Komputer for Alle 1998 #6/1998 CD 6 (Gul).iso/web/ffa/wwwenv~1.org/arrs/digest/news48~6.htm/text0006.txt

Text File | 1998-04-03 | 74.1 KB | 1,626 lines

from AP Wire page:
-------------------------------------
 07/28/1997 14:22 EST

 Beetle-Crazy Japan Caught in Glut

 By ERIC TALMADGE
 Associated Press Writer

 TOKYO (AP) -- Collector Shoji Teraoka probably wouldn't even have
 bothered to look three years ago. But now, the object of his dreams was
 almost within reach -- a big, black beetle that once would have sold for
 $3,000.

 ``I've always wanted one of those,'' he said while he contemplated the
 bug, marked down to a mere $800 at a ritzy department store. ``Words just
 can't describe it.''

 Possibly no other country in the world is as crazy about beetles as
 Japan, where the bugs of summer long have held a special place in the
 hearts of children and poets alike.

 But as the beetle season hits its peak this month, a gloom is hanging
 over dealers who once invested in larvae the way some people might trade
 shares of stock, and doled out tens of thousands of dollars for a
 sufficiently buff and bulky adult specimen.

 Japan, it seems, is experiencing an unprecedented bug glut. The [Image]
 market is in a panic. Breeders are going belly up.              The house
                                                                 pet
 ``Prices have hit rock bottom,'' lamented Kiyoaki Tsuno, head
[(AP/Itsuo[Image]
 of the gardening and pet division at the Tokyu department store Inouye)
 in Tokyo.                                                       [20K]
                                                                 ----------
 While his shelves once carried bugs that went for thousands of
 dollars, this year the $800 stag beetle that caught Teraoka's fancy was
 his priciest specimen.

 Especially attractive to bug connoisseurs are two kinds of beetle --
 Japanese varieties of the stag and atlas -- that can grow to nearly 3
 inches in length and bear impressive ``horns'' that resemble ornaments on
 the helmets of samurai warriors.

 Japan's beetlemania isn't isolated among hard-core collectors.
 Grade-school children commonly raise the smaller atlas beetles as
 homework projects during the summer vacation, which for most kids began
 this month.

 The total numbers of pet beetles in Japan is uncertain, though their
 popularity is undisputed. No Japanese pet store is really complete
 without a bug corner, and most carry a wide range of beetle supplies --
 including cages, log chunks for the bugs to nest in and even
 nutritionally enriched bug jelly and bug juice.

 Such affection for insects is nothing novel.

 In ancient times, aristocrats sung the praises of bugs and held
 competitions to see who could best identify their calls. An often-quoted
 work by Basho, generally regarded as the ultimate master of haiku poetry,
 celebrated the entrancing cry of the cicada.

 ``Of course, we are repulsed by some kinds of bugs just like everyone
 else,'' Tsuno said. ``But in some we see a kind of refined elegance as
 well.''

 In recent years, that elegance had been worth a lot of money.

 Tsuno said that unlike the more common atlas beetles, stag beetles longer
 than 3 inches can easily fetch $500 or more. The average atlas beetle
 costs only about $10.

 Along with size, collectors look for beetles with no scars, all their
 legs intact and an exoskeleton that has the sheen of a well-polished car.
 A healthy stag beetle can live in captivity for two or more years.

 Improved breeding techniques have made it easier for average collectors
 to get larvae and grow large beetles themselves, causing prices to
 plummet.

 ``It's not so difficult. Even a child can do it,'' said beetle breeder
 Kenji Yoshida, who is director of the private Insect Institute and author
 of ``The Lucanid Beetles of Japan.''

 ``People used to take out loans to buy a beetle, the same way you might
 borrow to buy a car or a house,'' he said. ``More people now are raising
 their own.''

 Yoshida said the drop in prices has put a lot of pressure on breeders,
 many of whom have been forced out of business. But he says that isn't
 necessarily a bad thing.

 ``The market was overheated,'' he said. ``You can't succeed in this
 business if you're just out for the money. You have got to really like
 bugs.''

Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 01:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Fwd. US Senate Action on Dolphin/Tuna Legislation Applauded
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

[Although this is dated July 25th, it was only received today - July 28th]

>From Greenbase - Greenpeace Press Release Server

GREENPEACE APPLAUDS SENATE ACTION ON DOLPHIN LEGISLATION;
VICTORY AT HAND FOR STRONGER PROTECTION OF DOLPHINS AND  OTHER
MARINE LIFE

Washington, D.C., July 25, 1997 --  Greenpeace calls today's action by the
Senate a crucial step forward in ensuring needed protection for  dolphins,
other marine life, consumers and the ocean ecosystem.  The  Senate agreement
reached this morning to take up S. 39 under  unanimous consent next week
paves the way for final action before  members leave for the August break.

An agreement reached late yesterday addresses the concerns of some  Senators
while maintaining the commitment of the other 11 "Panama  Declaration"
countries to enter into a binding international dolphin  conservation
program.  That historic program will institute precedent  setting protection
for dolphins, sharks, sea turtles, billfish and  juvenile tuna.

"For dolphins and other marine life in the Eastern Pacific Ocean, final
Senate  action next week holds the promise of strengthened protection and
conservation," said Barbara Dudley,
Senior Advisor to Greenpeace.   "Today's procedural vote was a major step in
the right direction, and  it's very encouraging to see key players coming
together on a package  that puts the dolphins first."

Four months ago, Greenpeace made it very clear that if there was to be  an
acceptable legislative compromise, it would need to be acceptable  to all
key allies supporting S. 39, including the countries that  would have to
participate in the new International Dolphin  Conservation Program Act
(IDCP).  That position was premised  the  fact that the United States and
other fishing nations in the Eastern  Tropical Pacific joined in an historic
October 1995 "Panama  Declaration," which provided an effective framework
for international  action.

"The Senate agreement sets the stage for achieving an international
solution to an international problem," said Clifton Curtis,  Political
Advisor with Greenpeace
International.  "The devil is in  the details, as always, but what's
essential now is that Senators  flesh out the final text in a manner
ensuring effective protection  for dolphins and
other sea life, consistent with the core elements of  the Panama
Declaration."  Acceptance by the House of Representatives'  of the final
Senate bill remains outstanding, though final
Congressional action is likely next week.

Congress passed in 1990 the "dolphin safe" labelling law, giving consumers a
choice between "dolphin safe" canned tuna and other tuna. That label means
that the tuna was not caught by the encirclement of tuna and dolphins -  a
fishing method used because  tuna tend to congregate under herds of
dolphins.  In truth, however,  dolphins are still dying by the thousands in
the Eastern Pacific,  even though the "dolphin safe" label has led consumers
to believe  that the problem has been solved.  The label and U.S. market
restrictions, though, have had little impact on fishing practices in  the
Eastern Tropical Pacific.

The non-U.S. countries are still encircling dolphins, at almost the same
rate  as when the label was first introduced.  Under the Panama
Declaration, the nations agree to reduce dolphin deaths towards zero,  with
tuna sold as "dolphin safe" as long as an independent observer  on each boat
does not see a dolphin killed or seriously injured,  regardless of the
fishing method used.


Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 01:55:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [CA] Anti-ar article in the Georgia Straight
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

The following article was published in the Georgia Straight, July 24th -
30th edition.

Lab-Rat Treatment a Painful Topic
By Bruce Wilson

A famous portrait by the great photographer Yousef Karsh shows Canadian
physiologist Hans Sayle holding up a white laboratory rat, as if to give it
equal billing. By conducting experiments on rats, Seyle formulated his
theory of "biological stress" in 1936 and brought to the world a new
understanding of the workings of disease.

His work eventually led to the treatments and drugs that have saved the
lives of millions of people and animals. But it also came at cost of the
suffering and death  of thousands of laboratory animals. Despite this, it's
sobering to think that if animal-rights groups had been powerful in his day,
none of his work might have been done.

The debate over the use of animals in research is as hot today as it was in
1876, when legislation prohibiting cruelty to research animals was first
enacted in Britain. On research-grant applications, scientists must now
provide strong justification for any suffering they cause laboratory animals
and demonstrate attempts to minimize it whenever possible. This is not good
enough for animal-rights groups, who would like to see animal research
stopped altogether. While some groups, such as the US-based Physicians
Committee for Esponsible Medicine, are willing to engage in intelligent
debate, others resort to hperbole. Brochures distributed by these groups
often portray animal researchers as coldhearted murderers, interested only
in researcg funds or the PhD's that their data will generate. They include
gruesome photos of of mutilated animals presented out of context, designed
to shock rather than to elicit thought.

One pamphlet distributed by Lifeforce, a Vancouver animal-rights group,
claims that animal research is "a lie that tortures billions of animals" and
"a medical and scientific fraud".

A key argument put forward by animal-rights activists is that the physiology
of labatory animals is dissimilar to that of humans to validate using then
as a model for ailing humans. A common argument in activist literature is
that human problems can only be solved by studying humans.

Although this statement is correct in that most treatments are finally
approved for safety and efficacy through clinical trials, the extensive
testing done on animals has yielded vast understanding of how drugs work on
both humans and  animals. Contrary to the claims of animal-rights activists,
the physiology of labatory animals, especially rats and primates, is close
enough to that of humans to have served as a successful  model in the
development of thousnads of drugs and surgical treatments. "Both [animals
and humans] control their internal biochemistry by releasing endocrine
hormones that are all essentially the same...and both react in the same way
to infection or tissue injury," wrote animal-research defenders Jack
Bottling and Adrian Morrison in the February 1997 issue of 'Scientific
American'.

Admittsdly, the scientific community hasn't always lived up to its promise
to minimize animal suffering, and it is here that animal-rights groups have
dome some good. In 1989, Lifeforce published a brochure with photographs of
burn experiments conducted at Vancouver General Hospital in which dogs and
cats were subjected to severe burns over 20 per cent of their bodies in
order to test the efficacy of antibacterial creams, some of which had
already been in clinical use for years. Partly because of public opinion,
the burn experiments were stopped in 1993. In 1984, Lifeforce exposed the
nistreatment of a baboon being used for heart research at the University of
Western Ontario. The expose led to a demand by the Canadian Council on
Animal Care that the university cease the experiment as it failed to meet
the council's standards for animal care.

According to Eric Jamieson, PhD, chairman of the Animal Care Committee,
which oversees animal research at UBC and the Vancouver Hospital and Life
Sciences Centre, things have changed dramatically over the past several
years. Researchers, he says, must provide strong justification for the use
of animals, and experimenters are regularly subjected to unannounced spot
checks by the CCAC to ensure that standards are being met. "At UBC,"
Jamieson told the 'Georgia Straight', "investigators are asked if they have
persued all possible alternatives to animals. We try to reduce the number of
animals being used, and we're constantly looking at the replacement of
animals in teaching methods."

Despite the great increase in research techniques designe to replace the use
of animals in recent years, it's unlikely animals will ever be eliminated
from research. They are just too valuable for obtaining ceratin types of
nedical knowledge. Animal-rights activists would serve their cause better if
tey stopped their misinformation and smear campaigns and learned to work
toward the more realistic goal of minimization rather than elimination of
animal research.

The Georgia Straight can be contacted at:

The Editor
Georgia Straight
1770 Burrard Street - 2nd Floor
Vancouver, BC
V6J 3G7
Canada

Fax: [phone]

e-mail: [e-mail]




Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 01:55:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [UK] New Forest deer hunt calls it a day after 1,000 years
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"


>From The Electronic Telegraph - Tuesday, July 29th, 1997

New Forest deer hunt calls it a day after 1,000 years
By Charles Clover, Environment Editor

THE last hunt in Britain to pursue fallow deer announced yesterday that it
is to cease hunting, ending a New Forest tradition which has lasted almost
1,000 years.

The decision by the New Forest Buckhounds comes amid rumours that ministers
are about to revoke - or refuse - licences for deer hunting on Forestry
Commission land. The hunt operates exclusively on the commission's ground.
The chairman, masters and committee of the Buckhounds issued a statement
saying that they had decided with regret not to hunt fallow bucks in the
forest this season and added that "it is unlikely that they will hunt again
in the future".

The decision was the result, they said, of the increasing demands upon the
forest made by the urbanisation of its fringes and millions of visitors each
year. "The New Forest is now no longer the provider of an environment
suitable to hunt the wild fallow buck, thus it seems that the buckhounds
will become part of the rich history of the New Forest," the statement added.

"It is hoped by all their supporters that the deer will not also be resigned
to history but will still flourish." The chairman and former master, Peter
Barfoot, said: "Time has caught up with us. Our committee met on Sunday and
decided the hunt had come to the end of its natural life. "We felt we should
end with some dignity while we still had some. The New Forest has
changed beyond recognition and there is no future hunting deer here." Mr
Barfoot said that the Buckhounds were different from the three hunts which
pursue red deer in the West Country.

Those were based in agricultural areas where they were the only form of
culling deer. "The New Forest is not an agricultural area any more but a
tourist destination. Now, even in the middle of winter and in the middle of
the forest, you can be chasing a buck and come across a family on mountain
bikes. In the minutes of the committee 20 years ago it was decided that our
hunt should only have another two or three years. So we have done well to
last this long. The fact is that the New Forest is now too small to support
our hunt."

He denied that the hunt had had talks with the Forestry Commission or that a
current commission review might have prompted the decision. The Buckhounds
were formed in 1885 but hunting fallow deer has been a part of New Forest
since William the Conqueror designated the forest a royal hunting ground in
1079.

The Buckhounds have been a thorn in the side of the hunting fraternity
because of the younger fallow buck's habit of not standing at bay but lying
down when cornered by the hounds. Anti-hunting campaigners have filmed
hounds escaping their huntsmen and attacking the deer before it could be put
down with a gun.

The commission announced soon after the election that it would not issue
licences for hunting on its land until a full review of hunting had taken
place.

A spokesman said: "We have prepared advice for ministers and that is being
discussed at the moment." Anti-hunting campaigners believe the commission
may be influenced by research carried out for the National Trust which said
deer hunting with hounds was cruel.

Kevin Saunders of the League Against Cruel Sports said he was "very pleased"
by the New Forest Buckhounds' decision. "The whole thing is academic anyway
as we've heard they are not going to get a licence anyway."

⌐ Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1997.

Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 01:55:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [UK] Experts find BSE cases 'in clusters'
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"


>From The Electronic Telegraph - Tuesday, July 29th, 1997

Experts find BSE cases 'in clusters'
By Aisling Irwin, Science Correspondent

SCIENTISTS have uncovered a clustering of BSE cases around the country, with
10 per cent of cattle herds harbouring 80 per cent of the disease.

Large herds had higher rates of the disease than smaller ones, the new,
detailed work has found. Herds with more than 100 cattle had rates of six
per thousand, while herds with less than 50 cows had rates of between one
and four per thousand. The researchers said they could not explain why
larger herds should be at greater risk. It could be because of a small
amount of transmission of the disease from cow to cow, or an effect of more
intensive farming.

The research was by the team that last year said that new cases would fall
dramatically, to 12 a year by 1999. Since then, they have returned to their
data for more detailed analysis. As a result, they uncovered the clustering.
"A small number of herds are accounting for a relatively large number of
cases," said Dr Christl Donnelly, one of the team at Oxford University.

The work is published today in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Society. The scientists showed that BSE has clustered regionally, with
incidence at its highest in the South West and East Anglia; second highest
in the South East and the North West; and lowest in Scotland. Their model
shows that it is possible that some BSE is transmitted horizontally, for
example through infected pasture or directly from cow to cow.

But this transmission is so small that it could not sustain an epidemic.
Horizontal transmission could, however, account for the rate of BSE being
higher in large herds than small ones. The team, led by Prof Roy Anderson,
has tested its computer models against reality for the first time, because
its first predictions were for last year. These calculations were accurate,
Dr Donnelly said. The number of new cases this year would be half that of
last year, the scientists have said.

⌐ Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1997.

Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 23:25:35 -0400
From: Mesia Quartano <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: 'Bison Belong' campaign launched in Montana
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

'Bison Belong' campaign launched in Montana


The National Parks and Conservation Association announced Friday that
more than 50 Montana business owners have joined the "Bison Belong"
campaign.

The campaign aims to engage Montana's tourist-oriented business
community in helping to call for a solution to the bison management
problem at Yellowstone National Park.

Implementation of current state and federal policies led to the killing
of 1,083 Yellowstone bison when they strayed over the park's border into
Montana in search of food during last year's unusually severe winter.

"At the core of Bison Belong is a list of business owners concerned
about protecting Yellowstone's bison. The Yellowstone bison herd is not
only a worldwide symbol of wild America and the trademark of the world's
first national park, Yellowstone's bison also are of incalculable value
to southern Montana's economic health," said Mark Peterson, Rocky
Mountain regional director of NPCA.

The bison are killed to eliminate the possibility of ranchers' cattle
becoming infected with brucellosis.

The Yellowstone bison herd decreased by nearly 60 percent last winter.
About half can be accounted for by "natural" winter mortality; the rest
were killed by the state.

Despite a public outcry last winter, the bison management plan that
governed the killings in 1997 has not been amended and probably will be
used in 1998. Bison Belong strives to utilize the combined influence of
the business community and concerned citizens to help state and federal
officials reach a solution to the brucellosis issue.

The campaign is called Bison Belong because participants agree that part
of the solution is allowing Yellowstone bison a Montana refuge outside
the park in severe winter conditions.

NPCA is a private nonprofit citizen organization founded in 1919 and
dedicated to preserving, protecting and enhancing the U.S. National Park
System.

For more information, contact Jerome Uher, NPCA, [phone] ext. 122.


Copyright 1997, Environmental News Network, All Rights Reserved
ENN Daily News -- July 28, 1997
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 01:55:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [UK] New Forest deer hunt calls it a day after 1,000 years
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


>From The Electronic Telegraph - Tuesday, July 29th, 1997

New Forest deer hunt calls it a day after 1,000 years
By Charles Clover, Environment Editor=20

THE last hunt in Britain to pursue fallow deer announced yesterday that it
is to cease hunting, ending a New Forest tradition which has lasted almost
1,000 years.

The decision by the New Forest Buckhounds comes amid rumours that ministers
are about to revoke - or refuse - licences for deer hunting on Forestry
Commission land. The hunt operates exclusively on the commission's ground.
The chairman, masters and committee of the Buckhounds issued a statement
saying that they had decided with regret not to hunt fallow bucks in the
forest this season and added that "it is unlikely that they will hunt again
in the future".

The decision was the result, they said, of the increasing demands upon the
forest made by the urbanisation of its fringes and millions of visitors each
year. "The New Forest is now no longer the provider of an environment
suitable to hunt the wild fallow buck, thus it seems that the buckhounds
will become part of the rich history of the New Forest," the statement added.

"It is hoped by all their supporters that the deer will not also be resigned
to history but will still flourish." The chairman and former master, Peter
Barfoot, said: "Time has caught up with us. Our committee met on Sunday and
decided the hunt had come to the end of its natural life. "We felt we should
end with some dignity while we still had some. The New Forest has
changed beyond recognition and there is no future hunting deer here." Mr
Barfoot said that the Buckhounds were different from the three hunts which
pursue red deer in the West Country.

Those were based in agricultural areas where they were the only form of
culling deer. "The New Forest is not an agricultural area any more but a
tourist destination. Now, even in the middle of winter and in the middle of
the forest, you can be chasing a buck and come across a family on mountain
bikes. In the minutes of the committee 20 years ago it was decided that our
hunt should only have another two or three years. So we have done well to
last this long. The fact is that the New Forest is now too small to support
our hunt."

He denied that the hunt had had talks with the Forestry Commission or that a
current commission review might have prompted the decision. The Buckhounds
were formed in 1885 but hunting fallow deer has been a part of New Forest
since William the Conqueror designated the forest a royal hunting ground in
1079.

The Buckhounds have been a thorn in the side of the hunting fraternity
because of the younger fallow buck's habit of not standing at bay but lying
down when cornered by the hounds. Anti-hunting campaigners have filmed
hounds escaping their huntsmen and attacking the deer before it could be put
down with a gun.

The commission announced soon after the election that it would not issue
licences for hunting on its land until a full review of hunting had taken
place.=20

A spokesman said: "We have prepared advice for ministers and that is being
discussed at the moment." Anti-hunting campaigners believe the commission
may be influenced by research carried out for the National Trust which said
deer hunting with hounds was cruel.=20

Kevin Saunders of the League Against Cruel Sports said he was "very pleased"
by the New Forest Buckhounds' decision. "The whole thing is academic anyway
as we've heard they are not going to get a licence anyway."

=A9 Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1997.

    [UK] New Forest deer hunt calls it a day after 1,000 years
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 01:55:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [UK] Experts find BSE cases 'in clusters'
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


>From The Electronic Telegraph - Tuesday, July 29th, 1997

Experts find BSE cases 'in clusters'=20
By Aisling Irwin, Science Correspondent=20

SCIENTISTS have uncovered a clustering of BSE cases around the country, with
10 per cent of cattle herds harbouring 80 per cent of the disease.

Large herds had higher rates of the disease than smaller ones, the new,
detailed work has found. Herds with more than 100 cattle had rates of six
per thousand, while herds with less than 50 cows had rates of between one
and four per thousand. The researchers said they could not explain why
larger herds should be at greater risk. It could be because of a small
amount of transmission of the disease from cow to cow, or an effect of more
intensive farming.

The research was by the team that last year said that new cases would fall
dramatically, to 12 a year by 1999. Since then, they have returned to their
data for more detailed analysis. As a result, they uncovered the clustering.
"A small number of herds are accounting for a relatively large number of
cases," said Dr Christl Donnelly, one of the team at Oxford University.

The work is published today in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Society. The scientists showed that BSE has clustered regionally, with
incidence at its highest in the South West and East Anglia; second highest
in the South East and the North West; and lowest in Scotland. Their model
shows that it is possible that some BSE is transmitted horizontally, for
example through infected pasture or directly from cow to cow.

But this transmission is so small that it could not sustain an epidemic.
Horizontal transmission could, however, account for the rate of BSE being
higher in large herds than small ones. The team, led by Prof Roy Anderson,
has tested its computer models against reality for the first time, because
its first predictions were for last year. These calculations were accurate,
Dr Donnelly said. The number of new cases this year would be half that of
last year, the scientists have said.

=A9 Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 1997.

    [UK] Experts find BSE cases 'in clusters'
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 09:44:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Tiger Rescue
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

For those of you who may have seen the "Extra!" television segment regarding
John Weinhart's menagerie for big cats in southern California, and his plea
for help, you should know that this person has been a breeder/dealer for at
least 30 years.  PAWS heard about his problems months ago and offered to help
on the condition that he spay or neuter all his animals.  It has always been
our policy to never use donated funds to assist someone in the business of
breeding and selling animals without providing an answer to what is causing
the problem.  That's counter productive.

Many places such as Weinhart's claim to be a sanctuary but are in fact
nothing more than an enterprise to provide profit for the owner.  Just this
past month Alamo Tiger Ranch, located in Colorado, went out of business
leaving over 30 big cats with no place to go.  Many werre underfed and
malnourished.  And although Alamo Tiger Ranch claimed to be a sanctuary
rescuing animals, you could frequently find their ads in the Animal Finder's
Guide, a popular publication offering all sorts of exotic and wild animals
for sale.

We are still willing to offer help for the 83 lions, tigers and leopards, but
only if John Weinhart will guarantee that there will be no more breeding and
selling.

Vernon Weir
For Pat Derby
Performing Animal Welfare Society
Galt, California
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 11:14:28 -0400
From: "D'Amico, AnnMarie" <[e-mail]>
To: "'ar-dc'" <[e-mail]>,
        "'[e-mail]'"
      <[e-mail]>,
        "'[e-mail]'"
      <[e-mail]>
Subject: Iowa Teens Slaughter Cats at Loal No-Kill Shelter
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

On the weekend of March 8 and 9, three high school students broke into
the Noah's Ark No-Kill Shelter in Fairfield, Iowa and brutally murdered
16 cats and beat 6 to 7 more.  Earlier that day, one of the three had
taken his mother's cat, killed it, skinned it and took the skin of the
animal around bragging to his friends.

The cats that survived the attack are recovering but are still
traumatized.  Two of the three are seriously injured (one with two
broken legs) and have been adopted by the veterinarians who are treating
them at Iowa State University Hospital.

Two of the attackers are 18 years old and the other is 17.  Although
they are to be charged as adults, no court date has been set yet.
Please write:

John Morrisey
County Attorney
109 North Court Street
Fairfield, IA  52556
515/472-3144 or FAX:  [phone].

Please express you concern about the brutal nature of the crime and the
obvious lack of respect for life that these individuals have shown.
They should be given maximum jail sentence for their crimes.

TKS -- AM
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 10:51:33 -0400
From: "D'Amico, AnnMarie" <[e-mail]>
To: "'ar-dc'" <[e-mail]>,
        "'[e-mail]'"
      <[e-mail]>,
        "'[e-mail]'"
      <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pennsylvania Residents
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Senator Roy Afferbach and four co-sponsers introduced SB764, a bill
which would ban live pigeon shoots in the state of Pennsylvania.  This
bill was referred to the Game & Fisheries Committee, headed by Senator
Helfrick.  This proposed legislation will die in committee unless
hearings are held.  Please contact your State Representatives in
Harrisburg to let them know this is an important issue for you, ask
Senator Helfrick to hold hearings on SB764.  It is also important to
wirte to Senator Helfrick requesting that hearings be held on SB 764.

Address Senator Helfrick and your Senator at:
     The Honorable (Senator's name)
     Pennsylvania Senate
     Harrisburg, PA  17120

Address your Representative at:
     The Honorable (Representative's name)
     House of Representatives
     Harrisburg, PA  17120

If you do not know who your State Senator or Representative are, call
your local library's reference room for help.

TKS -- AM
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 08:52:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike Markarian <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail],
        [e-mail]
Subject: Pa. "Bio-Hazard" Extends to Pigeon Shoot Counties
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Tuesday, July 29, 1997

CONTACT: Heidi Prescott, 301-585-2591

"BIO-HAZARD" EXTENDS TO BERKS AND SCHUYLKILL COUNTIES
Fund for Animals Demands that Pigeon Shoots in Those Counties be Halted

HARRISBURG, Pa. -- Today, The Fund for Animals sent a two-page letter to
Pennsylvania Secretary of Agriculture Samuel Hayes, requesting that the
state extend its current "bio-security policy" for poultry explicitly to
prohibit live pigeon shoots. Under the policy announced by the Secretary
yesterday, county fairs in the counties of Lancaster, Chester, Montgomery,
Lebanon, Dauphin, Berks, Cumberland, York, and Schuylkill cannot exhibit
live poultry or their feathers, because of a fear that the current epidemic
of avian influenza may spread to poultry.

A person at a fair in any of these counties could not even exhibit the
feather of a pigeon. Yet, pigeon shooting contests are scheduled at the
Strausstown Gun Club in Berks County on August 1-3, and in Hegins in
Schuylkill County on Labor Day, September 1, where thousands of pigeons will
be released and hundreds will escape unharmed to make their way into local
populations.

Heidi Prescott, National Director of The Fund for Animals, wrote in today's
letter, "In the interest of consistency, if the Department prohibits such a
low risk activity as exhibiting feathers it should simultaneously prohibit
an activity which has a much higher potential for spreading disease by
releasing hundreds of birds into the environment."

The Fund has information that the pigeons for the Berks County shoot are
coming from Lancaster County, the heart of the avian influenza outbreak, and
the birds for the Hegins shoot are coming from Montgomery County. Prescott
added, "The planned transport of birds from Lancaster County to Berks County
this week, and from Montgomery County to Schuylkill County next month, and
then the release of these birds into the wild, simply must be halted."

For a copy of the two-page letter, please call The Fund for Animals at
301-585-2591.

# # #

http://www.fund.org

Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 10:01:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike Markarian <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail],
        [e-mail]
Subject: Court Upholds Suit Against Live Animal Markets
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

For Immediate Release: Monday, July 28, 1997

Contact: Baron Miller, 415-522-0500

COURT UPHOLDS RIGHT OF COALITION TO PROSECUTE SUIT AGAINST LIVE
ANIMAL MARKETS

SAN FRANCISCO, Ca. -- In Coalition for Healthy and Humane Business Practices
vs. Never Ending Quails, Action No. 986059, the suit filed against twelve
San Francisco markets which both kill and sell live animals, the San
Francisco Superior Court has ruled against the markets' claim that the
Coalition has no right to prosecute the action. The Coalition is seeking an
injunction prohibiting these stores from continuing to violate health laws
which prohibit keeping and killing live animals where food is sold, and
humane laws which prohibit the torment and torture of animals.

In response to the ruling made on July 25, 1997, by Judge Raymond
Williamson, the Coalition's attorney, Baron Miller, said, "The court has
upheld our right as private citizens to enforce these laws. The court also
rejected the argument that the lawsuit is racially motivated, though I doubt
we have heard the last of that distortion."

The markets will now have the opportunity to present their position that
they are not violating humane laws when they slice shells off of living
turtles, chop animals to death, cram so many birds and rabbits into cages
that they can barely move, and pile frogs and turtles on top of each other
in bins with no food or water.

# # #

http://www.fund.org

Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 13:59:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Fwd: PETA investigator admits taking lab documents
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

 Knight-Ridder/Tribune News Service

 NORFOLK, Va. -- An animal-rights investigator who spied on a New Jersey
laboratory and came away with hours of videotape and 8,000 pages of stolen
documents testified Monday that she never even knew what she was stealing.

 Michele Rokke, an undercover investigator for People for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals, based in Norfolk, said she took whatever documents she
could find lying around at Huntingdon Life Sciences.

 Rokke testified about taking documents from co-workers' desks, copying
documents from Huntingdon's computers and secretly videotaping employees with
a tiny camera hidden in her glasses.

 The 30-year-old investigator said she had no idea she was stealing anything
confidential. She said no one warned her that the lab's work was strictly
secret --  even though a Huntingdon official testified that Rokke signed a
confidentiality
 agreement when she started work in September 1996.

 At times, Rokke's unapologetic testimony drew wide-eyed stares and
exclamations from a federal judge.

 ``If you worked at my office,'' Judge Robert G. Doumar asked Rokke, ``you
wouldn't hesitate to take something out of my desk?''

 ``I would never take anything from your desk,'' Rokke replied.

 Rokke's testimony capped an all-day hearing in Norfolk's federal court,
prompted by Huntingdon's lawsuit against PETA.

 Rokke worked from September to May as an associate technician at
Huntingdon's lab in East Millstone, N.J., mainly cleaning animal cages.

 But Rokke also was a paid undercover investigator for PETA. Her job was to
investigate animal cruelty at the lab, where Huntingdon tests the safety and
 effectiveness of pharmaceuticals on animals for client companies.

 At Huntingdon, Rokke secretly filmed incidents with animals that PETA claims
were abused. Rokke also copied thousands of pages of confidential documents.
After quitting in May, Rokke and PETA made the videotape and documents
public, prompting a backlash against the lab.

 On June 16, Huntingdon sued PETA and Rokke, claiming they stole ``trade
secrets'' and were trying to put the company out of business. The lawsuit
seeks unspecified damages and a court injunction to stop PETA from using the
videotapes and documents. Huntingdon also wants PETA to return everything it
took.

 Federal Judge Rebecca Beach Smith signed a restraining order June 17 that
bars PETA from using the tapes and documents. That order will expire Friday,
and Huntingdon seeks an injunction to extend the PETA ban until trial in
November.

 On Monday, Huntingdon President Alan Staple testified that publicity from
the PETA incident has badly hurt his company, which has about 200 workers at
the New Jersey lab.

 Staple also said he has gotten 10 to 15 death threats since May and said the
company's stock has plummeted 70 percent to 80 percent. The company
 depends on absolute confidentiality to attract and maintain corporate
customers, Staple said.

 ``The future of the business in its current form hangs in the balance,'' he
testified.

 But the hearing's star witness was Rokke, who detailed how she stole
documents and information from Huntingdon.

 Rokke testified that she grabbed any document she found that had anything to
do with animals. Often she did not know what the documents said or what they
were about.

 She said lab procedures, which are considered secret, were left lying around
the lab, so she took them. She said she lifted other documents off people's
desks, including the company's confidential client list. PETA used that list
to mail damaging letters to about 200 of Huntingdon's clients.

 ``I didn't take anything with any purpose,'' Rokke testified. ``I had no
idea the majority of things I took.''

 Rokke argued that Huntingdon has no real trade secrets.

 ``The only trade secret they're trying to hide is the mistreatment of
animals,'' Rokke testified.

 Later, as the hearing ended, Judge Doumar remarked, ``The question before me
today is not whether there was or was not animal abuse,'' and he declined to
see a PETA videotape that allegedly shows animal abuse at the lab.

 The lawyers will return at 11 this morning for closing arguments and the
judge's ruling. The full trial is set for Nov. 17. >>


---------------------
Forwarded message:
Subj:    PeTA Investogator
Date:    97-07-29 10:51:02 EDT
From:    Nyppsi
To:      Teresahfc,LMANHEIM,Dachs3Nite
To:      Elanjae
CC:      Nyppsi

Posted at 8:44 p.m. PDT Monday, July 28, 1997

PETA investigator admits taking lab documents

Knight-Ridder/Tribune News Service

NORFOLK, Va. -- An animal-rights investigator who spied on a New Jersey
laboratory and came away with hours of videotape and 8,000 pages of stolen
documents testified Monday that she never even knew what she was stealing.

Michele Rokke, an undercover investigator for People for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals, based in Norfolk, said she took whatever documents she
could find lying around at Huntingdon Life Sciences.

Rokke testified about taking documents from co-workers' desks, copying
documents from Huntingdon's computers and secretly videotaping employees with
a tiny camera hidden in her glasses.

The 30-year-old investigator said she had no idea she was stealing anything
confidential. She said no one warned her that the lab's work was strictly
secret --  even though a Huntingdon official testified that Rokke signed a
confidentiality
agreement when she started work in September 1996.

At times, Rokke's unapologetic testimony drew wide-eyed stares and
exclamations from a federal judge.

``If you worked at my office,'' Judge Robert G. Doumar asked Rokke, ``you
wouldn't hesitate to take something out of my desk?''

``I would never take anything from your desk,'' Rokke replied.

Rokke's testimony capped an all-day hearing in Norfolk's federal court,
prompted by Huntingdon's lawsuit against PETA.

Rokke worked from September to May as an associate technician at Huntingdon's
lab in East Millstone, N.J., mainly cleaning animal cages.

But Rokke also was a paid undercover investigator for PETA. Her job was to
investigate animal cruelty at the lab, where Huntingdon tests the safety and
effectiveness of pharmaceuticals on animals for client companies.

At Huntingdon, Rokke secretly filmed incidents with animals that PETA claims
were abused. Rokke also copied thousands of pages of confidential documents.
After quitting in May, Rokke and PETA made the videotape and documents
public, prompting a backlash against the lab.

On June 16, Huntingdon sued PETA and Rokke, claiming they stole ``trade
secrets'' and were trying to put the company out of business. The lawsuit
seeks unspecified damages and a court injunction to stop PETA from using the
videotapes and documents. Huntingdon also wants PETA to return everything it
took.

Federal Judge Rebecca Beach Smith signed a restraining order June 17 that
bars PETA from using the tapes and documents. That order will expire Friday,
and Huntingdon seeks an injunction to extend the PETA ban until trial in
November.

On Monday, Huntingdon President Alan Staple testified that publicity from the
PETA incident has badly hurt his company, which has about 200 workers at the
New Jersey lab.

Staple also said he has gotten 10 to 15 death threats since May and said the
company's stock has plummeted 70 percent to 80 percent. The company
depends on absolute confidentiality to attract and maintain corporate
customers, Staple said.

``The future of the business in its current form hangs in the balance,'' he
testified.

But the hearing's star witness was Rokke, who detailed how she stole
documents and information from Huntingdon.

Rokke testified that she grabbed any document she found that had anything to
do with animals. Often she did not know what the documents said or what they
were about.

She said lab procedures, which are considered secret, were left lying around
the lab, so she took them. She said she lifted other documents off people's
desks, including the company's confidential client list. PETA used that list
to mail damaging letters to about 200 of Huntingdon's clients.

``I didn't take anything with any purpose,'' Rokke testified. ``I had no idea
the majority of things I took.''

Rokke argued that Huntingdon has no real trade secrets.

``The only trade secret they're trying to hide is the mistreatment of
animals,'' Rokke testified.

Later, as the hearing ended, Judge Doumar remarked, ``The question before me
today is not whether there was or was not animal abuse,'' and he declined to
see a PETA videotape that allegedly shows animal abuse at the lab.

The lawyers will return at 11 this morning for closing arguments and the
judge's ruling. The full trial is set for Nov. 17.
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 11:12:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Heidi Prescott <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], "'ar-dc'" <[e-mail]>,
        "'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>,
        "'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Pennsylvania Residents
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Re: pigeon shoots in Pennsylvania

If you are a Pennsylvania resident and do not know who your State
Representative and Senator are, you can call me at The Fund and I will look
them up for you and tell you how they voted last time and what their
hesitations may be.  We are also looking for people willing to meet with
their Senators over the summer. The activists who have personally visited
with their Senators and Representatives are making progress.  We are
specifically looking for constituents of Senators Belan, Bodack, Hart,
Murphy (Allegheny County), Delp (York), Earll (Erie), Kitchen, Salvatore
(Philadelphia), Slocum (Warren) Wenger and Brightbill (Lancaster).  Please
contact me if you are willing to meet with them and we will provide you with
fact sheets, editorials in support of the shoot and the video
Gunblast/Culture Clash to show them.  Thank you.

Heidi Prescott [phone]


At 10:51 AM 7/29/97 -0400, D'Amico, AnnMarie wrote:
>Senator Roy Afferbach and four co-sponsers introduced SB764, a bill
>which would ban live pigeon shoots in the state of Pennsylvania.  This
>bill was referred to the Game & Fisheries Committee, headed by Senator
>Helfrick.  This proposed legislation will die in committee unless
>hearings are held.  Please contact your State Representatives in
>Harrisburg to let them know this is an important issue for you, ask
>Senator Helfrick to hold hearings on SB764.  It is also important to
>wirte to Senator Helfrick requesting that hearings be held on SB 764.
>
>Address Senator Helfrick and your Senator at:
    >The Honorable (Senator's name)
    >Pennsylvania Senate
    >Harrisburg, PA  17120
>
>Address your Representative at:
    >The Honorable (Representative's name)
    >House of Representatives
    >Harrisburg, PA  17120
>
>If you do not know who your State Senator or Representative are, call
>your local library's reference room for help.
>
>TKS -- AM
>
>

Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 16:23:15 -0400
From: Shirley McGreal <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Huntingdon Research news
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Is this UK company the same company as a US company with a similar name
where PETA "planted" an employee? Please conact IPPL by private e-mail on
this point.

 The Daily Telegraph25 July 1997

Drug-test animal lab faces closure

By Phillip Johnston, Home Affairs Editor

     One of Britain's largest animal testing companies, with 1,000 employees,
faces possible closure after a Home Office investigation into allegations of
maltreatment. Huntingdon Life Sciences has been given until the end of
November to meet 10 stringent conditions if it is to be allowed to continue
experiments for drug companies.
     Two individuals working at the Cambridgeshire laboratory have been charged
with offences under the Protection of Animals Act and the personal licence
of a third technician is to be withdrawn. Letters of admonition are to be
sent to two other staff members.
     The inquiry began after a Channel 4 team for a documentary broadcast in
March secretly filmed Huntingdon employees kicking and hurling a beagle
against a wall. Staff were shown punching, shaking and laughing at the dogs
and were unable to take blood samples properly.
     Despite two visits from the Home Office Inspectorate while the programme,
"It's a Dog's Life," was being made, none of the cruelty was uncovered.
     In a parliamentary answer last night, George Howarth, Home Office minister,
said a detailed investigation had been conducted by the department's animals
Inspectorate, which viewed more than 20 hours of unbroadcast material,
studied company records and interviewed past and present staff.
     "Shortcomings relating to the care, treatment and handling of animals and
delegation of health checking to new staff demonstrate that the
establishment was not appropriately staffed and that animals were not at all
times provided with adequate care," Mr. Howarth said.
     It was therefore proposed to revoke the company's certificate from Nov. 30.
        Animal rights groups estimated that the company had 100,000 animals
on it's premises, including 1,000 beagles and 700 monkeys.
     Mr. Howarth said revocation would shut down the company with the loss of
jobs but this could be avoided.
     "While the failures and admissions are extremely serious, this outcome
would not necessarily be warranted," he added.
     "An application for a replacement certificate could be considered if we can
be assured that measures have been put in place to prevent any recurrence of
the events shown in the television programme." Mr. Howarth acknowledged that
the inspectors were criticised and said there would be a review of policy.
The Inspectorate has been asked to audit all commercial dog facilities, to
advise on the best practice for keeping and caring for animals.
     Christopher Cliffe, chief executive of Huntingdon Life Sciences, said the
revocation would not necessarily close the company as only one third of the
staff was involved in animal studies. He was also confident that the company
could meet the Home Office's conditions.
     "It is a very important matter which we are taking terribly seriously," he
added.
     The controversy has hit Huntingdon's business, with the share price falling
from 1.21 pounds in 1996 to under 60 pence.
     Mike Baker, of the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, welcomed
the Home Office action.
     But he added: "It raises as many questions as it answers, particularly
about how they intend to make sure such scenes will never be witnessed again
in a British laboratory."
     "Huntingdon does not deserve to have its Licence renewed."


 The Daily Telegraph26 July 1997

Threatened Huntingdon has shares suspended

By Andrew Edgecliffe-Johnson

     Huntingdon Life Sciences asked the Stock Exchange to suspend trading in its
shares yesterday so that it can respond to the government's threat to revoke
its licence to experiment on animals.
     George Howarth, Home Office junior minister, has warned that the move could
shut the company down.
     About 1,400 jobs could go and thousands of dogs, rabbits, rats and baboons
could be slaughtered unless Huntingdon tackles "extremely serious" failures.
     Chief executive Christopher Cliffe said Mr. Howarth's statement took the
company by surprise. But he was confident it could satisfy the Home Office's
demands and optimistic that trading in the shares might resume as early as
Monday.
     The shares had fallen from 121p to 54p in five months. The government
statement came after an investigation by the Animal Inspectorate which
followed a Channel 4 documentary.
     The company said the investigation, which found animals had not been cared
for properly and their health had not been checked adequately, related to
"incidents alleged to have occured in October and November, 1996".
     Since then, Mr. Cliffe said, it has improved controls, training and procedures.

PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION FOR WRITTEN ANSWER ON THURSDAY 24 JULY

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what action his
Department has taken in response to the allegations against Huntingdon Life
Sciences broadcast on television on 26 March 1997.

DRAFT REPLY Lord Williams

        I was extremely concerned about the events shown in the Channel 4
programme "countryside Undercover: It's A Dog's Life" and I know these
concerns are shared by members of the public, and by scientists and animal
technicians, the vast majority of which are responsible and caring towards
animals.
        The Home Office took prompt and firm action. On the morning after the
programme was broadcast, the Home Office asked the police to investigate
possible offences under the Protection of Animals Act 1911 and, as a result,
two individuals have been charged with such offences. In replying to this
question, I cannot therefore comment, at this time, about these two
individuals or their actions as this might prejudice the prosecutions being
brought by to police.
        The chief Inspector, who heads the Animals (Scientific Procedures)
Inspectorate, has also carried out a comprehensive and detailed
investigation into the allegations arising from the programme and into the
management and control of animal work at the establishment. I understand
that in excess of 250 man-hours of time were spent in viewing more than 20
hours of unbroadcast video material, studying journals and company records,
visiting the establishment and interviewing staff (both present and
ex-employees). A report detailing his findings and recommendations was
submitted to me last week and I commend the Chief Inspector for the speed
and thoroughness of his investigation.
        The investigation has shown breeches of two of the standard
conditions which apply to all Certificates of Designation. Shortcomings
relating to the care, treatment and handling of animals, and delegation of
health checking to new staff of undetermined competence demonstrate that the
establishment was not appropriately staffed and that animals were not at all
time provided with
adequate care.
        The Secretary of State therefore proposes to revoke the Certificate of
Designation for this establishment, subject to the consideration of any
representations made under section 12 of the Animals (Scientific Procedures)
Act 1986. However, if the proposed revocation took immediate effect, we
estimate that up to 1,000 dogs; 10 baboons; 200 marmosets; 450 macaques;
13,000 mice; 35,000 rats; 2,000 rabbits; 4,000 guinea pigs; 3,000 birds;
4,000 fish; and smaller numbers of various other species undergoing
scientific procedures would have to be destroyed. In addition, any ongoing
work might need to be repeated; this would require the use of more
laboratory animals. It is therefore proposed that the revocation will take
effect on 30 November 1997.
        Revocation could shut down the company with the consequent loss of 1,400
jobs. Whilst the failures and omissions at the establishment are extremely
serious, this outcome would not necessarily be warranted. An application for
a replacement certificate could, therefore be considered if the Secretary of
State can be assured that measures have been put in place to prevent any
recurrence of the events shown in the television programme. Sixteen
stringent conditions have been set which must be met before any new
application can be considered.
        In addition to the two individuals facing prosecution, the Secretary of
State proposes to revoke the personal licence of a third animal technician
(again, subject to the right to make representations) and it has been
decided that letters of admonition should be sent to two other technicians.
        The Home Office, and specifically the Animals (Scientific Procedures)
Inspectorate, was criticised for having missed alleged mistreatment, for
failure to implement the requirements of the "Code of Practice for the
Housing and Care of Animals Used in Scientific Procedure", and for having
conducted inspections during which no checks were made on the animals being
cared for by the undercover investigator.
        I am satisfied that any alleged mistreatment of animals would not
have taken place in front of inspectors; that there was compliance with the
Code of Practice; and that appropriate proportion of Inspectorate resources was
directed at the establishment concerned. On each of the visits of inspection
witnessed by the investigator, animals in other parts of the dog unit were
checked and the performance of regulated procedures observed. The current
inspection policy will, however, be reviewed and we have already announced
that we will be considering ways of strengthening the Inspectorate.
        Whilst no breaches of the "Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of
Animals Used in Scientific Procedures" were identified, we are aware of
public concern about the conditions in which the dogs were kept. We have,
therefore, decided that the Inspectorate will audit all commercial dog
facilities to identify best practice and innovations with respect to the
housing and care of animals, and that this information will be used to
inform national standards.
        It has also been decided that the need for a Code of Conduct for the
control of dogs and other species in all establishments should be considered.
        The Animal Procedures Committee is keen to consider and promulgate to
establishments any other general lessons which can be learned in order to
help prevent similar occurrences in the future. We welcome this.
        The Chief Inspector's report contains information which was provided in
confidence and which cannot, therefore, be disclosed under section 24 of the
Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. It cannot therefore be published
in full.

Dr. Shirley McGreal, Chairwoman
International Primate Protection League, POB 766 Summerville SC 29484 USA
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail]
Note new web page address: http://www.ippl.org/
PLEASE DIRECT ALL E-MAIL TO [e-mail]

Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 15:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike Markarian <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: NYC: canned hunts on Ch. 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Ch. 9 in New York City is apparently doing a piece on canned hunts on
Wednesday, August 6, at 10:00 P.M.

Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 23:34:02 +0000
From: "Miggi" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: [UK] - Slough Council Passes Motion criticising Libel Laws
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Please forward on to other lists/press.

Following the end of the "McLibel Trial" Councillor Naomi Ridley of
the Liberal Party (not the Liberal Democrats!) proposed a motion
criticising the current libel laws at the meeting of Slough Borough
Council on 29th July. Cllr Ridley wore a McLibel Support Campaign
T- shirt to the meeting, and was supported by the other Liberal
Cllrs, including Cllr Stokes who was threatened with a libel case by
McDonalds some years ago (the company backed down).

Slough Borough Council passed the following motion:

"This Council notes that equality under the law is the founding
principle of democracy. This Council notes with concern that this
principle is not put into practice, particularly in the instance of
libel law.

This Council notes that defendants in libel trials do not, under
current law, always have the right to a jury trial, or to legal
representation through the legal aid system. This Council notes that
this contravenes the European Convention of Human Rights.

This Council resolves to urge all MPs for Slough and the Local
Government Association to do everything in their power to ensure all
citizens are equal under the law, in practice as well as principle.
Specifically, this Council resolves to request the MPs for Slough to
urge the Government to change the libel laws, to guarantee citizens
their human rights - including the right to trial by jury and to
representation through Legal Aid."


Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 09:05:11 +0800
From: bunny <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: ALARM OVER AN OUTBREAK OF HUMAN MONKEYPOX DISEASE
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>From Promed - News on emerging infectious diseases:

Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 01:58:18 -0700 (PDT)

This was posted in SCIENCE-WEEK a service that distributes synopses of
articles from newspapers, magazines, as well as journals such as SCIENCE
and NATURE.  The Democratic Republic of Congo is of course the former
country of Zaire, diferrentiated from Republic of the Congo, the DRC's
neighbor to the west.

ALARM OVER AN OUTBREAK OF HUMAN MONKEYPOX DISEASE

The largest and most complex animal viruses are the poxviruses, among them
smallpox and a related virus called monkeypox. Smallpox was ostensibly
eradicated completely in 1979. Monkeypox, however, is far from eradicated.
Until recently the disease exhibited minor outbreaks, with the incidence
being quickly damped due to the apparent difficulty of human to human
transmission. In these outbreaks, the disease was evidently transmitted by
eating the meat of infected monkeys, squirrels, and rats. Now, however,
during the last year, there has been a striking outbreak of 92 cases of
monkeypox, all within a few villages in the central part of the Democratic
Republic of Congo, and the most troubling aspect is the evidence that the
rate of human to human transmission may have suddenly increased many-fold
over what it has been in the past.

Peter Jahrling, a virologist at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute
(MD US) says, "I hate to be accused of pushing the alarmist button, but for
practical purposes smallpox is back." And Ali Khan, a medical
epidemiologist at the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention, who
recently visited the area of the Congo in question, says, "I am personally
concerned about what would happen if this disease showed up in a major city."

However, an argument can be made that the natural immunity of the people of
the Congo has been compromised by a high incidence of HIV and the
vicissitudes of armed conflict in the area. (Science 18 July)
--------------------------------------------------------------



===========================================

Rabbit Information Service,
P.O.Box 30,
Riverton,
Western Australia 6148

Email>  [e-mail]

http://www.wantree.com.au/~rabbit/rabbit.htm
(Rabbit Information Service website updated frequently)

     /`\   /`\
    (/\ \-/ /\)
       )6 6(
     >{= Y =}<
      /'-^-'\
     (_)   (_)
      |  .  |
      |     |}
 jgs  \_/^\_/













Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 11:19:35 +0800
From: jwed <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (CN) China bans imports of poultry from Britain
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

China Daily 30 July 1997

CHINA has banned imports of poultry and related products from Britain, the
Ministry of Agriculture says.
"For fear that New Town Disease might hit China's poultry industry, the
country decided to suspend imports as of May 8," said Qin Zhenkui,
deputy-general director with the ministry's Bureau of Animal and Plant
Quarantine.
Eleven cases of New Town Disease have been reported in Britain since
January. The virus has spread to four chicken farms and seven turkey farms.
"Chicks, ducks and geese in China might be infected with the virus through
air, water or contact when British products entered this market," Qin said.
The result would be the deaths of large numbers of poultry, and
consequently an insufficient supply of poultry products, he said.
He said the virus does not harm humans.
China imports millions of chicks, ducks and geese, and millions of tons of
poultry products from Britain every year.
Major consumers are farmers operating large farms around major Chinese
cities and their residents.
The import ban is in accordance with the law on quarantining animals and
plants which cross borders.
In addition, all approval lists issued by the bureau are invalid, and all
poultry and related products should be sent back to Britain or destroyed.
In another development, the Ministry of Agriculture recently approved
imports of sweet cherries from Washington State of the United States, kiwis
from the North Island of New Zealand, and bananas from Panama, Ecuador and
Costa Rica.
(CD News)

Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 11:55:53 +0800 (SST)
From: Vadivu Govind <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (HK) Drug firms banned from picking doctors
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



>South China Morning Post
Wednesday  July 30  1997

     Drug firms banned from picking doctors

     JANE MOIR

     Hospital chiefs have banned drug companies from picking doctors to send
to overseas     conferences because they fear selection may influence the
choice of medicine.

     The selection would no longer be in the hands of the organisers, but
the Hospital     Authority, its chief executive Dr Yeoh Eng-kiong said
yesterday.
"This takes away any conflict of interest if it's not up to the drug company
who is     going," he said.

     Potential candidates will be drawn up by relevant associations relating
to the medical     specialty. Doctors will then have to seek Hospital
Authority approval.

     "A third party makes the decision rather than the drug company," Dr
Yeoh explained.

     The guideline - along with others to prevent benefits offered by drug
and medical     supply companies influencing hospital staff's choice of drug
suppliers - was mapped out     by a taskforce from the authority and the ICAC.

     They were responding to the authority's concerns over air fare, hotel
accommodation     and conference fee packages being offered to doctors by
drug firms. The authority is the SAR's main drug purchaser, accounting for
nearly one-third of all drug usage.

     Those breaching the new rules would face immediate investigation, Dr
Yeoh added.

     Although no ceiling has been put on the amount of sponsorship doctors
can accept,     "common sense" would have to be exercised, Dr Yeoh said.
Soliciting sponsorship is     also prohibited.

     Pharmaceutical companies regularly sponsor doctors to attend specialty
symposiums, a     spokesman for Glaxo-Wellcome said yesterday.

     "We sponsor them only to speak or attend, it's not linked to the actual
sale of products,     more something we do to support the medical industry,"
she said.

     Public Doctors' Association spokesman Dr Andrew Yip Wai-chun hailed the
guidelines as removing the "loose" relationship between doctors and sponsorship.

     Doctors are allocated 14 days a year to attend conferences. Dr Yeoh said no
     complaints had been lodged that public doctors were abusing drug
companies'     donations.

Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 11:58:02 +0800 (SST)
From: Vadivu Govind <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (NZ) Law to ban 'cray dance' cruelty
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



>South China Morning Post
Wednesday  July 30  1997

     Law to ban 'cray dance' cruelty

     ASSOCIATED PRESS in Auckland

     A diner who watched in horror as people at a nearby restaurant table
tore pieces from     a live crayfish and ate them will soon be spared such
sights by a new law against eating     live seafood.

     Cyrina Holland, 18, was out for a celebratory meal with her boyfriend.
Confused by an item on the menu - which offered diners the chance to "check
the cray     dance", she asked her boyfriend to explain.

     "He pointed to the table behind me and there was a crayfish cut in half
and walking     around the table," she said.

     "It was alive, and they were getting stuck into it with their chopsticks."

     She said the crayfish's tail had been stuffed with rice and noodles,
but the body was still     alive and the diners were breaking off its legs.

     Ms Holland contacted the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals but found     that crustaceans were not covered by animal welfare laws.

In Australia, the state of New South Wales passed legislation this year
providing a     sentence of up to two years' jail for anybody serving live
fish or seafood.

     One popular dish in Sydney's Chinatown was "screaming prawns", doused
alive in     brandy or liqueur and set alight.

     New Zealand Animal Welfare Advisory Committee member Neil Wells said
yesterday     that a new law in New Zealand would impose jail terms of up to
three months and fines     up to NZ$10,000 (HK$50,000) for such cruelty.

     Mr Wells said research had proved crustaceans such as crayfish were
capable of     feeling pain and distress.

However, Japanese chef Yuji Minagawa, who served the live crayfish, said it
was     traditional in Japan to eat fish and shellfish alive.

     It was "much the same" as New Zealanders eating fresh oysters or
mussels off the     rocks.

Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 12:01:14 +0800 (SST)
From: Vadivu Govind <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (Laos) Forests offer medicine for rural poverty
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



>South China Morning Post
Wednesday  July 30  1997

     Forests offer medicine for rural poverty

     ANDREW PATERSON in Laos

     Forests could be the life-saver for many Laotians living in poverty.

     Although hydroelectricity is seen as the big revenue earner for the
cash-strapped     country, forest by-products may be the breadwinner in
rural areas. Non-timber forest products ranging from cardamom - used in
medicine and one of few      crops commercially harvested in Laos - rattan,
bamboo and orchids to fern roots are  being touted as possible sources of
income for the poor.

     The raw ingredients for traditional Asian medicines are a big foreign
currency earner -     and they come from forests. Each year 2,000 kilograms
of dried lizards and a dozen    other ingredients head to Hong Kong, China,
Thailand and Vietnam.

     Forests have always played a big role in the subsistence of villagers -
47 per cent of     Laos is forest-covered.

     It is hard to gauge just how much income forest products generate
because many     products are shipped across borders illegally. But cardamom
alone jumped from an     export value of US$18,332 (HK$141,890) in 1994 to
US$972,646 in 1996. The demand has meant that forest resources are under
pressure. But now the     Government has set up a programme, supported by
the Dutch Government and the     World Conservation Union, to sustainably
harvest and market forest products and to     raise local incomes.



</pre>
                            <!-- END OF PAGE CONTENT -->

    </TD>


    <TD width=50 align=center>

    </TD>
</TR>

                            <!-- THE BOTTOM TOOLBAR -->

<TR>

    <TD colspan=3 align=center fontsize=2>
    <a href="../SUB~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/sub.html">ARRS Tools</a>  |
<a href="../NEWSPA~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/newspage.html">News</a>  |
<a href="../ORGS~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/Orgs.html">Orgs</a>  |
<a href="../SEARCH~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/search.html">Search</a>  |
<a href="../SUPPOR~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/Support.html">Support</a>  |
<a href="../ABOUT/INDEX.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/about">About the ARRS</a>  |
<a href="mailto:[e-mail]">Contact ARRS</a>
    </TD>
</TR>


                                <!-- END OF MAIN -->

</TABLE></center>




        <!-- THE UNDERWRITERS -->

<table border=0 width=100%>
    <tr><td>

<center>    <hr width=285>
<Font Size=1>THIS SITE UNDERWRITTEN IN PART BY:</FONT>
<BR>


<a href="../../../tppmsgs/msgs9.htm#981" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/cgi-bin/show_support.pl?id=t889237342&sec=sbn_bottom&url=http%3a//www.go-organic.com/" target=_top><img src="../../SUPPORT/BANNERS/CROSS-~1/GO-ORG~1.GIF" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/support/banners/cross-promotion/go-organic.gif" border=0 alt="Go Organic"></a>


<hr width=285>

    <br><font size=2>
    <b>The views and opinions expressed within this page are not
necessarily those of the <br>EnviroLink Network nor the Underwriters.  The views
are those of the authors of the work.</b></font>
    </center>
    </td></tr>

</table>

</BODY>

</HTML>