace climbers. "These vessels catch hundreds of thousands of tons of pollock in direct competition with declining populations of sea birds and marine mammals like the Steller sea lion - this cannot be allowed to continue," said Greenpeace campaigner Dave Batker. "We will continue to take this campaign directly to the factory trawlers at the next meeting of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council", he added. The NPFMC is scheduled to meet here in Seattle beginning on September 22. The Steller sea lions were declared endangered under the Endangered Species Act in May, 1997. Scientists cite reduction in food availability due to fishing as the most likely cause of the decline. However, no reduction in fishing in Steller sea lion critical foraging habitat has been enacted by the NPFMC or the Fisheries Service to help them recover. The catch of pollock in Steller sea lion critical habitat has actually increased from 200,000 metric tons a year in the late 1970's, to over 800,000 metric tons a year in 1995. Many sea bird and marine mammal species that depend on pollock for food have declined since the 1970s when industrial fishing vessels came to Alaska. These include seabirds such as red and black-legged kittiwakes and common and thick-billed murres, as well as marine mammals such as northern fur seals and harbor seals. A bill recently passed the U.S. House of Representatives banning factory trawlers from the East Coast herring and mackerel fisheries because of their destructive potential. A companion bill was recently introduced in the U.S. Senate. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 02:00:25 -0400 From: Mesia Quartano To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Duck Hunting Message-ID: <33F93679.6168@usa.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Duck Hunting: With breeding duck populations the highest on record, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed expanding season lengths and bag limits for the 1997-98 duck hunting season. The service also proposed to continue the popular "Youth Waterfowl Hunting Day" for a second year to encourage parents and other adults to take children hunting. Forty states held the youth day last year. The service is predicting a fall migration of 92 million ducks, topping last year's 90 million and the highest on record since 1970. The service's breeding duck survey counted 42.6 million breeding ducks in key nesting areas, the highest level since the survey began in 1955. Contact Hugh Vickery, USFWS, (202)208-5634. ------------------------------------------------- From: Environmental News Network, Copyright 1997 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:23:05 +0800 (SST) From: Vadivu Govind To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Racing camels in Europe Message-ID: <199708190823.QAA01099@eastgate.cyberway.com.sg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >South China Morning Post Tuesday August 19 1997 Racing camels light up crowd in hilarious first for Europe DEUTSCHE PRESSE AGENTUR in Berlin Whether it was the summer heat, the grass as opposed to sand, or the 42,000-strong crowd, Europe's first camel race, held at the Hoppegarten racecourse near Berlin, certainly triggered surprises. Some of the camels ran in the wrong direction, others pulled up or would not budge from the starting line, two threw their jockeys in a tantrum and three more decided it was more pleasant to chew grass than participate in races. The timetable fell hopelessly behind schedule, as Arab trainers dashed about the course on Sunday trying to capture wayward camels. But the huge crowd remained good-humoured. Up in the VIP stand, Germany's Economics Minister, Guenter Rexrodt, was seen roaring with laughter. "A delightful afternoon's entertainment and relaxation," he said. "I'm so pleased I brought my family along." Sheik Falah bin Zaid, son of the United Arab Emirates President, looked on with a bemused smile. "I wish everyone a splendid afternoon's entertainment," he had said shyly in a brief opening speech. Between races, there were Arab food stalls, belly-dancing in Bedouin tents and Middle Eastern music. The big race of the meeting was for the Sheik Zayed Cup. This was the final race staged in the late afternoon, and was won by Alf Vajewski on Wobran, a star camel, which won five out of its six events. Most of the winning jockeys were teenage girls from the Black Forest who had been flown to Abu Dhabi for three weeks of intensive training in the desert. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 02:00:11 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [UK] Man jailed for microwaving kitten Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970819020039.095f34fa@dowco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >From The Electronic Telegraph - Tuesday, August 19th, 1997 Man jailed for microwaving kitten By Nigel Bunyan A PARTY guest microwaved a woman's kitten after she rebuffed his attempts to make a pass at her. Brendan Blennerhassett, 24, carried out the attack within hours of meeting Vicky Allen, 20. The 12-week-old kitten, called Jasper, took 10 minutes to die once it had been rescued from the microwave. Blennerhassett, of Luton, Beds, was jailed for the maximum six months for causing cruelty to an animal. Ann Morris, chairman of the bench at Houghton-le-Spring, Tyne and Wear, told him: "The torture and death of a much-loved and defenceless kitten is a thoroughly despicable offence. It was an inhumane act which can only be dealt with by a term of imprisonment." Lawyers for Blennerhassett, who denied the charge, lodged an appeal. The magistrates turned down a bail application that would have set him free. Blennerhassett said he had not seen a cat at the party and suggested that one of his friends might have carried out the attack. © Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1997. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 02:00:58 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [SP] Parents to sue over puma attack on girls Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970819020124.095f76b0@dowco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >From The Electronic Telegraph - Tuesday, August 19th, 1997 Parents to sue over puma attack on girls By Tim Brown in Madrid TWO families began legal action against the owner of a puma which they claim attacked their daughters outside a hotel in Majorca. Kirsty McQueen, seven, and her friend, Jade Taggart, six, were pinned to the ground by the animal outside the Lagoon Centre hotel in Puerto de Alcudia, the girls' parents said. Jade's father, Terrance Taggart, 41, from Ward End, Birmingham, said the puma belonged to a man who lived near the hotel. He said he saw the puma off its leash, fighting a dog in the yard, when he went for a walk on Saturday evening with eight other tourists, including four children. "Suddenly we heard a scream," he said. "We ran up and found the puma had the two youngest children pinned on the floor. I kicked him in the head but he hardly flinched. We got the children and ran inside the hotel." Mr Taggart and Kirsty's father, Andrew McQueen, 31, from Hodge End, Birmingham, lodged complaints with the Civil Guard. A spokesman said an investigation had begun. But he said the animal was harmless. The manager of the Lagoon Centre hotel, where the families were staying, denied that the puma had attacked anyone or tried to get into the hotel. © Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1997. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 02:01:32 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [India] Monkey business fills Punjab jail Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970819020158.095f9cb8@dowco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >From The Electronic Telegraph - Tuesday, August 19th, 1997 Monkey business fills Punjab jail By Rahul Bedi in New Delhi MONKEYS that harass people in the northern Indian state of Punjab are being jailed until declared fit for release back into society. One inmate at a correctional facility for monkeys in Patiala, 200 miles north of Delhi, was "arrested" at Punjab Agricultural University at Ludhiana more than a year ago for attacking students and is still held. It has been reported that another pair, arrested in a Patiala neighbourhood for snatching handbags and lunch boxes, are being considered for parole. Wildlife officials running the monkey jail said they were inundated with complaints about badmash, or ruffian, monkeys but did not have enough manpower to make arrests. There are around 50,000 monkeys in Punjab, almost all wild (and some, arguably, livid), with the largest number in Patiala district. Numbers have increased since monkey exports were banned in the late 1980s. Led by the biggest and most vicious animals of the pack, monkey gangs stake out fiefdoms in crowded neighbourhoods and terrorise the inhabitants. Officials said several of the leaders had been maltreated by lorry drivers who chained them to vehicles to act as guards and released them in populated areas when they became violent. Attempts to deal with the monkey menace anywhere in India are hampered by the reverence with which they are treated by Hindus. Hindu religious sentiment associates monkeys with Hanuman, the mythical monkey god who was Lord Rama's fearless and loyal assistant in his battle against Ravana, the evil god king of Lanka (modern Sri Lanka). Monkeys also menace New Delhi's corridors of power and spread mayhem on the campus of the nearby All India Institute of Medical Sciences, India's flagship research institution. Officials walk warily down passageways in the North and South blocks of the Indian government buildings, looking apprehensively over their shoulders for fear of being set upon by marauding monkeys concealed in niches in the Lutyens buildings. At the All India Institute hospital, ward windows are kept locked against gangs of monkeys, descended from a number of escapees from its laboratories in the 1970s. Institute doctors said the animals chased doctors and nurses, and patients in post-operative wards sometimes surfaced from anaesthesia to be greeted by grinning monkeys in their beds. © Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1997. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 02:00:11 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [UK] Man jailed for microwaving kitten Message-ID: <199708191154.HAA16066@envirolink.org> >From The Electronic Telegraph - Tuesday, August 19th, 1997 Man jailed for microwaving kitten By Nigel Bunyan=20 A PARTY guest microwaved a woman's kitten after she rebuffed his attempts to make a pass at her. Brendan Blennerhassett, 24, carried out the attack within hours of meeting Vicky Allen, 20. The 12-week-old kitten, called Jasper, took 10 minutes to die once it had been rescued from the microwave. Blennerhassett, of Luton, Beds, was jailed for the maximum six months for causing cruelty to an animal. Ann Morris, chairman of the bench at Houghton-le-Spring, Tyne and Wear, told him: "The torture and death of a much-loved and defenceless kitten is a thoroughly despicable offence. It was an inhumane act which can only be dealt with by a term of imprisonment." Lawyers for Blennerhassett, who denied the charge, lodged an appeal. The magistrates turned down a bail application that would have set him free. Blennerhassett said he had not seen a cat at the party and suggested that one of his friends might have carried out the attack. =A9 Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1997. [UK] Man jailed for microwaving kitten Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 02:00:58 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [SP] Parents to sue over puma attack on girls Message-ID: <199708191154.HAA16091@envirolink.org> >From The Electronic Telegraph - Tuesday, August 19th, 1997 Parents to sue over puma attack on girls By Tim Brown in Madrid=20 TWO families began legal action against the owner of a puma which they claim attacked their daughters outside a hotel in Majorca. Kirsty McQueen, seven, and her friend, Jade Taggart, six, were pinned to the ground by the animal outside the Lagoon Centre hotel in Puerto de Alcudia, the girls' parents said. Jade's father, Terrance Taggart, 41, from Ward End, Birmingham, said the puma belonged to a man who lived near the hotel. He said he saw the puma off its leash, fighting a dog in the yard, when he went for a walk on Saturday evening with eight other tourists, including four children. "Suddenly we heard a scream," he said. "We ran up and found the puma had the two youngest children pinned on the floor. I kicked him in the head but he hardly flinched. We got the children and ran inside the hotel." Mr Taggart and Kirsty's father, Andrew McQueen, 31, from Hodge End, Birmingham, lodged complaints with the Civil Guard. A spokesman said an investigation had begun. But he said the animal was harmless. The manager of the Lagoon Centre hotel, where the families were staying, denied that the puma had attacked anyone or tried to get into the hotel. =A9 Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1997. [SP] Parents to sue over puma attack on girls Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 02:01:32 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [India] Monkey business fills Punjab jail Message-ID: <199708191154.HAA16098@envirolink.org> >From The Electronic Telegraph - Tuesday, August 19th, 1997 Monkey business fills Punjab jail By Rahul Bedi in New Delhi=20 MONKEYS that harass people in the northern Indian state of Punjab are being jailed until declared fit for release back into society. One inmate at a correctional facility for monkeys in Patiala, 200 miles north of Delhi, was "arrested" at Punjab Agricultural University at Ludhiana more than a year ago for attacking students and is still held. It has been reported that another pair, arrested in a Patiala neighbourhood for snatching handbags and lunch boxes, are being considered for parole.=20 Wildlife officials running the monkey jail said they were inundated with complaints about badmash, or ruffian, monkeys but did not have enough manpower to make arrests. There are around 50,000 monkeys in Punjab, almost all wild (and some, arguably, livid), with the largest number in Patiala district. Numbers have increased since monkey exports were banned in the late 1980s. Led by the biggest and most vicious animals of the pack, monkey gangs stake out fiefdoms in crowded neighbourhoods and terrorise the inhabitants. Officials said several of the leaders had been maltreated by lorry drivers who chained them to vehicles to act as guards and released them in populated areas when they became violent. Attempts to deal with the monkey menace anywhere in India are hampered by the reverence with which they are treated by Hindus. Hindu religious sentiment associates monkeys with Hanuman, the mythical monkey god who was Lord Rama's fearless and loyal assistant in his battle against Ravana, the evil god king of Lanka (modern Sri Lanka). Monkeys also menace New Delhi's corridors of power and spread mayhem on the campus of the nearby All India Institute of Medical Sciences, India's flagship research institution. Officials walk warily down passageways in the North and South blocks of the Indian government buildings, looking apprehensively over their shoulders for fear of being set upon by marauding monkeys concealed in niches in the Lutyens buildings. At the All India Institute hospital, ward windows are kept locked against gangs of monkeys, descended from a number of escapees from its laboratories in the 1970s. Institute doctors said the animals chased doctors and nurses, and patients in post-operative wards sometimes surfaced from anaesthesia to be greeted by grinning monkeys in their beds. =A9 Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1997. [India] Monkey business fills Punjab jail Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 09:18:44 -0300 From: Ty Savoy To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: More Aquariums Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970819121844.006bb364@north.nsis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Monday, August 18, 1997 The Halifax Herald Limited Canada's oldest aquarium eager to tackle new projects By IAN BAILEY / The Canadian Press Vancouver - If John Nightingale could measure the happiness of his killer whales, he would. But the Vancouver Aquarium's executive director can't. "There is no 'Happy Meter' or 'Contento Meter' you can hook up to a whale," says Nightingale, 50. So he doesn't dwell on whether the two whales in a pool at the facility in Stanley Park are content in an area only a fraction the size of the sea. On a bright day, the whales swim in lazy circles before visitors to Canada's oldest aquarium. "I'm not sure what happy in the wild is," says Nightingale. The fate of the Vancouver Aquarium's whales prompted a tough fight last year with animal-rights activists. The park board ended the debate, for now, by curbing the aquarium's options for acquiring new whales. In 1997, however, the head of one of North America's key aquariums is more intent on projects beyond whales that include joint work with Canada's newest aquariums - facilities in Newfoundland and Toronto. "We're helping the folks in Newfoundland. We'd help the folks in Toronto if they asked us," he says. The looming aquarium rookies put a Canadian twist on a North American aquarium boom that's included a $96 million renovation of Boston's New England Aquarium, and a giant centre in Long Beach, Calif. "Given the number of aquariums that have gone into the United States in the last five years, it seems they are a highly desirable facility for a city interested in tourism," says David Bank, past president of the Canadian Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums. Vancouver's aquarium, opened in 1956 and now operating non-profit without direct government funding, seems to pay off for Vancouver. Every year, it contributes about $80 million to Vancouver's economy. Attendance was off slightly in 1996 - 849, 502 against an annual average of 866,364. But revenues were up - $10.3 million, compared with $9.8 million a year before. Nightingale, former head of Seattle's aquarium, is enthusiastic about opportunities for joint work with the Newfoundland and Toronto aquariums. Both are expected to open in 1999. Nightingale has been a consultant to the Newfoundland project which is affiliated with Memorial University and likely to be built just outside St. John's. Newfoundland's modest facility will be one-tenth the size of an $80 million project that Ripley Entertainment - manager of the Ripley's Believe It or Not! franchise - plans for Toronto. "Together we can do things that none of us have the financial or staff resources to do separately," says Nightingale. Nightingale is speaking of sharing data on science, marketing strategies and trading exhibits. Bank says Nightingale has a point. "That's one of the strengths of the American institutions. They (share) so you're not always having to re-invent the wheel," he says. Estimates of the number of Canadian aquariums varies. Five pass muster with Banks' association - two in Quebec, one in New Brunswick, the site at the West Edmonton Mall, and Vancouver's. The latest census at Vancouver's aquarium shows 56,928 animals. Fifty-thousand are creatures without backbones like sea urchins and jellyfish. The rest range from the near routine, like beluga whales and Pacific salmon, to the utterly bizarre. The Amazon section, for example, includes arapaima - 40-kg silvery fish known for leaping from the Amazon River to snatch monkeys and birds from trees. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:18:36 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: (US) Regulators Fine Egg Farm $1 Million Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819081833.00703760@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" environmental aspects of factory farming from AP Wire page: -------------------------------------- 08/18/1997 23:36 EST Regulators Fine Egg Farm $1 Million By PAUL SOUHRADA Associated Press Writer COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- Federal safety regulators on Monday proposed fining the Midwest's largest producer of white eggs more than $1 million for what they said were life-threatening conditions at one of its eggs farms. Employees at AgriGeneral Co. L.P.'s farm in Croton have high levels of ammonia and dust in the air, drink water contaminated with insecticide and bacteria from chicken manure and work around unsafe equipment, Emily Sheketoff, deputy assistant director of the Occupational Safety & Health Administration, said at news conference. Among the alleged violations at the farm 30 miles east of Columbus: raw sewage sitting inch-thick in basements, electrical hazards, and rodent and insect infestation. ``These dangerous, unhealthy and unlawful conditions are common at AgriGeneral,'' Ms. Sheketoff said. An AgriGeneral official said the company was working to comply with OSHA regulations. ``We have addressed all issues that have been raised, whether we agree with them or not,'' Andy Hansen, executive vice president, said in a news release. The company, which produces about 4.5 million eggs daily, has sales estimated at $85 million annually. It has an egg farm in northwestern Ohio and three more under construction or in the planning stages. AgriGeneral has 15 days to appeal the fines or pay them and submit a plan for fixing the problems, Ms. Sheketoff said. If the company does not comply with the order, it faces fines of up to 30 times the original amount. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:20:59 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: (US) Butterfly Popularity on the Rise Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819082057.00703760@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" an unusual exploitation of animals from Ap Wire page: ----------------------------------- 08/18/1997 03:07 EST Butterfly Popularity on the Rise By LYNYA FLOYD Associated Press Writer WILBRAHAM, Mass. (AP) -- Instead of a rain of white rice after the wedding ceremony, it was a fragile fluttering of butterflies, their wings beating orange and black. ``It was fabulous,'' said Diane Doherty of Longmeadow, who freed five dozen monarchs at her daughter's wedding. ``It was the perfect link between the religious ceremony and the festive celebration.'' And breeders say sales have soared recently, helped by news reports that convey the fancy of butterflies taking flight. ``When it comes to one of the most important days of a person's life, they're willing to spend a couple hundred dollars more,'' said Terry Terbrush of The Monarchy, a family-owned business in Wilbraham. Orange-and-black monarchs or yellow-and-black eastern tiger swallowtails can add a touch of beauty and whimsy to weddings, birthdays, store openings and other happy occasions. The symbolism of butterflies can even comfort mourners at a funeral. ``In many societies, they thought that when you died, your soul became a butterfly,'' said Rick Mikula, of Hole-In-Hand Butterfly Farm, in Hazleton, Pa. Mikula has bred, researched and taught about butterflies for nearly two decades. His seminars have inspired others to start businesses. For less than $100 a dozen, chrysalides -- the cocoons in which caterpillars transform into butterflies -- can be shipped to classrooms for students to hatch and release as an educational project. For a bit more (it cost Doherty $500 for her daughter's wedding), butterflies can be shipped overnight, arriving enclosed in envelopes that participants can open, releasing the creatures into the air. Jenny Woods, a spokeswoman for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, questioned the conditions in which the butterflies are transported. But butterfly growers said they take the utmost care in feeding and packing the insects. The bugs often sleep while shipped. ``My No. 1 priority is the care of these delicate creatures,'' said Bethany Homeyer, of Michael's Fluttering Wings in Swinney Switch, Texas. She said she usually ships only to regions where the butterflies are native, and in climates where they can survive. Jon Timko, of Flutterbies in Newark, Del., said his butterflies have been selling in droves in recent weeks. On the summer solstice in New York's Central Park, 21 of his monarchs were released to celebrate the longest day of the year. ``They're incredibly beautiful,'' said Bram Gunther, director of the Urban Park Rangers. ``They all swooped into the air, and there was a small cloud of butterflies.'' Some people like the feeling that they are returning butterflies to nature. Others say it's a good replacement for throwing rice at weddings, or they go for the mysticism. When Homeyer ships her butterflies, an American Indian legend usually goes along with them. One reads: ``To make a wish come true, whisper it to a butterfly. Upon these wings it will be taken to heaven and granted, for they are the messengers of the Great Spirit.'' Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:25:51 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: WTO Panel: Beef Hormone Ban Illegal Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819082548.00700da8@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" from AP Wire page: ----------------------------------- 08/18/1997 14:57 EST WTO Panel: Beef Hormone Ban Illegal By CURT ANDERSON AP Farm Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- A World Trade Organization panel issued a final report Monday concluding that Europe's ban on hormone-treated beef is illegal. While U.S. officials hailed the ruling as a key step in their lengthy effort to get Europe to lift the ban, the European Union is still expected to appeal to another WTO body. That could take another 60 to 90 days. The WTO panel found that Europe's ban on six growth hormones in cattle is an unfair restriction on trade because it has no scientific basis and does not mesh with current international safety standards on beef. ``The WTO settlement panel has affirmed what we have known for over nine years: that European consumers are being denied a high-quality and safe product due to an import regulation that cannot stand up to the test of good science,'' said Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman. The 1989 EU ban has blocked an estimated $100 million annually in U.S. beef exports from reaching Europe, officials said. The United States has retaliated by raising duties on various products from Europe. Hormones are widely used in the United States to promote growth in cattle and to increase milk production in cows. The EU ban had cited health concerns, but scientists have uniformly found that beef produced with hormones is safe. U.S. officials have long contended the ban's true purpose is to protect the European beef industry from American exports and to level competition within the EU itself. U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky said the EU was attempting to ``justify trade barriers by thinly disguising them as health measures'' and that the WTO panel was able to see through that. ``I am pleased that the panel affirmed the need for food safety measures to be based on science, as they are in the United States,'' Barshefsky said. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:34:00 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Bovine Growth Hormone: Mad Cow Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819083358.0070be1c@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" from private e-mail: ------------------------------- rBST/rBGH smuggling still under dispute in Canada It now appears that there is no way to know whether the allegations of genetically engineered bovine growth hormone (technically called bovine somatropin or rBST) being smuggled by farmers from the USA into Canada to increase milk production in Canadian dairy herds are valid. In a domain involving multi-billion dollar stakes world-wide, such as the dairy industry, it is difficult to sort out what is truth and what is public relations. Also, because of the availability of rBST in the USA, and the extensive traffic through the USA border, it is impossible for Canadian regulatory agencies to assess, let alone control, illegal importation of rBST. Officially, rBST has not been approved in Canada. Both the National Dairy Council of Canada (the processing industry) and the Dairy Farmers of Canada are strongly opposed to the introduction of rBGH at this time, due to unresolved issues of safety and consumer concern. One important issue is the claimed increased levels of insulin-like growth factor (a suspected carcinogen) in milk of cows injected with rBGH. Another unresolved concern is whether rBGH injections produce mastitis in cows. .......................................................... Status of rBGH Approval in Canada As far as rBGH approval in Canada, in media reports this past June, evaluators at the Bureau of Veterinary Drugs in Health Canada stated that management in their department were moving to get rBGH approved, without providing the relevant evaluators with documentation on its human safety. By law, before rBGH can be approved, evaluators in the Bureau need to determine its safety. However, management had apparently been pushing for rBGH approval, while hiding information from evaluators. With continued concern from the public, scientific evaluators, the processing industry, and the Dairy Farmers of Canada, the government may be backing off. However, due to continued lobbying from the biotech industry for approval of rBGH, continued pressure from the public and industry to stop rBGH is needed. .......................................................... Codex suspends rBGH decision The international food standards body, the Codex Alimentarius Commission, decided in June to suspend discussions on introducing rBGH on the world market. The USA had put forward a proposal that would have supported global rBGH approval. Technically, the US proposal stated that it was not necessary to set any "Maximum Residue Levels" (MRL's) of rBGH allowed in milk, or any "Acceptable Daily Intake" (ADI) levels of rBGH. In practical terms,the proposal could have allowed industry to use as much rBST as they wanted, and no one could complain. However, due to concerns from many countries, the issue was put on hold for at least 2 years, asking for more evaluation. While official Canadian Codex representatives supported the USA position, concerns shared by Canadian evaluators, industry, consumers, and farmers were used by Codex members in deferring the introduction of rBGH. _____________________________________________________________________________ article on Howard Lyman and Mad Cow Disease follows: Food Fight, by Evan Halper from In These Times (Chicago, Illinois) - August 11, 1997 (page 24-25) Sidebar: Agribusiness is trying to use dubious new libel laws to control the national debate on food safety. In April 1996, as Britain was swept up in a national panic over mad cow disease -- a sickness diagnosed in U.K. cattle that has been linked to a handful of cases of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans -- Oprah Winfrey devoted an episode of her widely popular show to the threat that the disease posed to cows and people on this side of the Atlantic. Winfrey is hardly known for her nuanced, dispassionate examination of the issues of the day, and this episode was no exception. Howard Lyman of the Humane Society's Eating With A Conscience campaign, one of Winfrey's guests, argued that the U.S. beef industry's practice of feeding cows the ground-up remains of other cows could lead to an outbreak of mad cow disease in the United States. In fact, Lyman warned the show's millions of viewers, the United States was heading toward a tragic epidemic. "You said this disease could make AIDS look like the common cold?" Winfrey gasped. "Absolutely," said Lyman. Gary Weber of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and William Hueston of the Department of Agriculture argued that feeding rendered cows to other cattle was perfectly safe, but Winfrey emphatically sided with Lyman. "It has just stopped me cold from eating another hamburger," she said to audience applause. "I'm stopped!" Cattle prices plummeted the next day, and dropped 10 percent by the end of May. Just days after the show aired, Texas Agricultural Commissioner Rick Perry called for action under a year-old state law banning disparaging remarks against perishable food. One of 13 states that have enacted so-called "veggie-libel" laws, Texas allows growers and ranchers to sue critics for damages suffered as a result of claims about agricultural products not grounded in "reasonable and reliable scientific inquiry, facts or data." Texas' attorney general chose not to pursue the matter, but a group of ranchers, led by Amarillo cattleman Paul Engler, filed suit privately in June 1996. The ranchers charged that the show's "carefully and maliciously edited statements were designed to hype ratings at the expense of the American cattle industry." The case marks the first and only suit to be filed to date under a food-disparagement law. Proponents of these laws argue that the public needs to be protected from mavericks who make outrageous claims about the dangers of modern food technologies. "Part of the incentive is to, at least, get someone to think twice before making an accusation," says Steve Kopperud, vice president of the American Feed Industry Association (AFIA). "The producer community and others have grown increasingly concerned by food scares that hit the media through activists with the price of an ad in a major publication." Critics, however, assert that food-disparagement laws tip the scales too far in favor of the food industry and do significant harm to free speech rights. They are also concerned that the laws will make it harder for those outside the scientific establishment to question products and practices that they consider unsafe. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:46:30 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Companies can say 'NO' to GE on labels Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819084627.006d42e0@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" from private e-mail: ----------------------------- Dear Pure Food People, US icecream company Ben and Jerry's (1% for peace) have scored a major victory for us all. They challenged the State of Illinois, to overturn Monsanto-inspired laws that did not allow products to be labelled as free of milk from cows treated with Bovine Growth Hormone, an injectible drug produced by genetically engineered microbes. The case has been settled, with agreement on a form of labelling which is less direct but enables food buyers to choose. Hopefully a lot of other food manufacturers around the world, including Australia, will seize the opportunity to also fully inform their customers. The Australia NZ Food Authority has always said counter-labelling would be permitted, but those who plan to do it are under enormous pressure from the rest of the industry to keep us in the dark. To their great credit, despite the pressure, some Australian companies have decided to label their gene bean-free products. But they need your support. Please phone to get info on their products and spend your food dollars wisely. They are: Pureharvest 03 9579 3422 Aust Natural Foods 1 800 641 614 Simply Better Foods 03 9794 8766 Stay posted, Bob PS Leaflets are available for distribution now! Email your orders. Media coverage of Ben and Jerry's win follows. _____________________________________________________________________ Thursday, August 14, 1997 Legal Settlement Clears Way For National Anti-rBGH Label Past Refusals by the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago had Created a National Ban on Labeling; Settlement Ends First Amendment Lawsuit by Ben & Jerry's Homemade, The Organic Valley - Family of Farms, Stonyfield Farm and Whole Foods Market South Burlington, VT --Manufacturers of ice cream, yogurt and other dairy products who use milk and cream produced without the controversial growth hormone rBGH can now say so on their labels. Under the terms of an unprecedented legal settlement announced today, the State of Illinois has agreed to permit such voluntary labeling by natural food companies opposed to rBGH. Since 1994 Illinois has forbidden Ben & Jerry's, Organic Valley and Stonyfield Farm from adding anti-rBGH labels to their products and threatened to seize any such products that were sold there. Because Illinois represents such a large consumer market, the state's actions had effectively stopped anti-rBGH labeling throughout the country, since it is not feasible for nationally distributed dairy products to be labeled differently in individual markets. The City of Chicago, which had also told these companies they could not sell products with anti-rBGH labels also agreed to the settlement. Ben & Jerry's, a Vermont based national manufacturer of all-natural superpremium ice cream and frozen yogurt, initiated and financed the suit. It was joined by Stonyfield Farm Inc., a manufacturer of yogurt and ice cream products located in Londonderry, New Hampshire; Whole Foods Market Inc., the nation's largest chain of natural food supermarkets, based in Austin, Texas; and Organic Valley, a farmers' cooperative based in La Farge, Wisconsin that sells milk, cheese and butter products. The suit, which was filed in Federal court in May of 1996 against the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago, charged that their prohibition on voluntary anti-rBGH labeling was a violation of the companies' First Amendment right to honestly inform customers about the contents of their products amid a controversial political issue. The agreement announced today settles that lawsuit and allows the companies to proceed with anti-rBGH labels. "The use of bio-engineered growth hormones in dairy cows is inconsistent with everything we stand for. This settlement is a great victory for Ben & Jerry's, for our family farmers, and most of all, for our customers" said Perry Odak, the CEO of Ben and Jerry's Homemade Inc. who himself grew up on a dairy farm. Noting Ben & Jerry's spent considerable resources to resolve this suit Odak added: "We regret that the State of Illinois forced us into a legal resolution of this matter. However, this is a fundamentally important issue. Manufacturers should be able to tell customers how their products are produced and consumers should have a right to information that allows them to make an informed choice." "This win signifies a great step for freedom of speech, consumer rights and the survival of family farms. Our dedication to using pure, all natural ingredients and our fight against labeling bans shows our commitment to supporting our customers right to know about the food they eat," commented Gary Hirshberg, CEO of Stonyfield Farm. Alison Williams, Marketing Director of Whole Foods Market stated: "This victory is not only significant for the natural foods companies involved, but for the consumers as well. Our customers have been concerned about the rBGH issue. As the nations largest natural foods retailer, we are excited to offer them products with informative labels that allow them to make educated choices." Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone, known as rBGH, is a bioengineered hormone that stimulates a cow's natural body processes to "trick" it into producing more milk than it otherwise would. The Food and Drug Administration's hearing on rBGH in 1993 caused a national uproar. Opponents included public health experts, consumer groups, environmental organizations and family farmers. Opponents argued that rBGH increased the risk that dairy cows would contract a variety of diseases including mastitis (udder infections), which would require increased amounts of antibiotics to treat, and that rBGH threatens the survival of family farms. It was also noted that the potential health effects on humans who drink milk from rBGH treated cows have not been fully resolved. Finally, rBGH is viewed as an unnecessary application of food technology to boost production of a commodity that is already in over-supply. "The family farmers who make up The Organic Valley Family of Farms, are in this business because we love cows. We would not knowingly subject our animals to a drug with side effects that could cause illness, death and create undue stress on the animal. Utilizing any genetically engineered product is counter to what we believe in here at Organic Valley," said George Siemon the cooperative's CEO. Despite objections, the FDA approved the use of rBGH in November 1993. The agency did not require foods containing rBGH to be so labeled, as in the case for irradiated foods, another controversial technology. Instead it allowed voluntary labeling. A 1996 poll commissioned by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and performed by researchers at the Universities of Wisconsin and Oregon showed that 94 percent of more that 1,900 respondents surveyed nationwide favored labeling that would allow consumers to distinguish between milk from cows treated with rBGH and milk from untreated cows. Other consumer surveys support this finding. The FDA issued interim guidelines on voluntary labeling in February 1994 setting forth how labels could be worded so as to be truthful, not misleading and in compliance with food and labeling law. Most states followed those guidelines, but a handful of states including Illinois refused to permit any anti-rBGH labeling. Ben and Jerry's Odak said today he feels confident the label approved in this settlement with the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago addresses all legitimate concerns that could be raised by any state. Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc., Stonyfield Farm and Organic Valley intend to start phasing in the agreed upon label which says: "We Oppose Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone. The family farmers who supply our milk and cream pledge not to treat their cows with rBGH. The FDA has said no significant difference has been shown and no test can now distinguish between milk from rBGH treated and untreated cows." Since some of Ben & Jerry's products include "chunks" that contain small amounts of dairy ingredients those products will include the further statement: "Not all the suppliers of our other ingredients can promise that the milk they use comes from untreated cows." _________________________________________________________________________ LAW SUIT CLEARS WAY FOR "FREE FROM rBGH" LABELS Score one for truth-in-food-labels =============================== Thursday, August 14, 1997 Legal Settlement Clears Way For National Anti-rBGH Label Past Refusals by the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago had Created a National Ban on Labeling; Settlement Ends First Amendment Lawsuit by Ben & Jerry's Homemade, The Organic Valley - Family of Farms, Stonyfield Farm and Whole Foods Market South Burlington, VT --Manufacturers of ice cream, yogurt and other dairy products who use milk and cream produced without the controversial growth hormone rBGH can now say so on their labels. Under the terms of an unprecedented legal settlement announced today, the State of Illinois has agreed to permit such voluntary labeling by natural food companies opposed to rBGH. Because Illinois represents such a large consumer market, the state's actions had effectively stopped anti-rBGH labeling throughout the country. Ben & Jerry's, a Vermont based national manufacturer of all-natural superpremium ice cream and frozen yogurt, initiated and financed the suit. It was joined by Stonyfield Farm Inc., a manufacturer of yogurt and ice cream products located in Londonderry, New Hampshire; Whole Foods Market Inc., the nation's largest chain of natural food supermarkets, based in Austin, Texas; and Organic Valley, a farmers' cooperative based in La Farge, Wisconsin that sells milk, cheese and butter products. The suit, which was filed in Federal court in May of 1996 against the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago, charged that their prohibition on voluntary anti-rBGH labeling was a violation of the companies' First Amendment right to honestly inform customers about the contents of their products amid a controversial political issue. The agreement announced today settles that lawsuit and allows the companies to proceed with anti-rBGH labels. "The use of bio-engineered growth hormones in dairy cows is inconsistent with everything we stand for. This settlement is a great victory for Ben & Jerry's, for our family farmers, and most of all, for our customers" said Perry Odak, the CEO of Ben and Jerry's Homemade Inc. who himself grew up on a dairy farm. Noting Ben & Jerry's spent considerable resources to resolve this suit Odak added: "We regret that the State of Illinois forced us into a legal resolution of this matter. However, this is a fundamentally important issue. Manufacturers should be able to tell customers how their products are produced and consumers should have a right to information that allows them to make an informed choice." "The family farmers who make up The Organic Valley Family of Farms, are in this business because we love cows. We would not knowingly subject our animals to a drug with side effects that could cause illness, death and create undue stress on the animal. Utilizing any genetically engineered product is counter to what we believe in here at Organic Valley," said George Siemon the cooperative's CEO. ___________________________________________________________________________ c The Associated Press Aug. 14, 1997 By CURT ANDERSON WASHINGTON (AP) - Those pints of Ben & Jerry's ice cream such as Cherry Garcia or Chunky Monkey will soon sport labels designed to appeal to shoppers worried about the use of artificial hormones in dairy cows. Although the government says the hormone known as RBGH is safe, Ben & Jerry's labels now will declare that the farmers from whom it buys milk have agreed not to use the genetically engineered substance to increase milk output from their cows. Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc. of Burlington, Vt., had wanted to label its products ``RBGH free,'' but the company ran into trouble with public health officials in the state of Illinois who said such language was misleading and could imply there was something wrong with milk from RBGH-treated cows. Ben & Jerry's and organic food companies today announced settlement of a lawsuit against the state in which the parties agreed to compromise language that will include the statement: ``We oppose recombinant bovine growth hormone. The family farmers who supply our milk pledge not to treat their cows'' with the hormone. The label also states that the FDA has found no significant difference between milk from RBGH-treated and untreated cows. National distribution of the anti-hormone labels had been held up pending resolution of the suit. Use of RBGH - recombinant bovine growth hormone - has caused consternation among anti-biotechnology advocates since it was introduced in 1994. But many dairy farmers viewed it as a means of boosting milk production by as much as 10 percent. RBGH is produced naturally in a cow's pituitary gland but can be injected as a supplement to increase milk output. The hormone is made by St. Louis-based Monsanto Co. and is now used in 25 percent of the nation's dairy herd, company spokesman Gary Barton said. The Food and Drug Administration certified RBGH, also called RBST, as safe in February 1993, but Ben & Jerry's chief Perry Odak said the company refuses to buy milk or cream from hormone-injected cows for any of its products. ``It's both a business decision and part of our social mission,'' Odak said. ``Consumers ought to be able to know what is and is not in their products. Our product is all natural.'' Ben & Jerry's sued Illinois and the city of Chicago in May 1996. Illinois agreed to settle the case because Ben & Jerry's decided not to use the words ``RBGH free'' on its labels and also promised to mention that some ingredients, such as milk chocolate, could possibly come from cows treated with the hormone. ``There is no way to ensure that they do have RBGH-free milk. That's why we had opposed it,'' said Tom Schafer, spokesman for the Illinois Department of Public Health. The city of Chicago also had agreed to the settlement, Schafer said. The hormone's natural origins make it impossible to detect in milk from treated cows. FDA says there is no difference in the composition of milk from treated or untreated cows and that labels must reflect that fact. For that reason, Ben & Jerry's can only say on its labels that farmers from whom it buys about 1.9 million gallons of cream and 1.5 million gallons of condensed skim milk each year have signed pledges not to use RBGH on their cows. Nevertheless, food companies like Ben & Jerry's that are inclined toward the organic end of the market say use of anything artificial is automatically suspect - Odak calls it ``unnatural and unnecessary'' - to them. ``You're able to offer a product that is free from a very questionable additive,'' said Allison Williams, spokeswoman for the 74-store Fresh Fields chain. ``Our customers feel very strongly about RBGH.'' Fresh Fields' parent company, Whole Foods Market of Austin, Texas, joined Ben & Jerry's in the lawsuit along with Stonyfield Farm Inc. of New Hampshire and Organic Valley, a Wisconsin dairy cooperative. AP-NY-08-14-97 0901EDT Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. ___________________________________________________________________________ Settlement Reached in Hormone Labeling Case Ben and Jerry's, States Agree Food Makers Can Indicate Absence of Added Product By Beth Berselli Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, August 15, 1997; Page A22 The Washington Post Connoisseurs of Ben & Jerry's ice cream won't have to wonder any longer whether it's made from milk from cows treated with artificial growth hormones. A settlement announced yesterday between the state of Illinois and a coalition of organic food companies, including the Vermont ice cream maker, means in the future that one glance at the label on a pint of Cherry Garcia or Chunky Monkey will tell you whether its cows are hormone-free. Under terms of the settlement,manufacturers of ice cream, yogurt and other dairy products that don't use the controversial recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) can say so on their labels. The decision is expected to allow them to distribute these anti-hormone labels nationally, Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc. officials said. Consumer groups estimate that about 5 percent of dairy farmers inject the hormone into some of their cows. Illinois is one of four states -- as well as Hawaii, Nevada and Okla homa -- that have forbidden these labels. Illinois's 1994 decision to do so basically stopped anti-rBGH labeling across the country because it is not feasible for companies such as Ben and Jerry's to label their products differently for individual markets. Dairies haven't typically run into the same problem because their products are mostly distributed locally; several milk producers include anti-hormone labels on their cartons. In the settlement, the parties agreed on compromise language for the new labels. Ben & Jerry's originally wanted to say their products were "rBGH free," but Illinois officials protested that was impossible to prove and it implied that milk from treated cows was harmful. The agreed-upon label reads: "We oppose recombinant bovine growth hormone. The family farmers who supply our milk and cream pledge not to treat their cows with rBGH. The FDA has said no significant difference has been shown and no test can now distinguish between milk from rBGH treated and untreated cows." Additionally, some of Ben & Jerry's products include "chunks" -- like the chocolate pieces in Cherry Garcia -- that contain small amounts of dairy ingredients. Their labels will include the further statement: "Not all the suppliers of our other ingredients can promise that the milk they use comes from untreated cows." Ben & Jerry's filed suit last year in federal court against the state of Illinois and the city of Chicago, charging that their prohibition on voluntary anti-hormone labeling violated the company's First Amendment right to inform their customers of their products' content. Chicago officials also agreed to yesterday's settlement. Joining Ben & Jerry's in the suit were Stonyfield Farm Inc., a New Hampshire ice cream manufacturer; Whole Foods Market Inc. of Austin; and Organic Valley of La Farge, Wis., which sells milk, cheese and butter products. Whole Foods Market owns 10 Fresh Fields stores in the Washington area. "The use of artificial growth hormones in dairy cows is inconsistent with everything we stand for," said Perry Odak, Ben & Jerry's chief executive. "We're just pleased because now we can tell our customers how the products are made." Sold by Monsanto Co. of St. Louis, rBGH is produced in the cow's pituitary gland but can be injected as a supplement to increase milk production by as much as 20 percent. It was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1993 but has remained controversial as consumers rights activists have questioned its effects on cows and humans. @CAPTION: Ben & Jerry's Web site says its ice cream doesn't contain bovine growth hormone ("a chemically-intensive . . . food supply") and that it wants to say so on its labels. © Copyright 1997 The Washington Post Company ____________________________________________________________________________ Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:46:30 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Companies can say 'NO' to GE on labels Message-ID: <199708191250.IAA21618@envirolink.org> from private e-mail: ----------------------------- Dear Pure Food People, US icecream company Ben and Jerry's (1% for peace) have scored a major victory for us all. They challenged the State of Illinois, to overturn Monsanto-inspired laws that did not allow products to be labelled as free of milk from cows treated with Bovine Growth Hormone, an injectible drug produced by genetically engineered microbes. The case has been settled, with agreement on a form of labelling which is less direct but enables food buyers to choose. Hopefully a lot of other food manufacturers around the world, including Australia, will seize the opportunity to also fully inform their customers. The Australia NZ Food Authority has always said counter-labelling would be permitted, but those who plan to do it are under enormous pressure from the rest of the industry to keep us in the dark. To their great credit, despite the pressure, some Australian companies have decided to label their gene bean-free products. But they need your support. Please phone to get info on their products and spend your food dollars wisely. They are: Pureharvest 03 9579 3422 Aust Natural Foods 1 800 641 614 Simply Better Foods 03 9794 8766 Stay posted, Bob PS Leaflets are available for distribution now! Email your orders. Media coverage of Ben and Jerry's win follows. _____________________________________________________________________ Thursday, August 14, 1997 Legal Settlement Clears Way For National Anti-rBGH Label Past Refusals by the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago had Created a National Ban on Labeling; Settlement Ends First Amendment Lawsuit by Ben & Jerry's Homemade, The Organic Valley - Family of Farms, Stonyfield Farm and Whole Foods Market South Burlington, VT --Manufacturers of ice cream, yogurt and other dairy products who use milk and cream produced without the controversial growth hormone rBGH can now say so on their labels. Under the terms of an unprecedented legal settlement announced today, the State of Illinois has agreed to permit such voluntary labeling by natural food companies opposed to rBGH. Since 1994 Illinois has forbidden Ben & Jerry's, Organic Valley and Stonyfield Farm from adding anti-rBGH labels to their products and threatened to seize any such products that were sold there. Because Illinois represents such a large consumer market, the state's actions had effectively stopped anti-rBGH labeling throughout the country, since it is not feasible for nationally distributed dairy products to be labeled differently in individual markets. The City of Chicago, which had also told these companies they could not sell products with anti-rBGH labels also agreed to the settlement. Ben & Jerry's, a Vermont based national manufacturer of all-natural superpremium ice cream and frozen yogurt, initiated and financed the suit. It was joined by Stonyfield Farm Inc., a manufacturer of yogurt and ice cream products located in Londonderry, New Hampshire; Whole Foods Market Inc., the nation's largest chain of natural food supermarkets, based in Austin, Texas; and Organic Valley, a farmers' cooperative based in La Farge, Wisconsin that sells milk, cheese and butter products. The suit, which was filed in Federal court in May of 1996 against the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago, charged that their prohibition on voluntary anti-rBGH labeling was a violation of the companies' First Amendment right to honestly inform customers about the contents of their products amid a controversial political issue. The agreement announced today settles that lawsuit and allows the companies to proceed with anti-rBGH labels. "The use of bio-engineered growth hormones in dairy cows is inconsistent with everything we stand for. This settlement is a great victory for Ben & Jerry's, for our family farmers, and most of all, for our customers" said Perry Odak, the CEO of Ben and Jerry's Homemade Inc. who himself grew up on a dairy farm. Noting Ben & Jerry's spent considerable resources to resolve this suit Odak added: "We regret that the State of Illinois forced us into a legal resolution of this matter. However, this is a fundamentally important issue. Manufacturers should be able to tell customers how their products are produced and consumers should have a right to information that allows them to make an informed choice." "This win signifies a great step for freedom of speech, consumer rights and the survival of family farms. Our dedication to using pure, all natural ingredients and our fight against labeling bans shows our commitment to supporting our customers right to know about the food they eat," commented Gary Hirshberg, CEO of Stonyfield Farm. Alison Williams, Marketing Director of Whole Foods Market stated: "This victory is not only significant for the natural foods companies involved, but for the consumers as well. Our customers have been concerned about the rBGH issue. As the nations largest natural foods retailer, we are excited to offer them products with informative labels that allow them to make educated choices." Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone, known as rBGH, is a bioengineered hormone that stimulates a cow's natural body processes to "trick" it into producing more milk than it otherwise would. The Food and Drug Administration's hearing on rBGH in 1993 caused a national uproar. Opponents included public health experts, consumer groups, environmental organizations and family farmers. Opponents argued that rBGH increased the risk that dairy cows would contract a variety of diseases including mastitis (udder infections), which would require increased amounts of antibiotics to treat, and that rBGH threatens the survival of family farms. It was also noted that the potential health effects on humans who drink milk from rBGH treated cows have not been fully resolved. Finally, rBGH is viewed as an unnecessary application of food technology to boost production of a commodity that is already in over-supply. "The family farmers who make up The Organic Valley Family of Farms, are in this business because we love cows. We would not knowingly subject our animals to a drug with side effects that could cause illness, death and create undue stress on the animal. Utilizing any genetically engineered product is counter to what we believe in here at Organic Valley," said George Siemon the cooperative's CEO. Despite objections, the FDA approved the use of rBGH in November 1993. The agency did not require foods containing rBGH to be so labeled, as in the case for irradiated foods, another controversial technology. Instead it allowed voluntary labeling. A 1996 poll commissioned by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and performed by researchers at the Universities of Wisconsin and Oregon showed that 94 percent of more that 1,900 respondents surveyed nationwide favored labeling that would allow consumers to distinguish between milk from cows treated with rBGH and milk from untreated cows. Other consumer surveys support this finding. The FDA issued interim guidelines on voluntary labeling in February 1994 setting forth how labels could be worded so as to be truthful, not misleading and in compliance with food and labeling law. Most states followed those guidelines, but a handful of states including Illinois refused to permit any anti-rBGH labeling. Ben and Jerry's Odak said today he feels confident the label approved in this settlement with the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago addresses all legitimate concerns that could be raised by any state. Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc., Stonyfield Farm and Organic Valley intend to start phasing in the agreed upon label which says: "We Oppose Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone. The family farmers who supply our milk and cream pledge not to treat their cows with rBGH. The FDA has said no significant difference has been shown and no test can now distinguish between milk from rBGH treated and untreated cows." Since some of Ben & Jerry's products include "chunks" that contain small amounts of dairy ingredients those products will include the further statement: "Not all the suppliers of our other ingredients can promise that the milk they use comes from untreated cows." _________________________________________________________________________ LAW SUIT CLEARS WAY FOR "FREE FROM rBGH" LABELS Score one for truth-in-food-labels =============================== Thursday, August 14, 1997 Legal Settlement Clears Way For National Anti-rBGH Label Past Refusals by the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago had Created a National Ban on Labeling; Settlement Ends First Amendment Lawsuit by Ben & Jerry's Homemade, The Organic Valley - Family of Farms, Stonyfield Farm and Whole Foods Market South Burlington, VT --Manufacturers of ice cream, yogurt and other dairy products who use milk and cream produced without the controversial growth hormone rBGH can now say so on their labels. Under the terms of an unprecedented legal settlement announced today, the State of Illinois has agreed to permit such voluntary labeling by natural food companies opposed to rBGH. Because Illinois represents such a large consumer market, the state's actions had effectively stopped anti-rBGH labeling throughout the country. Ben & Jerry's, a Vermont based national manufacturer of all-natural superpremium ice cream and frozen yogurt, initiated and financed the suit. It was joined by Stonyfield Farm Inc., a manufacturer of yogurt and ice cream products located in Londonderry, New Hampshire; Whole Foods Market Inc., the nation's largest chain of natural food supermarkets, based in Austin, Texas; and Organic Valley, a farmers' cooperative based in La Farge, Wisconsin that sells milk, cheese and butter products. The suit, which was filed in Federal court in May of 1996 against the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago, charged that their prohibition on voluntary anti-rBGH labeling was a violation of the companies' First Amendment right to honestly inform customers about the contents of their products amid a controversial political issue. The agreement announced today settles that lawsuit and allows the companies to proceed with anti-rBGH labels. "The use of bio-engineered growth hormones in dairy cows is inconsistent with everything we stand for. This settlement is a great victory for Ben & Jerry's, for our family farmers, and most of all, for our customers" said Perry Odak, the CEO of Ben and Jerry's Homemade Inc. who himself grew up on a dairy farm. Noting Ben & Jerry's spent considerable resources to resolve this suit Odak added: "We regret that the State of Illinois forced us into a legal resolution of this matter. However, this is a fundamentally important issue. Manufacturers should be able to tell customers how their products are produced and consumers should have a right to information that allows them to make an informed choice." "The family farmers who make up The Organic Valley Family of Farms, are in this business because we love cows. We would not knowingly subject our animals to a drug with side effects that could cause illness, death and create undue stress on the animal. Utilizing any genetically engineered product is counter to what we believe in here at Organic Valley," said George Siemon the cooperative's CEO. ___________________________________________________________________________ c The Associated Press Aug. 14, 1997 By CURT ANDERSON WASHINGTON (AP) - Those pints of Ben & Jerry's ice cream such as Cherry Garcia or Chunky Monkey will soon sport labels designed to appeal to shoppers worried about the use of artificial hormones in dairy cows. Although the government says the hormone known as RBGH is safe, Ben & Jerry's labels now will declare that the farmers from whom it buys milk have agreed not to use the genetically engineered substance to increase milk output from their cows. Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc. of Burlington, Vt., had wanted to label its products ``RBGH free,'' but the company ran into trouble with public health officials in the state of Illinois who said such language was misleading and could imply there was something wrong with milk from RBGH-treated cows. Ben & Jerry's and organic food companies today announced settlement of a lawsuit against the state in which the parties agreed to compromise language that will include the statement: ``We oppose recombinant bovine growth hormone. The family farmers who supply our milk pledge not to treat their cows'' with the hormone. The label also states that the FDA has found no significant difference between milk from RBGH-treated and untreated cows. National distribution of the anti-hormone labels had been held up pending resolution of the suit. Use of RBGH - recombinant bovine growth hormone - has caused consternation among anti-biotechnology advocates since it was introduced in 1994. But many dairy farmers viewed it as a means of boosting milk production by as much as 10 percent. RBGH is produced naturally in a cow's pituitary gland but can be injected as a supplement to increase milk output. The hormone is made by St. Louis-based Monsanto Co. and is now used in 25 percent of the nation's dairy herd, company spokesman Gary Barton said. The Food and Drug Administration certified RBGH, also called RBST, as safe in February 1993, but Ben & Jerry's chief Perry Odak said the company refuses to buy milk or cream from hormone-injected cows for any of its products. ``It's both a business decision and part of our social mission,'' Odak said. ``Consumers ought to be able to know what is and is not in their products. Our product is all natural.'' Ben & Jerry's sued Illinois and the city of Chicago in May 1996. Illinois agreed to settle the case because Ben & Jerry's decided not to use the words ``RBGH free'' on its labels and also promised to mention that some ingredients, such as milk chocolate, could possibly come from cows treated with the hormone. ``There is no way to ensure that they do have RBGH-free milk. That's why we had opposed it,'' said Tom Schafer, spokesman for the Illinois Department of Public Health. The city of Chicago also had agreed to the settlement, Schafer said. The hormone's natural origins make it impossible to detect in milk from treated cows. FDA says there is no difference in the composition of milk from treated or untreated cows and that labels must reflect that fact. For that reason, Ben & Jerry's can only say on its labels that farmers from whom it buys about 1.9 million gallons of cream and 1.5 million gallons of condensed skim milk each year have signed pledges not to use RBGH on their cows. Nevertheless, food companies like Ben & Jerry's that are inclined toward the organic end of the market say use of anything artificial is automatically suspect - Odak calls it ``unnatural and unnecessary'' - to them. ``You're able to offer a product that is free from a very questionable additive,'' said Allison Williams, spokeswoman for the 74-store Fresh Fields chain. ``Our customers feel very strongly about RBGH.'' Fresh Fields' parent company, Whole Foods Market of Austin, Texas, joined Ben & Jerry's in the lawsuit along with Stonyfield Farm Inc. of New Hampshire and Organic Valley, a Wisconsin dairy cooperative. AP-NY-08-14-97 0901EDT Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. ___________________________________________________________________________ Settlement Reached in Hormone Labeling Case Ben and Jerry's, States Agree Food Makers Can Indicate Absence of Added Product By Beth Berselli Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, August 15, 1997; Page A22 The Washington Post Connoisseurs of Ben & Jerry's ice cream won't have to wonder any longer whether it's made from milk from cows treated with artificial growth hormones. A settlement announced yesterday between the state of Illinois and a coalition of organic food companies, including the Vermont ice cream maker, means in the future that one glance at the label on a pint of Cherry Garcia or Chunky Monkey will tell you whether its cows are hormone-free. Under terms of the settlement,manufacturers of ice cream, yogurt and other dairy products that don't use the controversial recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) can say so on their labels. The decision is expected to allow them to distribute these anti-hormone labels nationally, Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc. officials said. Consumer groups estimate that about 5 percent of dairy farmers inject the hormone into some of their cows. Illinois is one of four states -- as well as Hawaii, Nevada and Okla homa -- that have forbidden these labels. Illinois's 1994 decision to do so basically stopped anti-rBGH labeling across the country because it is not feasible for companies such as Ben and Jerry's to label their products differently for individual markets. Dairies haven't typically run into the same problem because their products are mostly distributed locally; several milk producers include anti-hormone labels on their cartons. In the settlement, the parties agreed on compromise language for the new labels. Ben & Jerry's originally wanted to say their products were "rBGH free," but Illinois officials protested that was impossible to prove and it implied that milk from treated cows was harmful. The agreed-upon label reads: "We oppose recombinant bovine growth hormone. The family farmers who supply our milk and cream pledge not to treat their cows with rBGH. The FDA has said no significant difference has been shown and no test can now distinguish between milk from rBGH treated and untreated cows." Additionally, some of Ben & Jerry's products include "chunks" -- like the chocolate pieces in Cherry Garcia -- that contain small amounts of dairy ingredients. Their labels will include the further statement: "Not all the suppliers of our other ingredients can promise that the milk they use comes from untreated cows." Ben & Jerry's filed suit last year in federal court against the state of Illinois and the city of Chicago, charging that their prohibition on voluntary anti-hormone labeling violated the company's First Amendment right to inform their customers of their products' content. Chicago officials also agreed to yesterday's settlement. Joining Ben & Jerry's in the suit were Stonyfield Farm Inc., a New Hampshire ice cream manufacturer; Whole Foods Market Inc. of Austin; and Organic Valley of La Farge, Wis., which sells milk, cheese and butter products. Whole Foods Market owns 10 Fresh Fields stores in the Washington area. "The use of artificial growth hormones in dairy cows is inconsistent with everything we stand for," said Perry Odak, Ben & Jerry's chief executive. "We're just pleased because now we can tell our customers how the products are made." Sold by Monsanto Co. of St. Louis, rBGH is produced in the cow's pituitary gland but can be injected as a supplement to increase milk production by as much as 20 percent. It was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1993 but has remained controversial as consumers rights activists have questioned its effects on cows and humans. @CAPTION: Ben & Jerry's Web site says its ice cream doesn't contain bovine growth hormone ("a chemically-intensive . . food supply") and that it wants to say so on its labels. =A9 Copyright 1997 The Washington Post Company ____________________________________________________________________________ Companies can say 'NO' to GE on labels Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 08:57:12 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: EuropaBio: Plan to PR us into GE foods 2/2 Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819085710.00711574@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" from private e-mail: ------------------------------------- LEAKED DOCUMENT ON EUROPABIO PR STRATEGY PART 2 of the leaked PR strategy from Burson Marstellar ------------------------------------------------------------- 30. In summary then, we recommend : Top of the chain (food and retail) : Independent from suppliers (and each other) Separation (choice) seen to be an option Support/endorse regulators Bottom of the chain: Do not speak for the top of the chain Defer to regulators Do not be seen to fight separation Concentrate region-wide on environmental benefits Concentrate locally on economic benefits Implementation 31. Focus of EuropaBio effort : the most urgent (and resource intensive) task in our view is to organise the bottom-of-chain media campaigns on environmental and economic benefits. Top-of-chain communications may require less direct EuropaBio effort and involvement 9althoug we stress their importance for the full strategy). 32. Pan European strategy & individual Member State implementation : The bottom-of-chain campaign needs to be conceived and planned in a regional framework, but actual media campaigns (for both environmental and economic benefits) will need to be tailored and conducted in target countries. This "localisation" of the stories is crucial not only to actually connect to consumers but also to overcome the perception that US interests have co-opted an unwilling Europe. The environmental and economic benefits need to be interpreted and portrayed through story-telling in the national mand local context, taking into account the cultural, historical and economic characteristics which determine public perceptions on the agri-food issue at those levels. 33. (For example, in Spain, the issue of water pollution is one of very few environmental issues of concern to the majority of Spaniards. Sensitivity on this issue is due in particular to historical water shortages. Media campaigning in Spain on the desireability of crop varieties requiring fewer pesticides can be effectively positioned to exploit this perceived vulnerability. However, such a specific positioning would be less relevant in Ireland, a country with an abundant water supply.) 34. We see the following countries as first priority: * France * Germany * Italy * Spain * U.K. * Belgium * The Netherlands * Ireland * Denmark Second priority include: * Austria * Finland * Sweden * Portugal * Greece * Norway * Switzerland 35. We propose that the campaign in the U.K. and Ireland be run three to four weeks ahead of implementation in other countries, in order to ensure that lessons learned can be applied elsewhere. Start-up and operational approach 36. using the Burston-Marstellere bio-issues network, we need to review the medoia coverage at regional and target-country level over the last eighteen months - essentially to pinpoint key media outlets and individuals. We will also need to review previous communications efforts made by EuropaBio, SAGB, ESBNA, and individual members, and individual members, in addressing public concern over agri-food biotechnology. 37. We will also need to review with EuropaBio task force members the list of forthcoming new agri-food sector applications, and to map them for their potential interest profile by country and for Europe. (For example, a genetically engineered Mediterranean crop would be dealt with differently from a northern european cereal.) 38. Story opportunities can then be slected and developed for both region-wide and local placement (keeping in mind that basic principles for generating news value and managing media relations). This will involve particularly indentifying both bio-industry and third party spokespeople willing and able to contribute to the story. 39. Effort will then shift to actual media placement for potential story. The mix will typically include a selection from trade press, and local, regional and national media, including print, radio and television. A campaign plan 40. Hereunder we present a draft campaign plan to show how it would run in practice : Weeks 1-2 * Review of current jounralistic opinion in all markets * Compile list of applications due into market place in the next 3 years * Correlate with regions of use Weeks 2-4 * Prompt media use ion trade press of relevant sector * Prepare economic and environment case * Tailor case to specific regions of use providing local news hooks and personal story Weeks 4-8 * Place story with local/regional radio and press * Collate coverage in a package to demonstrate "growing interest around the country" * Present national journalists with evidence of interest and fresh 'national' story * Introduce link to international congress * Maintain 'firefighting' capacity for instant response to critical stories in all markets Weeks 8-12 * Stories now have life of own requiring managment rather than prompting * Integrate with preparations for congress * Prepare schedule of all journalists providing postive coverage weeks 1-12 * Correlate speakers/experts at congress with coverage * Prepare new follow-up story linking local story to international congress Weeks 12-16 * Seek local/regional coverage that has "taken off" on issue and convert into national story * Take national stories with cross border application and use in other markets, having modified in the light of experience * Ramp up reference to congress Weeks 16-20 * Sell in congress to media * 'Teaser' release to all radio, TV stations in Europe * Follow press release with sample local stories and description of remote facilities to conduct interviews with key congress experts Weeks 20-22 * Arrange radio interview schedule * Prepare standard TV shots of congress venue and key speakers for distribution to TV channels for 'cut in' with local story * Seek plots in 'specialist' programmes (farmers programs, science reviews, business news etc) CONGRESS Weeks 23-28 * Manage congress follow-up * Provide guests from congress to prompt follow up stories in national, regional media * respond where appropriate to critical coverage * press release an "astonishing response to congress" including tailored quotes eg., "Congress indicates huge economic growth potential of * Biotech in our area says Mayor" Weeks 28-30 * Collate total coverage for assessment * Prepare draft plan for next six months with EuropaBio Fee structure and estimate 41. Fees for the time if B-M professionals would need to cover involvement at the EuropaBio task force level and at the level of individual country campaigns. Fee estimates cover the time involved in the preparation, implementation and review of the agreed media strategy and all necessary expenses, including travel. 42. Actual fees will depend largely on the number of the countries targeted, as wel as the extent of the role of B-M core team professionals would be expected to play at EuropaBio level and in-country. 43. For fee estimation purposes, countries being targeted in the campaign are divided into two levels; factors used to determine fee level are market size, influence of media at both national and international level and importance of market to success or failure of bitoechnology in the agri-food business. We see the breakdown as follows: Central Co-ordinating budget $400 000 Category A $150 000 per country UK/France/Germany/Italy Category B $80 000 per country Spain/Ireland/Belgium/Netherlands/Portugal/Greece/Switzerland/Sweden/D enmark/ Finland/Austria A COMMUNICATIONS INITIATIVE FOR THE JUNE CONGRESS Objective 44. The practical objective of this initiative should be media coverage of positive bioindustry stories before, during and after the Congress, but not media attendance at or coverage of the Congress per se. 45. In particular, EUROPABIO must at all costs avoid creating a media-centred event which will automatically draw protesting environmental groups to the Amsterdam venue. the result of that would surely be considerable media coverage - but inevitably focussing on the conflict surrounding biotechnology (the killing field). EuropaBio will have set the table and Greenpeace will have eaten the lunch. 46. Moreover, assembling a large body of non-local media in Amsterdam would entail logistical difficulties of no small scale, as well as considerable added time and cost, with no guarantee of success. Practical approach 47. Keeping in mind the common principles outlined in section II, our practical recommendation is based on three factors : + Media attendance in Amsterdam is not necessary for coverage (and as pointed out is dangerous and costly) + There is little pan-European media. Virtually all key targets (for any EuropaBio communications initiative) will be national (although we would seek coverage in the FT, Economist, Sky Television, CNN, etc.), because national media are by far the most effective vehicle for EuropaBio originated stories. + In the full B-m scenario, the agri-food campaign would already be up and running. 48. Therefore : + Media coverage should not be about the congress per se. Rather, preliminary work would focus on identifying bio-product and bio-industry stories of national and local interest for target member states, which also connect to one or more themes of the Congress - which will be virtually any story selected. + Agri-food stories would presumably already be up and running by June. Additional Conference-specific, story-based, communications effort would then focus on the other EuropaBio sectors (health care, industrial processing, environmental remediation), and also on key horizontal issues (entrepreneurism, capital markets, global competition, job creation and job market, educational opportunities, BT & IT) We foresee the need to develop a (vertical) x (horizontal) x (location) story matrix in order to make certain that the proper balance is struck in the selection of those selected for placement. And as in the agri-food campaign all stories will need to be thoroughly vetted for their accuracy and vulnerability to hostile reaction.) + Stories would then be moved directly in-country to national and local media with, however, arrangements being made for added commentary on them by appropriate spokespeople from the congress, using "down the lone" interview techniques concentrated on national radio and TV. In this way, multiple member state coverage from the Congress can be ensured without actually assembling a large media presence in Amsterdam. 49. We believe the primary target media should be radio, for three reasons : + The environment movement deliberately does not target the radio + because it is difficult to attract attention i.e., demonstrations + rarely get covered by the radio because they can't film them. + Additionally, the radio, by its very nature, is verbal and this + usually means considerably more cerebral than TV. the "packages" + given to any particular issue are much longer. Sometimes by a + multiple of 5 or 6 times. Which is precisely what we need. + There are far more listening hours than viewing hours right the way + across Europe. This often comes as a great surprise to people but it + is fact true. In other words we will get much broader coverage by + concentrating on radio than by concentrating on TV. + Although we do not want to concentrate media interest on the + Congress itself, the Congress creates an excellent news hook for the + stories we really want running "back home". Furthermore it should be + perfectly possible and manageable to schedule interviews with people + attending the congress with radio stations all over Europe, This has + three advantages : (1) the congress is referred to in all of the + stories that play (2) we control the choice of commentators + discussing the local story and the relevance of the Congress to it + (3) the Congress link emphasises the European dimension of the local + story and allows us to introduce the broader competitive issues in + all of those interviews. 50. A similar approach can be taken for TV, relying on the daily feed to national networks of standard footage from the Congress, shot by us, to supplement related national interest stories already placed to run that evening or the following morning. Again this should generate considerable simultaneous coverage across Europe, but without the risks associated with the presence of live TV crews looking for conflict. 51. Finally, print media can be dealt with in a similar fashion (including down the line interviews), but we would not place strategic emphasis on recruiting their interest. A basic information kit can be distributed ahead of the event. Those who respond with interest can then be serviced. Fee structure and estimate 52. It is difficult at this point to judge the degree of overlap/synergy in a scenario where the agri-food campaign and the Congress campaign run together through July (and where both involve Burson-Marsteller). Nevertheless, at this stage we offer the following estimate for the Congress approach described above, as a stand-alone. Central coordinating budget $100 000 Category A countries $40 000 Category B countries $20 000 53. The lower estimates for the Congress results from the differing intensity of the two initiatives : Congress work targets a period of media coverage of roughly a week, with preliminary work building toward that objective; the 6-month agri-food campaign seeks to catalyse rapid and sustained communication over a large portion of Europe over several months. V. A LONG-TERM EUROPABIO COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAMME Relationship between the three proposed initiatives 54. Assuming both the rapid start-up of the agri-food campaign proposed in Section III and implementation of the Congress-linked initiative proposed in Section IV, and further assuming that each is predicated on the common principles laid out in Section I, the two shorter term initiatives should lay a strong operational and experimental foundation for building a sustained, long-term communications programme. 55. We therefore strongly recommend that the twin initiatives leading up to and through Congress be considered together also as "Phase I" of the longer term programme. (The two running together may in any event be anticipated to consume all available resources through until the end of July 1997.) Core components of long-term capability 56. This being in our view the sensible way to view the immediate future, the important question for the longer-term is what the core components of EuropaBio's longer-term communications capability should be. Moreover, despite the fact that we are now thinking about the longer term, some consensus on the answer to this question from the outset of the two shorter-term start-up initiatives will help channel those "Phase I" efforts muxh more deliberately toward laying the longer-term foundations. In short, we need to know where we intend to go from the beginning. 57. B-M have deep and wide relevant experience in the creation of sustained industry-initiated Europe-wide public affairs communications programmes. The first lesson we recommend to EuropaBio is simply that success requires significant commitment. The costs of true campaigning look high, but the magnitude of the potential payoffs are a multiple of the investment. In one highly relevant case from our experience, the public and market perceptions of the environmental liabilities of a particular prodct - fanned by concerted Greenpeace campaigning - had put it on a death-watch list in Europe. A three-year campaign funded by an alliance of competitors and upstream suppliers turned that perception around, to the point where today the product is widely seen as part of the environmental solution. 58. Beyond commitment, we strongly recommend the development of the following core components: a. A fully-functioning communications strategy group within EuropaBio, and the operational resources necessary to go from strategy to effective action. b. A hub-and-spoke network built around the strategy group and funded centrally but with the authority to allocate its resources to national level as a function of central strategy and decision-making. c. Internally "neutral" operational leaders/spokespeople for the organisation both at the hub and in-country. At the EuropaBio hub, this role is by definition filled by the Secretary General. In-country, the assignment of this role may be less obvious (although National Association heads may be the obvious choice where present). This role can be effectively filled by the outside partner agency, as B-M has done in many different campaigns. d. An institutionalised public attitudes research programme, to run at standard intervals. e. A well-organised media service centre, ideally able to connect and communicate at national level on the basis of assets and tools run at the hub. The hub operation can be in-sourced or out-sourced (irrespective of where it is physically established). f. The hub operation will normally oversee the development and day-to-day running of whatever common information and media-relations tools are created. these may include : periodical publications of EuropaBio; a EuropaBio website ; a Bio-industries database ; creation and dissemination of EuropaBio press communications ; central management of media contact lists ; periodic (ideally daily) media monitoring (perhaps off the back of members' existing capabilities ' a number of different models for this capability can be looked at). The B-M role 59. The primary value of B-M over the longer term will be at the level of the central strategy group. the basic nature of the responsibility of this group will be ehat we at B-M call "perceptions management". This needs to be seen as a senior management discipline just like marketing management or financial management. And just as marketing managers typically partner with advertising firms, or financial managers with particular financial service providers, so perceptions managers benefit from the skills and experience available through sustained management with Burson-Marsteller. 60. Beyond the core relationship at the strategy and planning level, the assignment of any specific tasks to B-M professionals (or other third party suppliers) would depend entirely on the work to be done and agreement that B-M are the best choice for doing it. NOTES: 1. (For a compelling view on the socio-pathology of public outrage, we recommend the work of Peter Sandman, the world's leading academic authority on its causes and how to deal with it. Peter also consultants public and private entities confronted with such difficulties, and was notably involved in the defusion of the Brent Spar crisis. Members of the B-M team have on occasion collaborated with him.) ___________________________________________________________________________ _____ The Guardian August 6, 1997 STAY QUIET ON RISKS OF GENE-ALTERED FOOD, INDUSTRY TOLD Danny Penman EUROPE'S biotechnology industry has been warned not to discuss the safety of genetically engineered food and the risks it poses to the environment, according to a leaked document seen by the Guardian. EuropaBio, which represents the interests of the industry, received the advice from Burson Marsteller, leading worldwide crisis management consultants. Burson Marsteller, which represented Babcock and Wilcox during the Three Mile Island nuclear crisis in the US in 1979, has been brought in to try to improve the image of the biotechnology industry. The company also represented Union Carbide after the Bhopal disaster in India, which killed up to 15,000 people, and it helped to manage public relations during the mad cow disease crisis. It has also advised oppressive regimes in Indonesia, Argentina and South Korea. According to the leaked document, Burson Marsteller has drawn up plans for a multi-million pound campaign "to change perceptions" of genetic engineering, biotechnology, food and environmental safety across Europe. The company says it cannot hope to win the arguments over the risks posed by genetically modified food, including environmental dangers. Instead of discussing these issues, Burson Marsteller advises the industry to focus on "symbols, not logic" - symbols that elicit "hope, satisfaction, caring and self-esteem". It has also drawn up plans to monitor the activities of journalists and publications so that it can target sympathetic outlets for these "consumer interest" stories. It suggests that the industry should become a "reliable" source of information for journalists. Commenting on the leaked document, Peter Linton, the company's spokesman, said the industry had behaved in the past "like an axe murderer with something to hide". The campaign was intended to shed that image. "I think the industry thought it had good news, that it had less noxious and polluting ways of controlling bugs and weeds. Then it discovered to its horror that its products were viewed as contaminated food. "Now it has learned that if a product benefits the consumer that fact has to be communicated to the consumer. That is what this document was designed to do." In the document, Burson Marsteller suggests that the biotechnology industry has little credibility in the eyes of the public. Therefore, the best way of eliciting a favourable consumer response to new products must be to use regulators and food producers to reassure the public. The document states: "Where safety is concerned there is no substitute for credible public regulators. It thus must become a strategic objective of this campaign to help build that credibility." Food companies will also be vital to the industry's campaign, despite the battle they have fought against labelling of genetically engineered food. Consumer organisations and food companies have demanded labelling. Recently, the European Commission decided that all genetically modified foods should be clearly identifiable. Now Burson Marsteller hopes to turn this apparent setback to the industry's advantage. Environmental groups have dismissed the strategy as "cynical and manipulative". Doug Parr, spokesman for Greenpeace, said: "We do not understand why they don't accept public opinion rather than trying to change it. The nuclear industry spent millions trying to change public opinion and got nowhere. "They don't seem to realise that the industry's bad image comes from what they do rather than from bad public relations." Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 09:07:43 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: EuropaBio: Plan to PR us into GE foods 1/2 Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819090741.0070cf14@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" from private e-mail: ------------------------------- Dear Friends, The following document, leaked in Europe, proposes a disinformation strategy to overwhelm public opposition to GE foods and demands for labelling, in Europe. Never doubt that this has global implications as the European market is seen as a barometer of public acceptance globally. Only concerted, committed opposition can neutralise such big gun tactics, so please get active now. Contact us for the materials you need to make a difference. Best wishes, Bob Phelps PS For a newspaper account, see the end of 2/2 ____________________________________________________________________________ _____ LEAKED DOCUMENT ON EUROPABIO PR STRATEGY EUROPEAN BIOTECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY LOBBY HIRES AGGRESSIVE CRISIS MANAGEMENT SPECIALISTS ENGINEERING ACCEPTANCE, FORCEFEEDING EUROPE by RTS Europe's most powerful biotechnology industry has contracted the government and public affairs PR agency, Burson Marsteller, to manage the crisis that the biotech market is facing as a result of the widespread resistance to genetic engineering and its products in this part of the world. While little known to the public, Burson Marsteller has developed a notorious reputation as high level political cover-up specialists. It has worked along side oppressive regimes in Argentina, Nigeria, South Korea and has provided the PR strategy for such controversies as the BSE crisis in the UK, the Exxon-Valdez oilspill and the Bhopal tragedy. EuropaBio's move to contract a PR agency specialising in high-level political cover-ups is a strong indication of the fact that EuropaBio is intent on covering up, indeed smothering the issues at the heart of the genetic engineering debate - risks to the environment, human health and corporate control over the world's genetic resources. In the PR strategy proposal from January (leaked to Greenpeace), Burson Marsteller outlines a scheme aimed at weathering the storm of protest in Europe. The document is important for a number of reasons: * it shows which strategies of resistance to genetic engineering are making industry vulnerable. These areas are calously referred to as the "killing fields" - and encompass the environmental and human health aspects as well as the profit motive. B-M warns EuropaBio to stay off these fields, and instead to let the policymakers represent industry interests. * it outlines the strategy for engineering public acceptance of genetic engineering and its products - primarily by feeding the public with narrow "consumer" benefits "with symbols eliciting hope, satisfaction, caring and self-esteem". * it outlines the strategy with retailers - crafting the appearance of retailer choice - whereby retailers are "seen to be" making a free choice to deal in GMOs it outlines media management strategy, both at the time of the June congress (just finished today) as well as the long-term media programme. 1. the active discouragement of live media at the congress due to "the risks associated with the presence of live TV crews looking for conflict" (i.e., debate raised on the issues that concern the public) 2. the feeding of carefully styled information to the press, especially to local radio so that "we control the choice of commentators discussing the local story and the relevance of the Congress to it". In this way, the information media is reduced to yet another form of marketing, rather than a forum for serious discussion of the central issues regarding the applications of genetic engineering and the huge impact such a radical technology has in shaping the future of society and social relations. CLEARLY, the barrage of advertising assailing the public today indicates that this programme has already been activated by EuropaBio members. Public information on how to interpret the aggressive ideology concealed beneath the "symbols eliciting hope, satisfaction, caring and self-esteem" has become more urgent. The files to follow in subsequent mails are 1. the leaked document: Communications programme for EuropaBio, January 1997. 2. an article by Carmello Ruiz on the trackrecord of Burson Marsteller The leaked document which is Burson Marsteller's PR strategy proposal to EuropaBio is an 18 page document, so you will receive it in 2 separate parts. Part one starting below. _____________________________________________________________________ COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAMMES FOR EUROPABIO January 1997 Prepared by Burston Marsteller Government and Public Affairs 1. INTRODUCTION Contents of this proposal 1. Burston Marsteller Government and Public Affairs Europe submit this proposal in response to a threefold request from EUROPABIO for: 1) A communications strategy and programme responding to the urgent circumstances now confronting agri-food bioindustries in Europe; 2) A communications programme for the first European Bioindustry Congress for late June in Amsterdam; 3) A long-term communications strategy and programme. 2. Proposals are made for each of these specific requests (including very preliminary fee estimates for the first two). But it is self-evident that each of these initiatives must complement and contribute to the other two. Moreover, each will (we assume) involve many of the same individuals operating through EuropaBio at both the strategy level and the operational level. We therefore preface our specific proposals with a discussion of the common strategic principal which we believe should apply to all three. Burston Marsteller and Bioindustry issues 3. The Burston Marsteller Government & Public Affairs practice is a single worldwide team of public affairs specialists (not a network of all-purpose national PR subsidiaries). In Europe, we cover the institutions of the European Union (via Robinson Linton Associates, a fully integrated member of the team), all 15 member states of the European Union, Norway and Switzerland, a growing number of Central and Eastern European countries, and a growing number of CIS countries. No other government & public affairs communications group is constituted as a single, borderless business entity across Europe, and none has B-M's reach and depth. 4. Within the practice, there functions a dedicated "bio-issues network", linking together all team members with experience and involvement in these issues. leadership responsibility for the network rests with Jean-Christophe Alquier in Paris, In Europe, this experience and involvement is particularly developed at the EU level (Robinson Linton Associates), as well as Germany, France, Denmark, the U.K. and Belgium. On-going client relationships attached to one or more of these (and several other) offices include a number of EuropaBio members. 5. In addition to our Public Affairs Practice, Burston-Marsteller has a number of other fully constituted practices functioning on the same single team basis around the world. Notable among these in the EuropaBio context is our Health Care practice, which is the acknowledged communications services leader for these sectors in Europe and worldwide. Client relationships likewise exist with certain EuropaBio members through this sister practice, and B-M service teams routinely include individuals from both practices. The basis for this proposal 6. This proposal draws primarily on the cumulative experience of the B-M Public Affairs practice, and more particularly on that of our "bio-issues network", as well as on relevant experience from our Health Care colleagues. 7. We also note that B-M colleagues in Brussels have been associated with EUFIC (The European Food Information Council) since its inception, a grouping which includes a number of EuropaBio members and which continues to devote part of its efforts to biotechnology issues in the food industry. This experience also underlies these proposals. 8. Finally by way of introduction, we note that some of the key judgments shaping these proposals are based on very recent professional research into public attitudes in Europe toward biotechnology in general and biotechnology in the food chain in particular. We have been accorded access to the results of this work and permission to make generic reference to it in this proposal, but are not yet in a position to cite it specifically. Despite this limitation we stress here the enormous value for our own further understanding and insight of having seen it. Indeed, we cannot over-emphasize the vital role such research plays in conceiving and executing any effective public communications effort. Flying without its literally flying blind. Moreover, progress in changing public attitudes can only be measured objectively against an initial baseline - and such measurements are the only reliable criteria for judging success. Just as no successful company guesses what consumers think of its products, so no serious politician today operates without on-going research - and no effective advocacy group does either. But allocation of the necessary resources to attitude research remains the exception rather than the rule in industry's public affairs campaigning. This means, quite simply, that adversaries and politicians always have a good idea of what the public really thinks, but industry often doesn't. (We return to this issue in our long-term strategy proposal.) II. COMMON PRINCIPLES A different approach 9. EuropaBio's antecedent organizations (SAGB and ESNBA) have over the past several years firmly established themselves as the primary representatives of European bioindustrial interests within the political and regulatory structures of Europe. Europabio now assumes this indispensible direct role in the policy-making process. But it has become self-evident that this role is no longer in itself sufficient to ensure the supportive environment Europe's bioindustries need to achieve global competitiveness through the new biotechnologies. A sustained communications strategy and programme able to generate favourable perceptions and opinions beyond the policy world is now essential. 10. We emphasise this point because it leads to the following key observation; success in this new effort will require a much different approach from the one typically used by EuropaBio in its communications to the policy world. In our experience, the key t success will be the speed to which EuropaBio members actually embrace the need for a different approach and then follow through on it. 11. The fundamental difference itself is, moreover, straightforward : in order to effect the desired changes in public perceptions and attitudes, the bioindustries must stop trying to be their own advocates. That approach often works in the policy world. It quite demonstrably hasn't worked and won't work in the sphere of public perceptions. Basic strategy disciplines 12. We believe the four basic strategic disciplines must shape any EuropaBio communications initiative. + Stay off the killing fields + Create positive perceptions + Fight fire with fire + Create service-based media relations 13. Stay off the killing field : Public issues of environmental and human health risk are communications killing fields for bioindustries in Europe. As a general rule, the industry cannot be expected to prevail in public opposition to adversarial voices on these issues. Al the research evidence confirms that the perception of the profit motive fatally undermines industry's credibility on these questions. (This said, the evidence also shows that some companies are perceived as more "ethical", and therefore as somewhat more credible than others. But this perception typically attaches to brands, meaning either to specific consumer products or to retail brands, an important insight which adversaries well understand and to which we return in our agri-food sector proposal). The difficulty of course is that today adversarial voices largely dominate in the public debate and, unsurprisingly, always chose these very killing fields, because they do enjoy high public credibility and because they know that direct industry rebuttal usually feeds the story instead of killing it. Therefore, a basic discipline of EuropaBio's communications strategy must be to stay off these killing fields - no matter how provocative the invitation to enter u[on them may be. 14. This is by no means to say, however, that this ground can be left undefended. Deep-seated perceptions of the risk will kill any product. But the industry must accept that it is for those charged with the public trust in this area - politicians and regulators - to assure the public that bio-industry products are safe. (This leads to a very specific problem for bioindustries in Europe today: the evidence clearly shows that Europeans do not trust their regulators in bio-product sectors. This is different from the U.S., where the EPA and FDA do enjoy widespread public confidence (which does not, however, extend to Europe). We return to this issue as well in the proposals which follow.) 15. Create positive perceptions : It no doubt seems banal to assert that until strong positive public perceptions of bio-products are created in Europe, there will be no effective counterweight to the negative perceptions generated by adversaries on their chosen killing fields. It may seem doubly banal to add that positive perceptions derive from perceived benefits. Nevertheless, all successful public affairs communications is predicated on these two apparent self-evidences. Understanding the words isn't difficult. Obtaining objective insight into what they really mean for a given group or individual or group, and then having the discipline, organisation and determination to really apply them - that is what makes the difference. Fight fire with fire : 16. Stories - not issues : for EuropaBio to make the transition from effective policy interlocutor to effective public communicator, it is essential to shift from issues-based communications to stories-based communications. There are no issues-oriented media with any broad appeal, and the selling of complex issues coverage is a difficult task in any event because it contains little or no news value. Good stories, on the other hand, go around the world in minutes. That's the way adversaries play. That's the way industry must play. 17. Products - not technologies : stories must, moreover, focus largely on the products of the new technologies, because they are the only way most people connect (directly or indirectly)to the benefits of the technology. (To recall : when SAGB published its communication on the environmental benefits of biotechnologies a few years ago, the biggest media up-take was on the specific product examples - and among them the most interest was generated by ... household detergents !) 18. Beneficiaries - not benefits : product stories (as well as other sorts of stories) must focus on benefits, but these benefits must be personified. People stories are always the most compelling (recall the presence in Brussels during the Parliamentary vote on biotech patents of the fellow who claims to have had his genes ripped off without his permission.) 19. Symbols - not logic : symbols are central to politics because they connect to emotions, not logic. Adversaries of biotechnology are highly skilled in the cultivation of symbols eliciting instant emotions of fear, rage and resentment. Bioindustries need to respond in similar terms - with symbols eliciting hope, satisfaction, caring and self-esteem. Create service-based media relations 20. Most reporters and editors do not have a personal agenda when it comes to coverage of biotechnology and bioindustries. Rather, as with any other beat, they are preoccupied with producing salable material under extreme deadline pressure. Deadlines dominate journalism, and largely shape what is reported. 21. EuropaBio must turn itself into the journalist's best and most reliable continuing source of biotechnology/bioindustries inspiration and information - the first-stop help-desk where they get not industry propaganda but practical, editor-pleasing, deadline-beating connect to interesting stories and personalities - even adversarial - relevant to their readerships. III. A EUROPABIO COMMUNICATIONS CAMPAIGN FOR THE AGRI-FOOD SECTOR Urgency 22. A well-orchestrated effort to change current perceptions of agri-food biotechnology in Europe is urgent. there is no point in gradually ramping up a longer-term EuropaBio communications programme only to find that in this key sector public attitudes, public policies and commercial practices have hardened beyond recall. 23. Adversaries remain determined, and their two-fold strategy remains clear : to split the food industry and to balkanise the single market. 1997 will be a critical year, particularly because entry into force of the EU Novel Foods Regulation will precipitate a new and potentially divisive political debate over safety and transparency, as could the European Commission's review of Directive 90/220/EEC. At the same time, supplies of certified non-GMO soya will become difficult to obtain. It may also be anticipated that over the next 12 months the first genetically modified crop varieties destined for the food chain will become available for planting in Europe. That could offer new opportunities for adversaries to stage media events. A front-loaded campaign 24. In view of these circumstances, we proposed an intensive, front-loaded campaign to begin as soon as practically possible and to run up through and slightly beyond the June Congress. 25. At that point, progress can be reviewed through analysis of media coverage over the period, and also the EuropaBio public attitude survey proposed as part of a longer term communications programme. Strategic framework / current perceptions and attitudes 26. Our proposed agri-food campaign strategy is conceived around the vertical industrial and commercial chain : (starting at the "bottom") technology innovators-proprietors / seed companies / farmers / commodity brokers / food companies / retail sector. it is further predicated on the following assessment of current public perceptions and attitudes (based on our own experience and the available research): a. Within the chain, consumer "trust" attaches (if it attaches at all ) to product brands and retail brands; therefore, the top two sectors of the chain are the two most effective direct channels of communications with the consumer. b. In contrast, research reveals no public awareness or knowledge at all of the companies at the bottom of the chain (Monsanto, Ciba, Sandoz, PGS, etc.) - except what adversaries have been able to put into the public consciousness in recent months, all of which is intended to engender fear and distrust. c. Food itself is a powerful vector if cultural - and even political - values virtually everywhere in Europe. but these values dffer from country to country. And in many parts of Europe there also exists a strong corresponding emotional attachment to idealised images of rural society, farming and the countryside. d. There is virtually no understanding of the real purposes of the genetic modifications to the first crops now entering the European market. The general perception is that it has to do with increased profits for industry and maybe also farmers, but that it is a perversion of nature motivated by greed at the bottom of the chain. e. At the same, there are very strong public perceptions of risk to human health attached to the idea of genetically modified food - heightened in certain countries by the living memory of current trauma of specific food-related crises (e.g., BSE; salmonella in Scotland; cooking-oil in Spain). f. Moreover, and to a surprising degree, the current climate of public suspicion and resentment surrounding the arrival on the European market of gnetically modified soya and maize is shown by research to be rooted in the perception that dangerous, unnatural ingredients are being forced into tradtional European food by the American chemical industry for reasons of pure profit, against the will of European consumers, and over the objections of at least part of the European retailing and food sectors. This reflects, of course, the drumbeat of adversarial media campaigning, exploiting certain objective facts of the situation. 27. The cumulative effect of these perceptions and attitudes has been to create a perfect incubator for public outrage and resentment over the introduction of genetically modified food (the actual strength of which, however, varies across Europe). The available evidence likewise supports the classic theory that these emotions are ultimately rooted in a sense of powerlessness in the face of what are perceived to be malevolent (and foreign) forces threatening facets of life held dear.1 28. The bottom-line consequence of this is a (literal) chain-reaction in many parts of Europe from the farming sector on up the chain embracing the new technoloy is seen to be risky (and being the first to embrace is seen to be especially risky), while being seen to refuse it looks a tempting marketing strategy (clean vs. dirty) Strategic recommendations 29. Based upon this assessment of the perceptions and attitudfes with which the agri-food interests in EuropaBio must contend, we make the following strategic recommendations for the conduct of the proposed front-loaded media campaign. a. Companies in the food sector must be perceived by the public to have their own independent view, voice and scope of action on the introduction of genetically modified ingredients or organisms into their product ranges. They must be seen to have a choice, they must be seen to control that choice, and they must be seen to have made a choice. b. Food companies must also be seen to ensure that this power to chose is passed on to the consumer. This means "transparency" - product information made available to the consumer in some form. (We note that EuropaBio's public statement following ratification by the European Parliament of the EU Novel Foods concilitation tetx leads very much in this direction.) This in itself can largely defuse the sense of powerlessness which in large measure feeds the current climate of resentment and rejection. c. Retailers must also be seen to occupy a similar position of independence vis a vis the rest of the chain - including former manufacturers, and must likewise adopt policies of transparency enabling consumer choise (i.e., empowerment). (Nobody instinctively understands this better than retailers themselves, which explains their recent public positioning on these issues.) d. By the same token, the supply-side sectors farther down the chain must not themselves be heard to speak on behalf of the food and retail sectoprs, nor behave in any way which is seen to deny those sectors either their own independence of action or their ability to communicate with their customers. (This is the great public perceptions pitfall in the "bottom-up" argument that separation is impossible. That argument is seen as a direct chalennges to the power and independence of retailers and food companies. Nobody believes that retailers and the food companies cannot force separation if they collectively decide to. That perception places those sectors in an invidious position with their customers and with adversaries are attmetping to split those sectors, and it works.) e. Rather, the task of the sectors at the bottom of the chain is to help make it possible for both the food and retail sectors to explain their up-take of GM foods in a way which at least does not violate the values of their customers, and at best responds positively to them. If that condition is met, and provided also that the products are both safe and seen to be safe, the great majority of consumers will have no further cause for outrage, and no reason to reject these products. f. As noted, where safety is concerned there is no substitute for credible public regulatorsd. It thus must become a strategic objective of this campaign to help build that credibility. And because the greatets consumer credibility within the industrial chain is carried by the branded sectors at the top, endorsements of the regulator's intergrity, competence and reliabilityshould come only from them. The effectiveness of such endorsements will be further enhanced to the extent that they are also seen to be coming from parties who are not dependent on the regulator's decision - i.e., who have the power of choice over the take-up of the product (assuming of course they do). Regulatory endorsements from the bottom of the chain, on the other hand, are to be avoided because they contribute to the credibility-killing perception that those with the greates self-interest control the regulators. g. What only the lower sectors in the chain can do - and now must urgently do - is educate the public on why these food crops are being modified in the first place. Indeed there is a great and bitter irony in the current situation in Europe : the products now causing the greatest furor were born from efforts to relieve environmental pressures brought on the farming sector by the very same militant organisations who today condemn them. h. That adversaries have had considerable success in this bizarre form of infanticide is a largely a failure of public perceptions management in Europe at the bottom of the chain. In fact, recent reserach shows that Europeans are generally receptive when told that these new varieties can help reduce the use of agricultural chemicals. But most either simply have not understood that this is their primary technical and economic purpose at the level of the farm, or simply do not believe it when told (interpreting this message as nothing more than self-interested propaganda). i. We therefore conclude that for this category of products (whihc includes virtually all those in the first wave of 90/220/EEC authorisations and is the real seat of the fire) it is both absolutely vital and perfectly achievable to position them in European public perceptions as environmentally superior to standard crop varieties and therefore desirable. j. We are perfectly aware that adversaries have tried to discredit this positioning. But we can see absolutely no down-side risk in taking on the environmental lobby on this, its own turf. After all, if these new varieties do not prove to have chemical displacing benefits they will fail in the market anyway. So either they perform as advertised and the environmental case becomes inconrtovertible, or they don't perform, disappear from the market, and the case is closed. k. Assuming this positioning were achieved (and that perceptions of risk are attenuated) it should then be perfectly possible for food companies and retailers to embrace these environmentally-superior ingredients - just as they do other inputs which respond to this demonstrated consumer value. Indeed, rather than behaving as though they have something to hide, why would they not actually want to tell the consumer they are using them? l. We would even go so far as to consider whether retailers and food companies should not announce immediately that this basic environmental criterion will (or has) largely dictated their policy toward the use of ingredients from this class (once certified safe by the competent authorities). Up-take by the branded sectors might then vcome to be seen for what it actually will be - an ethical response to a real environmental problem about which consumers genuinely care. At that point, use of htese ingredients would no longer threaten consumer confidence in thgeir brands, and the labelling issue would become entirely moot. m. We note in passing recent evidence showing that Europeans are less responsive to the argument that these new agricultural technologies will help feed the underfed and the generations yet unborn in other parts of the world. In our developed societies characterised by excess and surfeit, this benefit is not valued as highly as the environmental benefit, and we would not make it a focus of the agri-food media campaign. n. Beyond the modified commodity crops now scrutiny, there are of course other categories of genetically modified food products either already in European markets of headed for them. This will also need to be considered for treatm,ent in the media campaign. But each will need to be considered on its own merits, because their consumer benefits will vary, and the appeal of those benefits may well vary across Europe. o. Finally, we also strongly recommend strategic campaign focus by the bottom of the chain on carefully selected economic/benefits stories specific to their sectors. These may well need to play more locally across Europe, becaue that is where the greatest interest will almost always lie. But they can be used to great effect to build pockets of strong support. (To cite one extreme analogy, consider the political support generated by the tabacco industry in the U.S. in certain southern states.) (continued in part 2) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 10:18:54 -0700 From: Sean Thomas To: ar-news@envirolink.com Subject: Ottawa Citizen, letters to the editor Message-ID: <33F9D57E.30ED@sympatico.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------18415A8060D6" Sean Thomas Co-Director, Animal Action Ottawa Citizen Hit reload or refresh if you're not getting today's Online date. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Image] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Image] [Image] [Image] [Image] [Image] [Image]Letters [Image]Highlights [Image]Email the Editor GATEWAY | FRONT PAGE | CITY | SPORTS | BUSINESS | NATIONAL | WORLD | EDITORIALS ENTERTAINMENT | YOUR MONEY | INTERNET | COLUMNISTS | CLASSIFIED [Letters - Ottawa Citizen Online] Tuesday 19 August 1997 Canada makes monkeys an offer they can't refuse Len Goldberg The Ottawa Citizen Attention all monkeys! Jungle life got you down? Had your fill of grinding it out, day after day, in today's chimp-eat-chimp rainforest? Fret not, furry friend, for primate paradise awaits! Introducing the Health Canada Primate Country Club. Nestled in scenic Tunney's Pasture, a mere coconut's toss from the Ottawa River, the Health Canada Primate Country Club is the resort of choice for monkeys who deserve to be pampered, coddled, just plain spoiled. Lavish suites, fabulous recreation facilities, gourmet fare. * Suite Dreams At the Health Canada Primate Country Club, tastefully appointed stainless-steel suites are a monkey's haven from jungle hell. Imagine: three glorious feet of floor space to call your very own. Enough space to take two full steps in any one direction. And security bars to ensure peace of mind. Why, I believe you'll never want to leave your Health Canada suite dream! In fact, you never will leave your Health Canada suite, because they lock you inside it, for LIFE! OK, not quite: You will spend one full day every three weeks in the Health Canada monkey gym -- an eight-foot-long cage! (Try to find that much space in today's cramped and congested jungles!) * A WORLD OF RECREATION As a treasured patron of the Health Canada Primate Country Club, you will, on occasion, be tossed a ball. And not just any ball. A good ball. A very good ball. A ball you can bounce and squeeze and look at. And, as if that isn't enough, your monkey suite at Health Canada is appointed with a deluxe perch. On which you can perch. And stare some. * SUMPTUOUS FARE Enough jungle fast food. Enough filthy fruit and crusty old crab! At the Club, our team of gourmet chefs prepare symmetrical biscuits. And our beverage menu -- ooh, la la! Invigorate your morning with a refreshing glass of fresh-squeezed lead; while away the afternoons with a cup of tangy dioxin; then cap off your enchanted evening (with that special simian someone) by indulging in a carafe of our finest vintage mercury! So don't delay. As you can imagine, space is limited at the Health Canada Primate Country Club. With so many simians clamouring to get in, we'll soon have to start a waiting list! So call now. Make your escape from the animal kingdom rat-race before it's too late. The Health Canada Primate Country Club. Could this be monkey heaven? Len Goldberg, co-director Animal Action Ottawa FRONT PAGE | CITY | SPORTS | BUSINESS | NATIONAL | WORLD | EDITORIALS ENTERTAINMENT | YOUR MONEY | INTERNET | COLUMNISTS | CLASSIFIED FEEDBACK | GATEWAY Copyright 1997 The Ottawa Citizen Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 10:18:54 -0700 From: Sean Thomas To: ar-news@envirolink.com Subject: Ottawa Citizen, letters to the editor Message-ID: <199708191421.KAA02929@envirolink.org> ----------------------------- Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN ---- M U L T I P A R T ---- Decoded from: 7BIT ---- Part 1 ---- Lines: 4 Sean Thomas Co-Director, Animal Action ----------------------------- Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN ---- M U L T I P A R T ---- Decoded from: 7BIT ---- Part 2 ---- Lines: 115 Ottawa Citizen Hit reload or refresh if you're not getting today's Online date. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Image] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Image] [Image] [Image] [Image] [Image] [Image]Letters [Image]Highlights [Image]Email the Editor GATEWAY | FRONT PAGE | CITY | SPORTS | BUSINESS | NATIONAL | WORLD | EDITORIALS ENTERTAINMENT | YOUR MONEY | INTERNET | COLUMNISTS | CLASSIFIED [Letters - Ottawa Citizen Online] Tuesday 19 August 1997 Canada makes monkeys an offer they can't refuse Len Goldberg The Ottawa Citizen Attention all monkeys! Jungle life got you down? Had your fill of grinding it out, day after day, in today's chimp-eat-chimp rainforest? Fret not, furry friend, for primate paradise awaits! Introducing the Health Canada Primate Country Club. Nestled in scenic Tunney's Pasture, a mere coconut's toss from the Ottawa River, the Health Canada Primate Country Club is the resort of choice for monkeys who deserve to be pampered, coddled, just plain spoiled. Lavish suites, fabulous recreation facilities, gourmet fare. * Suite Dreams At the Health Canada Primate Country Club, tastefully appointed stainless-steel suites are a monkey's haven from jungle hell. Imagine: three glorious feet of floor space to call your very own. Enough space to take two full steps in any one direction. And security bars to ensure peace of mind. Why, I believe you'll never want to leave your Health Canada suite dream! In fact, you never will leave your Health Canada suite, because they lock you inside it, for LIFE! OK, not quite: You will spend one full day every three weeks in the Health Canada monkey gym -- an eight-foot-long cage! (Try to find that much space in today's cramped and congested jungles!) * A WORLD OF RECREATION As a treasured patron of the Health Canada Primate Country Club, you will, on occasion, be tossed a ball. And not just any ball. A good ball. A very good ball. A ball you can bounce and squeeze and look at. And, as if that isn't enough, your monkey suite at Health Canada is appointed with a deluxe perch. On which you can perch. And stare some. * SUMPTUOUS FARE Enough jungle fast food. Enough filthy fruit and crusty old crab! At the Club, our team of gourmet chefs prepare symmetrical biscuits. And our beverage menu -- ooh, la la! Invigorate your morning with a refreshing glass of fresh-squeezed lead; while away the afternoons with a cup of tangy dioxin; then cap off your enchanted evening (with that special simian someone) by indulging in a carafe of our finest vintage mercury! So don't delay. As you can imagine, space is limited at the Health Canada Primate Country Club. With so many simians clamouring to get in, we'll soon have to start a waiting list! So call now. Make your escape from the animal kingdom rat-race before it's too late. The Health Canada Primate Country Club. Could this be monkey heaven? Len Goldberg, co-director Animal Action Ottawa FRONT PAGE | CITY | SPORTS | BUSINESS | NATIONAL | WORLD | EDITORIALS ENTERTAINMENT | YOUR MONEY | INTERNET | COLUMNISTS | CLASSIFIED FEEDBACK | GATEWAY Copyright 1997 The Ottawa Citizen Ottawa Citizen, letters to the editor Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 11:28:42 -0400 (EDT) From: MINKLIB@aol.com To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Anti Fur Resources Message-ID: <970819112713_1085382400@emout02.mail.aol.com> With fall right around the corner it is time to start planning for a really good anti fur campaign. Stay abreast of the developments in the fur trade by utilizing some of the publications CAFT has for sale. Please distribute this list to anyone who might be interested. The Holland Reports $8 Holland became the first nation in the world to ban fox farming. This is a collection of reports that were submitted to the parliament when the ban was being debated. It contains a report that is sympathetic to the fur trade, particularly mink farmers, and is then followed by 12 letters from experts refuting its claims. This is an excellent resource for anyone interested in the physiological and psychological abuses of fur farming. Most of the focus is on mink. The mink farm ban failed by just a few short votes. Inside the Fur Industry $18 for a 4 issue, one year subscription This newsletter gives quarterly updates on the fur trade. IFI contains information that is not compiled together in any other place. This is a crucial newsletter for anyone organizing an anti fur campaign. Jaws of Steel by Thomas Eveland $8 This is the most comprehensive anti trapping book ever written. It covers the suffering of trapped animals concisely, and refutes all common pro trapping arguments. Fur Farming in Finland $2 Finland produces nearly 70% of the worlds ranch raised fox skins. This report details the welfare problems inherent on Finnish fox farms. Very in depth and applicable to fur farms anywhere! The Fur Industry: An Ecological Nightmare $3 This is a report produced by CAFT which details the environmental destruction caused by fur production. The fur trade claims to be environmentally friendly, so this is a very important resource for countering those claims. Living with Beavers $3 Trappers are constantly using beaver control as an excuse for their continued killing of animals. This booklet argues that trapping does not control beaver populations, and provides non-lethal methods that are effective. It also details the environmental benefits of having a strong beaver population. The Final Nail and Final Nail supplement $3 These two booklets explain how the ALF is trying to stop the slaughter of fur animals with a combination of live liberation and economic sabotage. It contains a list of fur farms, with complete address, etc. so that these animal concentration camps cannot remain hidden from the public any longer. No Compromise #2-7 $2 each News magazine of the direct action wing of the animal rights movement. Underground #7 $3 Magazine of the ALF Supporters Group. Contains updates on ALF campaigns and prisoner news. All of these items can be ordered from the: Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade PO Box 822411 Dallas, TX 75382 Date: 19 Aug 1997 11:16:00 EST From: fls@wspausa.com (Joanne deMarrais) To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: WSPA Aids Animals on Volcanic Stricken Montserrat Message-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The World Society for the Protection of Animals has been actively involved in rescue efforts of animals affected by the severe volcanic activity on the tiny Caribbean island of Montserrat. BACKGROUND The increasing press coverage of the volcano on the Caribbean Island of Montserrat has stimulated many inquiries to WSPA's regional offices and to other animal protection organizations. Since the volcano first erupted in July of 1995, various WSPA staff have visited the island eleven (11) times. During the last six months, as the volcano intensified, WSPA teams built two temporary shelters to hold given-up, abandoned and stray dogs, cats and livestock. A wide assortment of veterinary pharmaceuticals and specialized animal handling equipment has been provided to the Ministry of Agriculture, including transport containers and an assortment of humane traps. Tons of dried pet foods were also shipped to the island. As the volcano continued to destroy larger areas of the island, WSPA intensified it's efforts. Since Montserrat is a British Colony, WSPA asked for, and received, the assistance of two experts from the Royal SPCA to assist in the training of government employees in a program of emergency animal handling and control. As the port and capitol city of Plymouth was evacuated, and eventually destroyed by burning lava and ash, WSPA constructed a shelter close to the airport to facilitate evacuation of pets. In June an eruption and resulting pyroclastic flow closed the airport. WSPA then relocated the shelter to the area thought to be the safest on the northern end of the island. As more residents were evacuated, the numbers of un-wanted, abandoned and stray animals increased. Some livestock were isolated between lava flows. A helicopter was rented to assist personnel in herding animals to safety and to get to livestock still tied or fenced. Livestock were taken on a sand barge to the island of St. Kitts. As the airport was permanently closed, the humane society of the nearby island of Antigua (27 miles away) provided invaluable assistance in negotiating an agreement with that government, whereby pets rescued from Montserrat would be brought by boat to Antigua, and kept at a safe section of the airport until they could be airlifted to Florida. The Broward County Humane Society agreed to accept the animals. After observation, medical treatment (if necessary), and exhaustive interviews of potential new families, the animals were placed in new homes. To date more than 80 animals have been taken safely from Montserrat to new homes in the United States. CURRENT SITUATION As the situation is now grave on Montserrat, and the evacuation of residents continues, WSPA's Gerardo Huertas helicoptered to Montserrat yesterday, accompanied by Karen Corbin and veterinarian Dr. Radcliffe Robbins of the Antigua/Barbuda Humane Society. They have arranged for an Antigua Coast Guard vessel to bring dog and cat air transport cages to Montserrat today. Plans call for the Coast Guard vessel to standby as the remaining 24 dogs and 13 cats in WSPA's shelter are crated and returned to the vessel. Yesterday, all animals were bathed and dipped for fleas, ticks and lice, and treated for internal parasites. All have had the necessary vaccinations and will travel to Antigua aboard the vessel with Gerardo, Karen and Dr. Robbins. Volunteers will assist in bringing the animals from the Coast Guard port to the airport, where the animals will be fed, watered and exercised in readiness for their airlift to Florida tomorrow. For further information, photos or video footage, please contact: John Walsh International Projects Director World Society for the Protection of Animals 29 Perkins Street PO Box 190 Boston, MA 02130 USA Telephone:617-522-7000 Fax:617-522-7077 Direct E-mail:jwalsh@wspausa.com Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 09:35:03 -0700 From: "Haptas, Joe" To: "ar-news@envirolink.org" Subject: DON'T EAT, DON'T TELL, Wendy's and the USDA Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT BREAK 8/19/97 04:09 UTC DON'T EAT, DON'T TELL The public was made aware of last week's recall of 1.2 million pounds of HUDSON BEEF hamburger patties -- contaminated with potentially deadly E. coli slime -- because the patties were sold to both restaurants and supermarkets. But a key U.S. Department of Agriculture official admits that no warning would have been issued had the patties been sent only to fast food franchises! This exclusive report was set to move on the COX newswire late Monday night. Investigative writers Elliot Jaspin and Scott Montgomery poke and choke, with specific details of fast food happy meals gone sour. Departmental rules distinguish between food sold in stores and food sold in restaurants because, as Jesse Majkowski, manager of recalls for the Agriculture Department, tells COX: "Our policy on public notification has been that we will issue a press release when consumers can identify a product and avoid consuming that product... When we have product that has gone to a restaurant and is being cooked and handled in a restaurant, the consumer cannot recognize that." Jaspin and Montgomery zero in on a 1994 incident involving WENDY'S: "[It] sought to recall 253,360 pounds of hamburger patties... In keeping with its policy of 'don't eat, don't tell,' the Agriculture Department helped WENDY'S mislead the public about the size and reason for the recall of tainted beef sent to five Midwest states... The government said it was unable to recover 50,000 pounds of the suspect beef, enough meat to prepare 200,000 hamburgers... When contacted Monday, Denny Lynch, a WENDY'S spokesperson, initially denied that his company had ever done a recall for beef tainted with E. coli. 'We never had an E. coli recall,' he said. Later, however, he acknowledged that there was a recall of beef after a test for E. coli had appeared to be positive. But because further testing allegedly showed no contamination, he did not consider it to be an E. coli recall." FOOTNOTE: Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman sends a special "SWAT team" of government health investigators to a HUDSON BEEF plant in Columbus, Nebraska, believed to be ground zero of last week's recall. Investigators will check with the plant's 230 employees to determine if any of them might have been ill or if any other unusual situations may have brought them into contact with the dreaded E. coli... Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:21:25 -0700 From: Michelle Sass To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Michelle's in NYC Message-ID: <33FB2795.4EA@cts.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Vegans! Many of you probably don't know who the hell I am because I never post anything on here because I am always so damn busy! (AND I live on the road) Anyway, I just dropped my tour group off in NYC and I have some free time before I pick up my new group and head back to California ( 22 states in 23 days!). I am Frickin' starving because I have been on the road non stop for months!! ( not much vegan food in the Deep South so I often opt to starve!) I am staying at the Hotel Beacon on the Upper West Side and if any group of vegans would like to get together and EAT I would be thrilled!!! How about any of the Vegans I used to hang with in NYC- like Kat and Johnny!!! Where the hell are they?? What about my Andrea? Larry, where the hell are you living NOW?? Where are the Activists for Animals people??? Any protests or anything going on? Anti-fur fashion shows?? Any single Vegan Nordic Gods??? HELP ME! I hang with foriegn carrnivores and I am going Nuckin' Futs!! Michelle Sass Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 12:11:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Mike Markarian To: ar-news@envirolink.org, seac+announce@earthsystems.org, en.alerts@conf.igc.apc.org, ar-wire@waste.org Subject: Essex Junction,Vermont: Rodeo Protest 8/27 Message-ID: <2.2.16.19970819154352.5c07bf40@pop.igc.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" VERMONT ACTION ALERT Green Mountain Animal Defenders (GMAD) is having a Rodeo Protest at the main entrance of the Champlain Valley Fair on Rte 15 in Essex Junction, VT on Wed, Aug 27th. The protest starts at 5:30PM and the rodeo begins at 7PM. For more info call Kathee at 878-3516 or Sharon at 985-3044 or e-mail Sharon at SMATGMAD@aol.com Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 16:09:04 -0400 (EDT) From: DDAL@aol.com To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: FDA Reform Message-ID: <970819160752_2081519919@emout19.mail.aol.com> Further Background and Details on FDA Reform Thanks to Lawrence Carter Long for posting the "action alert" regarding FDA Reform yesterday. Several organizations are opposed to "national uniformity" in FDA Reform, including members of the Coalition for Consumer Information on Cosmetics comprised of The HSUS, Doris Day Animal League, PETA, AAVS, AHA, NEAVS, IDA, Beauty Without Cruelty, USA and API. I have been working other organizations, including the Environmental Defense Fund and Center for Science in the Public Interest, also opposed to centralizing authority for labeling consumer products with the FDA. Please note that S. 830, the Senate version, is entitled the "Food and Drug Administration Modernization and Accountability Act." The section on "national uniformity" is Section 807 and only includes cosmetics and non-prescription drugs. This bill has been fast-tracked and will be scheduled for a floor vote in early September. Senator Kennedy (D-MA) has championed opposition to "national uniformity" and Massachusetts activists should ask him to stand firm. We do not want to see a compromise which would grandfather in Proposition 65 in California, but prohibit future cosmetic labeling. The House version, H.R. 1411, is entitled the "Drug and Biological Products Modernization Act." It contains a "national uniformity" provision which also includes food. We expect it will be marked-up in early September by the House Commerce Committee/Subcommittee on Health and Environment. The House will be a difficult fight for activists. These bills are being expedited to reauthorize the "Prescription Drug User Fee Act" before it expires on September 30. While appropriations for the Act may be available to fund it through the end of the year, federal legislators are being pressed to move FDA Reform asap. Your telephone calls, faxes and letters are crucially important. Remember that Republicans should support opposition to "national uniformity" on the basis that the party does not embrace federalism. Republicans want authority for regulation to reside with the states. Democrats will support a consumer's right-to-know. Animal activists have a right to make choices based on the best available information, often provided through labeling. Please feel free to contact me with further questions or concerns. Sara Amundson ddal@aol.com t: 202/546-1761 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 21:51:57 +0000 From: "Miggi" To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [UK] Barry Horne: Prison staff back down Message-ID: <199708192051.VAA19970@serv4.vossnet.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT > From: ALFSG > Subject: Barry Horne: Prison staff back down > The press release issued earlier today seems to have got immediate > results. Barry Horne, having spent 1 week on hunger strike as of 18/8/97 > in HMP Bristol, has been taken off the punishment regime that had been > imposed upon him. > > Barry has had all his privileges returned to him and im addition is > getting the free services of a physiotherapist who gives him a check-up > every day. > > It seems that this sudden change of direction on the prison's behalf is > a direct result of the press release that was sent out to national and > local media. > -- > ALFSG > > Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 21:51:57 +0000 From: "Miggi" To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [UK] Trial and Error - Taken from SchNEWS issue 130 Message-ID: <199708192050.VAA19869@serv4.vossnet.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Article from this weeks SchNEWS: > TRIAL AND ERROR > > "So, what I'm charged with in plain English is that "Somewhere in the > world > over a five year period (they're not sure when) I conspired with people > (most of whom I don't know) to incite other people (they don't know who) > to > commit criminal damage (they don't know what) and that the conspiracy > continued into the day after we were charged..." > - Robin Webb, Animal Liberation Front (ALF) > > Some Orwellian nightmare? Well no, this is what six people were charged > with > when on 16th January 1996, when 30 + cops were acting for ARNI (the > Animal > Rights National Index ) did dawn raids and arrested four editors of > Green > Anarchist (GA) newspaper, the ALF Supporters Group Newsletter's editor > and > Robin Webb, the ALF press officer. Robin Webb has since had charges > dropped > on a technicality, but still continues to be harassed. This was the > culmination of Operation Washington which, according to police, has been > running since 1991 and which saw 55 raids across the UK throughout the > course of 1995/6. > > "We're accused of inciting an arson wave by the Animal Rights Militia on > the > Isle of Wight in 1994. We didn't write a damn thing about the Isle of > Wight > until after the event..." > - Green Anarchist editorial > > The arrestees were all charged with `conspiracy to incite criminal > damage' - > for reporting direct action news or knowing others that had. This > `crime' > could land each of the defendants in prison for up to 5 years. According > to > StateWatch "Britain has the most repressive conspiracy laws in Europe." > For > the so-called `Thought Police' to prove their case, no criminal damage > need > be done nor anyone feel incited to do it: the `conspirators' need know > no-one doing damage and may know each other only tenuously or indirectly > (in > this case, having attended the same political rally - along with > thousands > of other concerned people); it's all down to their intent and in > practice > what that means is the defendants have to prove a negative in court, > that > they didn't intend anything. As you can imagine many believe the > conspiracy/incitement laws to be a bit of a `catch all', with its heavy > penalties making it a useful tool in suppressing direct action after the > failure of the Criminal Justice Act. > > In a similar case in 1988 two editors of the ALF support group were > jailed > in for 18 months in a similar case for reporting acts against animal > abuse. > > According to the committal even just reporting the facts about animal > lib or > eco-defence actions constitutes incitement. Let alone printing opinions > in > favour of these. Under this, we are up against a very broad, sweeping > definition and the implications of this are going to be used as a > catch-all > against the entire radical press... Therefore this is not just a problem > for > Green Anarchist alone, it is everybody's problem, because it concerns > freedom of speech. There is no evidence at all suggesting that any of > the > defendants were involved in the acts reported, but the prosecution is > trying > to say that people would have been encouraged by the favourable > reporting of > them. Why is reporting events that have already happened incitement? > Some of > the news had already been reported in the national press- are they going > to > find themselves in the dock as well? However, one editor of GA told > SchNEWS, > "What's more likely to encourage people to act is the continuing abuse > against animals and the planet" > > There have also been over 100 raids connected with the case; an old lady > who > wrote to Robin Webb in prison had her door knocked down, and a man who > bought a GA T-shirt was also raided. > > This case has also involved the use of Public Interest Immunity orders, > or, > as it should be more properly called `Police Interest Impunity' - PII's > are > being used to suppress evidence of secret state action against Green > Anarchist magazine. There has been interest from the security services, > as > was admitted by DI Des Thomas during the committal proceedings in > December > 1996, and this is being used as an excuse not to disclose documents that > could be vital to the defence. The Gandalf 6 believe that they were > infiltrated by an agent provocateur who encouraged them to write the > articles accused of being inciting. The prosecution are not obliged to > disclose their evidence so as not to compromise any agent's future > activities, PII's are serving as police protection. All accounts suggest > that the trial is going to be shrouded in mystery, with everybody, > including > the defence and defendants, being barred from the court room on the > first > day of the trial whilst the judge and defence decide what evidence to > submit > and what must be withheld. > > Their trial begins at Portsmouth Crown Court on August 26th, and a bike > blockade of Portsmouth is being planned for 9am that morning. Hampshire > Police, predictably, unhappy about the whole thing - appear to be > panicking! > They have been removing posters almost as soon as they go up, and are > attempting to prosecute someone for contempt of Court for giving out > 20,000 > leaflets advertising the trial ! - contact Green Anarchist BM 1715, > London > WC1N 3XX for more details . > > There will be transport going from Brighton for the first day of the > trial. > Ring Justice? office 01273 685913 if you want to go. > > SchNEWS, PO Box 2600, Brighton, BN2 2DX, England > Phone/Fax (call before faxing): 01273 685913 > Email: schnews@brighton.co.uk Web: http://www.cbuzz.co.uk/SchNEWS/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Last updated 17th August, 1997 > @nti copyright - information for action - copy and distribute! > SchNEWS Web Team (schnews-web@brighton.co.uk) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 17:25:13 -0400 (EDT) From: MINKLIB@aol.com To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Trappers Convention Article Message-ID: <970819172307_-84039079@emout03.mail.aol.com> Rochester Post Bulletin August 11 Protesters arrested at trappers convention by Bob Fruend (The Post-Bulletin) Animal rights activists carried signs protesting the trapping trade, shouted slogans and, in four cases, got physical enough to prompt arrests by police Saturday. The ongoing clash between the animal rights movement and the fur industry flared at the annual convention of the National Trappers Association, held at the Olmsted County Fairgrounds. Twenty-five to 30 members of Twin Cities-based chapters of the Student Organization for Animal Rights picketed at south and east entrances during a two-hour period. Shortly after arriving, some demonstrators blocked visitors driving into the show. Police arrested a man and a woman. The man was handcuffed and placed in the back of a squad car on his stomach. One had pushed a police officer, Rochester Police Sgt. Bob Schei said later. Sheriff's deputies quickly arrested two other protesters a short time later at the east, walk-in entrance when they stepped a few feet onto the grounds. One picketer, Matthew Bullard of Minneapolis, pleaded not guilty to three misdemeanor charges, including fifth-degree assault, in Olmsted District Court this morning. He was released on his own recognizance pending a Sept. 18 court date. Also arrested and still awaiting arraignment this morning, were Jessica Peters of Washington, Jeremy Dunbar of St. Louis Park and Allison George, no permanent address given, on charges such as disorderly conduct and obstructing a legal process. The protesters occasionally yelled at people arriving and at crowds inside the gates. They chanted slogans such as "Fur trade, death trade" and "Fur is murder, fur is death; free the animals; ALF (short for Animal Liberation Front a radical group)." The trappers group is used to watching signs parade by outside the fences for it's gatherings. "We have a small contingent like this about everywhere we go," said Steve Greene, spokesman for the national organization. About 400 exhibitors ranging from trap makers to outdoors artists from throughout the United States showed products or tools at the convention. It drew between 6,000 and 8,000 visitors from Thursday to Sunday. The protest was geared to "wake them up to what they are doing," said Katie Fedor, 23, of St. Paul, a recent graduate of University of St. Thomas in St. Paul. "You're killing a living, sentient being that feels pain and pleasure similar to our own," she said at the picket line Saturday. The convention is "celebrating animal cruelty," she said. The group particularly protests the use of leghold traps. Greene said, "They have a right to their beliefs" but many of the protesters also are misinformed about trappers or the fur business. Steel-toothed traps are no longer used widely to catch and hold animals, he said. The National Trappers Association is based in Bloomington, IL. Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 02:30:51 +0200 From: "sa338@blues.uab.es" To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Cruelty is not ELLEgant Message-ID: <33FA3ABB.7C0D@blues.uab.es> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I am Nuria from Barcelona. Please see what some magazines consider "fashionable" or "chic" http://www.geocities.com/heartland/ranch/1231/elle.htm and tell them that Cruelty is not fashionable! Thanks a lot Nuria http://www.geocities.com/heartland/hills/3787 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 08:44:11 +0800 (SST) From: Vadivu Govind To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Compassionate Living Festival Message-ID: <199708200044.IAA04605@eastgate.cyberway.com.sg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Re-posted from Sci-Veg with permission: ------------------Forwarded Message ----------- Tom Regan asked me to post this. --Carl ---------- Forwarded message ---------- The twelfth annual International Compassionate Living Festival is scheduled to be held in Raleigh, North Carolina, Septemeber 26th to the 28th. Featured speakers include Jeffrey Masson ["Why Elephants Wheep"], Chris DeRose [preisdent of Last Chance for Animals, and author of "In Your Face"], T. Colin Campbell ["The China Study"], and Christopher Chappell ["Nonviolence to Animals, Earth, and Self in Asian Traditions"]. Also including presentations by Ellen LaConte, Pat Derby, Sidney Gendin, Bernard Unti, and Tom Regan. Plus a remembrance and celebration of the life and work of Helen Nearing, incredible prizes, gourmet vegan meals, and much, much more. For additional information, contact The Culture & Animals Foundation, 3509 Eden Croft Drive, Raleigh, NC 27612. Phone 919-782-3739. Fax 919-782-6464. Tom Regan Professor of Philosophy and Department Head Dept of Philosophy & Religion North Carolina State University Box 8103 Raleigh, NC 27695-8103 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 20:51:34 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ibvegan@king.cts.com, ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Admin Note--was: Michelle's in NYC Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819205132.00709d28@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Michelle...we all wish you well in meeting your old friends, but AR-News is an inappropriate forum for this. Anyone responding to her post, please do so via private e-mail and not to AR-News. Please do not post commentary or personal opinions to AR-News. Such posts are not appropriate to AR-News. Appropriate postings to AR-News include: posting a news item, requesting information on some event, or responding to a request for information. Discussions on AR-News will NOT be allowed and we ask that any commentary either be taken to AR-Views or to private E-mail. Continued postings of inappropriate material may result in suspension of the poster's subscription to AR-News. Here is subscription info for AR-Views: Send e-mail to: listproc@envirolink.org In text/body of e-mail: subscribe ar-views firstname lastname Also...here are some websites with info on internet resources for Veg and AR interests: The Global Directory (IVU) http://www.ivu.org/global World Guide to Vegetarianism--Internet http://www.veg.org/veg/Guide/Internet/index.html Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 02:52:04 +0200 From: "sa338@blues.uab.es" To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Cats burned Message-ID: <33FA3FB4.1349@blues.uab.es> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I am Nuria from Barcelona. Remember to express your petition for the maximum penalty for the two idiots that burned cats in Indiana. http://www.geocities.com/heartland/ranch/1231/olivia.htm Thanks for your concern. For the animals, Nuria http://www.geocities.com/heartland/hills/3787 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 22:02:52 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: (US) Dog Survives Being Dragged From Car Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819220249.006c842c@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" from AP Wire page: ------------------------------ 08/19/1997 18:06 EST Dog Survives Being Dragged From Car FAIRPORT, Iowa (AP) -- A dog tied to the bumper of a truck survived being dragged nearly two miles at speeds as high as 55 mph. Tippy, a 2-year-old black Pekingese, had its side and paws rubbed raw by the pavement, and its face was bloody. A veterinarian said the animal will need surgery but did not elaborate. The owner, Merlin John Laing, 46, was charged with animal neglect, drunken driving, and an open container violation Sunday night near Fairport. ``The only thing he had the nerve to say was it was the dog's fault for not alerting him that he was tied back there, if you can believe that,'' said Sgt. Steve Lawrence. Laing said he chained Tippy to the bumper while the family was at a recreational area. ``I always tie him up. I never thought anything about it,'' Laing said. ``I thought he would have barked when we paid the fee at the campground but I didn't hear him or nothing. ``You know how you can forget sometimes,'' he said. Laing was released on bond and is due back in court on Friday. Animal neglect is punishable up to one year in jail and a $1,000 fine, Lawrence said. Laing expressed remorse Monday. ``I didn't want to run over him or hurt him,'' he said. ``I hate that it happened. It won't happen again.'' Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 23:09:39 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: (UK) Report: Condemned Poultry Meat Sold for Human Consumption Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819230937.006c86ec@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" from CNN web page: ----------------------------------- Report: Condemned Poultry Meat Sold for Human Consumption AP 19-AUG-97 LONDON (AP) It's enough to make a person turn vegetarian. Some 1,440 tons of British poultry meat certified as fit only for pet food were sold for human consumption, The Mirror reported Tuesday. The London daily said the chicken and turkey breasts dumped at rendering plants for pet food were recycled by rogue dealers and ended up on the shelves of two British supermarket chains. Trials will start next month of 37 people butchers, meat dealers and brokers allegedly involved in the racket that went on from early 1995 to the end of last year, the newspaper said. The trade was stopped after a tipoff to food safety authorities. The Mirror said the rogue poultry dealers are believed to have used hoses and salt baths to clean up the poultry meat, which was almost certainly rife with disease. The newspaper said the supermarket chains Kwik Save and Netto were duped into stocking the meat, and it was also sold to old people's homes and restaurants. Britain has been plagued by food scandals in recent years. Last year, the European Union banned British beef exports after the government announced that beef contaminated with mad cow disease was the most likely cause of a new deadly strain of Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease in humans. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 23:10:49 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: (UK) Linda McCartney Has Launched an Ambitious Expansion Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819231047.006c41d4@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" from CNN web page: -------------------------------- Linda McCartney Has Launched an Ambitious Expansion of World Entertainment News Network 19-AUG-97 (AUG. 19) WENN/P - LINDA McCARTNEY has launched an ambitious expansion of her vegetarian food empire as she rebuilds her life after a two-year struggle against cancer. A range of dairy free ice-cream and yoghurt desserts will be in the shops this autumn (97) and meat-free Chinese and Indian dishes are also being developed for worldwide export. The move is seen as evidence that the wife of former BEATLE SIR PAUL McCARTNEY is confident that her health has improved. Since news of the illness became public more than 18 months ago the McCartney's have recovery. Details of the dessert launch have been kept under wraps - but it is understood that there will be four ice-creams, chocolate, strawberry, toffee and coffee, and six yoghurts, strawberry, raspberry, black cherry, rhubarb, apricot and peach and blueberry and redcurrant. Because dairy ingredients have been barred, trades description rules prevent them from being called ice-cream and yoghurt. They will be sold as "Linda McCartney's Dairylike Dessert" and "Linda McCartney's 'Yogas'." In six years, the Linda McCartney range of vegetarian meals has become a British market leader, now selling 3.5 million products each week. The company is now working on meat-free lookalike bacon and roasts. (WNTMA/JAG) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 23:21:55 -0400 From: allen schubert To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: (AU) Dieters Need Not Shun Beef Australian Study Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970819232152.006e3068@clark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" from CNN web page: ------------------------------- Dieters Need Not Shun Beef Australian Study Reuters 18-AUG-97 SYDNEY, Aug 19 (Reuter) - Women who exclude all red meat from their diets to lose weight fare no better than women who continue to eat moderate amounts of lean beef, according to an Australian study published on Tuesday. The study, by Melbourne's Baker Medical Research Institute, was jointly funded by the National Heart Foundation and an industry body, the Meat Research Corp. It showed that overweight women, mainly between 30 and 45 years of age, achieved the same weight reduction, about nine percent of initial body weight in 16 weeks, irrespective of whether their diets included lean beef or soybean. The study follows concern in Australia's red meat industry over falling sales as red meat loses favour with consumers. Its findings were released by the meat industry's main statutory authority the Australian Meat and Livestock Corp (AMLC). Researchers led by the Institute's Professor Paul Nestel set out to establish that eating lean beef within a calorie-controlled diet does not interfere with weight loss, the AMLC said. After a study of 36 overweight women, half of whom continued to eat beef, Nestel concluded that reducing energy intake was the key and staple foods like beef need not be excluded. Other benefits such as blood pressure and cholesterol reductions and improvements in arterial health were also equal in both groups of women studied. Nestel said the findings were important: ``The more a weight-loss eating plan resembles a normal diet, the more likely it is to succeed.'' The researchers said that women often followed fad diets or misleading dietary advice and one piece of ``misinformation'' was that staple foods like red meat should be cut out. In the Australian study, two groups of 18 obese women were put on separate diets over a 16-week period. The energy and fat content of both groups were similar, but one group included 150 grams (5 1/4 ounces) of lean red meat at least five times a week. The other group did not eat red meat at all, substituting soybean, although the women still ate chicken or fish at other meals. Both groups achieved an average nine percent reduction in body weight over the 16 weeks, with the lean beef group losing an average 7.8 kg (17 lbs three ounces) and the ``semi-vegetarian'' group an average 7.6 kg (16 lbs 13 ounces). The two groups also achieved a 12-percent reduction in plasma cholesterol levels, a seven-percent reduction in blood pressure and equal reductions in the elasticity of arteries, the AMLC said in a statement. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 20:28:10 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: Fwd: Attempted Piracy in High Seas by US Coast Guard Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970819202835.2257812a@dowco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >From Greenbase - Greenpeace Press Release Server] ATTEMPTED PIRACY ON HIGH SEAS BY US COAST GUARD Arctic Ocean, August 18 (GP): In a blatant violation of international law tonight, the US Coast Guard attempted to stop the Greenpeace Ship, Arctic Sunrise in international waters. As ARCO's concrete island drilling system settled into Camden Bay, despite legal Greenpeace protests, the Arctic Sunrise left the area. After the ship was well into international waters, a US Coast Guard helicopter flew out and repeatedly ordered them to heave to for boarding. Even after being informed that the vessel was in international waters, the Coast Guard responded: "I am still ordering you to heave-to, skipper. Uhmm, your choice, I am ordering you to heave-to, uh, for documented violations of federal laws and treaties of the United States, and uh, it is your choice obviously, there are coast guard vessels out to board you." "This is an extraordinary breach of international law, which provides absolute protection of the navigation of vessels in international waters," said Greenpeace international attorney Duncan Currie. The events on the High Seas ended a day of high drama where Greenpeace performed a citizens arrest on ARCO's oil rig manager for violation of us law, declared an environmental protection zone, and witnessed numerous marine mammals including polar bears fleeing from the three tugs towing the drilling platform. "ARCO, the federal agencies and the Coast Guard have clearly demonstrated that they will stop at nothing to prevent Greenpeace's campaign to protect the environment from the abuses of the oil industry," said Steve Sawyer, on board the Arctic Sunrise, "But Greenpeace will continue its protest against oil exploration because we cannot afford to burn even a quarter of the known fossil fuel reserves, it is foolhardy and irresponsible of the oil industry to continue searching for more." "The oil industry obviously have the authorities at their beck and call - even to the extent of getting the coast guard to abuse its powers in international waters. It is time the oil industry was brought under control," Sawyer added. Attached - extracts from a transcript of the exchange between US Coast Guard helicopter 6523 and the mv Arctic Sunrise captain, Arne Sorensen. The complete transcript is available. Transcript, VHF communications, 18 August CG = Coast Guard helicopter 6523 AS = Captain Arne Sorensen, Greenpeace Motor Vessel Arctic Sunrise CG: motor vessel Arctic Sunrise, motor vessel Arctic Sunrise, this is Coast Guard helicopter, Coast Guard helicopter 16. CG: Motor vessel Arctic Sunrise, motor vessel Arctic Sunrise, this is Coast Guard helicopter overhead your position 70 30 north, 144 35 west, on a heading of 335, 10 knots, red vessel, with white superstructure, with Coast Guard helicopter overhead, on channel 16. You are ordered to heave to, stop your vessel, (AS call sign? "sea-ray, kay- beck, bee-so-too"??) to await Coast Guard, US Coast Guard boarding, and other federal agent boarding, for violation of US laws and treaties. I have you over, uh, underneath me at this time, positive identification, I am ordering you to heave to, stop your vessel, in your current position, immediately skipper. Coast Guard helicopter standing by, channel one-six. CG: Motor vessel Arctic Sunrise, motor vessel Arctic Sunrise, Coast Guard helicopter overhead circling, you are ordered to heave to, heave to, stop your vessel, `sea-ray, kay- beck, bee-so-too, sea-ray, kay beck, bee-so-too,' heave to, skipper, for US Coast Guard and other federal agents boarding for violation of US laws and treaties, Coast Guard helicopter circling overhead, to the Greenpeace vessel Arctic Sunrise, Greenpeace vessel Arctic Sunrise, you are ordered to heave to. AS: Coast Guard helicopter, this is the Arctic Sunrise on channel 122.9 CG: Arctic Sunrise, Coast Guard helicopter on channel 122.9 AS: Yeah, good evening, what's your business here, over. CG: Motor vessel Arctic Sunrise, Coast Guard helicopter. I am ordering you to heave to, for Coast Guard and other federal agents boarding for violation of US laws of treaties, you are ordered to stop your vessel at this time, AS: Coast Guard helicopter, this is the Arctic Sunrise, sorry to inform you that this is a Dutch-registered vessel operating in international waters, and you have no authority to stop me in this area, over. CG:: Motor vessel Arctic Sunrise, Coast Guard helicopter. I am still ordering you to stop for violation of US laws and treaties, you are ordered to stop at this time, on uh, for violation of US laws and treaties. AS: Right-oh, yes, understood, but I'm sorry, I am not going to stop my vessel. You have no authority to stop me in international waters. CG: Motor vessel Arctic Sunrise, Coast Guard helicopter six-five-two-three, and I am still ordering you to heave to, skipper. Um, your choice, I am ordering you to heave to, uh, for documented violations of federal laws and treaties of the United States, and uh, it is your choice, obviously, there are Coast Guard vessels that are out to board you, I am ordering you to heave to, and we have documented proof, or documented, uh evidence, of violation of US laws and treaties. AS: I can only repeat what I've just said, that you have no authority to stop me in international waters. Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 20:28:13 -0700 (PDT) From: David J Knowles To: ar-news@envirolink.org Subject: [UK] Anti-hunting league expels top officials Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970819202838.2257b6f6@dowco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >From The Electronic Telegraph - Wednesday, August 20th, 1997 Anti-hunting league expels top officials By Hugh Muir and Charles Clover TWO senior members of the League Against Cruel Sports have been expelled after becoming involved in compromise talks with the foxhunting lobby. Mark Davies, a former chairman of the league, and Steve Watson, formerly the regional representative for Bedfordshire, have been thrown out because they are also leading figures in the Wildlife Network, a group which is seeking to reform rather than abolish hunting. They have been told that their involvement with the group network is incompatible with membership of the league. An attempt to have their expulsions overturned failed last weekend despite an appeal to fellow members at the organisation's annual meeting. However, the two men are threatening a court challenge to the decision, claiming that the league made no attempt to inform them of any charges until they were called upon to defend themselves at the meeting. Last night Kevin Saunders, a league spokesman, confirmed that its constitution did not oblige the executive committee to provide disciplined members with detailed charges. Mr Davies, 52, of Crosby, Merseyside, said: "We may seek a court injunction to have the whole process set aside because we do not believe it gave due weight to natural justice. The executive committee wrote a letter saying I was expelled but they didn't give any reason." Mr Watson, 35, of Bedford, said: "My expulsion for thinking through the issue of hunting shows how unprofessional the league has become. The lack of evidence against us and the way this appeal has been handled has shown that the league is quite prepared to act in a way totally outside the principles of natural justice." James Barrington, the director of the network and a former director of the league, said that the league could have allowed the pair to remain members. The prospect of an agreement between pro-hunters and reformers is an explosive one because abolitionists are pinning their hopes on the Private Member's Bill proposed by Mike Foster, the Labour MP, which would ban the sport completely. The Bill will go before the House of Commons on Nov 28 and has the support of the Prime Minister, although the Government has indicated it will not smooth the measure's passage by allowing it extra time. The network's blueprint for reform says a complete hunting ban would be damaging for foxes because farmers would find unacceptable ways of killing them. In February Mr Barrington, Mr Davies and Mr Watson held secret talks with Capt Ian Farquhar, the Master of the Beaufort Hunt and Lord Mancroft, the deputy chairman of the British Field Sports Society. Although the two sides are far from total agreement, they claim to have found areas for compromise. However, Mr Saunders said the expelled men must have realised their talks with the hunters would lead to expulsion. © Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1997.