Komputer for Alle 1998 #6/1998 CD 6 (Gul).iso/web/ffa/wwwenv~1.org/arrs/digest/news49~6.htm/text0007.txt

Text File | 1998-04-03 | 81.6 KB | 1,871 lines

 Monkeys Allegedly Used for Research

 MADISON, Wis. (AP) -- Scientists violated school policy by using 65
 monkeys from a zoo for potentially fatal research, a University of
 Wisconsin official said Wednesday.

 Thirty-nine of the monkeys died or were killed as a result of the
 research, a ``serious breach'' of the university's agreement with the
 Henry Vilas Zoo, Graduate School Dean Virginia Hinshaw said.

 Another 26 monkeys were killed for tissue research, and 110 monkeys were
 sold or traded to other researchers to prevent overpopulation, she said.

 ``I regret that this activity has cast doubt on a facility that is
 important to the community,'' Hinshaw said.

 The university's Primate Research Center owns and maintains the monkey
 house at the zoo where it keeps 158 rhesus and stump-tailed macaques.

 University policy for the past eight years has banned the use of zoo
 monkeys for invasive research.

 Primate center officials have previously said that monkeys taken from the
 zoo were used only for breeding and non-invasive research.

 Hinshaw's investigation began after The Capital Times of Madison reported
 last weekend that data showed some of the dead zoo monkeys had AIDS.

 The Wisconsin Regional Primate Research Center, which has about 1,300
 monkeys, is one of seven regional centers conducting research on primates
 to solve human health problems.

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 00:30:04 -0400
From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US) Wording of New Ben & Jerry's Labels
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

refs to rBGH
from AP Wire page:
-----------------------------------
 08/14/1997 15:19 EST

 Wording of New Ben & Jerry's Labels

 By The Associated Press

 The label Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc. of Burlington, Vt., will put on its
 ice cream containers advertising its ban on milk from cows treated with
 hormones to increase milk production:

 ``We oppose recombinant bovine growth hormone. The family farmers who
 supply our milk pledge not to treat their cows with rBGH.''

 In smaller print, this language required by the Food and Drug
 Administration:

 ``The FDA has said no significant difference has been shown and no test
 can distinguish between milk from rBGH treated and untreated cows.''

 For products that contain chunks of milk chocolate or other ingredients,
 Ben & Jerry's will add this:

 ``Not all of the suppliers of our other ingredients can promise that the
 milk they use comes from untreated cows.''

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 00:30:21 -0400
From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US) Ben & Jerry's To Label Products
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

more detail with refs to BGH
from AP Wire page:
-----------------------------------
 08/14/1997 09:01 EST

 Ben & Jerry's To Label Products

 By CURT ANDERSON
 AP Farm Writer

 WASHINGTON (AP) -- Those pints of Ben & Jerry's ice cream such as Cherry
 Garcia or Chunky Monkey soon 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.

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 00:33:45 -0400
From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US) Company Recalling More Hamburger
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

refs to Burger King and Boston Market/possible e. coli tainted food
from AP Wire page:
---------------------------------
 08/14/1997 00:50 EST

 Company Recalling More Hamburger

 OMAHA, Neb. (AP) -- Hudson Foods Inc. said Wednesday it is recalling
 another 20,000 pounds of ground beef that may be infected with E. coli
 bacteria and were delivered to Burger King and Boston Market, the Omaha
 World-Herald reported Thursday.

 Hudson, based in Rogers, Ark, said Tuesday it was recalling 20,000 pounds
 of suspected frozen patties that it had distributed to retail stores and
 warehouse clubs in 35 states in June and July.

 The 40,000 pounds of possibly tainted meat is believed to have all been
 produced in a Hudson processing plant in Columbus, Jacque Knight,
 spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety
 Inspection Service in Washington, told the newspaper.

 Kim Miller, a spokeswoman for the Burger King chain office in Miami,
 Fla., said her company has voluntarily recalled ground meat produced at
 the Columbus plant from 1,205 restaurants in its central and western
 regions, including Nebraska, Iowa, South Dakota and Colorado.

 Jeff Beckman, a spokesman for Golden, Colo.-based Boston Chicken Inc.,
 said the comparatively small amount of meat his company received from the
 Columbus plant has already moved through the chain's restaurants. He said
 the meat ``most likely'' was shipped to restaurants on both coasts.

 The USDA said it learned about the problem from the Colorado Department
 of Public Health and Environment after it received reports that about 20
 people became ill after eating the Hudson product in early July.

 There have been no E. coli illness in Nebraska linked to the meat, said
 Dr. Thomas Safranek, Nebraska state epidemiologist.

 Hudson, the nation's third-largest publicly traded poultry company,
 opened the $28 million Columbus plant in September 1995. At the time,
 Hudson said the plant would produce three million pounds of hamburger a
 week for Burger King.

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 05:35:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: Debbie Leahy <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [US] Kelly Miller Circus Coming
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII

NAPER SETTLEMENT INVITES CIRCUS BACK TO TOWN

Please speak out against the use of performing animals at an
upcoming circus in Naperville, Illinois. The Naper
Settlement Museum Village has invited the Kelly
Miller Circus back again this year for a Sept. 19-21
engagement--complete with elephant rides--despite complaints
and protests generated from last year's circus.  Kelly
Miller circus animals will repeat the same tiresome routine
440 times during 32 consecutive weeks.

Last month at another Miller circus, Carson & Barnes, a
humane investigator found animals living in the most
appalling conditions in her 14 year career.

Let the organizers know that you oppose the use of animals
at this event and urge them to cancel the animal acts.
Mention:

* Performing animals endure a miserable life of continual
  confinement, total domination, and fierce punishment.
* Animals used in traveling shows are deprived of all their
  natural behaviors.
* Animals are forced to perform demeaning and uncomfortable
  tricks.
* Animal acts are offensive to members of the community who
  oppose animal cruelty.
* Elephant rides are extremely dangerous for both riders and
  viewers--many elephant rampages have resulted in deaths
  and injuries.

Illinois Animal Action is running advertisements in an area
paper asking residents to sign and mail-in a petition
opposing the circus.  Please support this effort with your
polite letters and faxes, and send us copies of your
correspondence.  Contact:

John Stevens, President
Naper Settlement Museum Village
201 W. Porter
Naperville, IL  60540
phone) 630/420-6010 / fax) 630/305-5255


==============================
Illinois Animal Action
P.O. Box 507
Warrenville, IL  60555
630/393-2935
==============================
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 22:15:21 -0400
From: jeanlee <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Letter to copy on downed animals
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


Hi All-

This letter to copy and send goes to your representatives and senators.
The text that follows is for your senators.  For your representative,
CHANGE the two references to the number of the bill - the House bill is
H.R. 453.  Same name of bill.  Senators go to United States Senate,
Washington, DC  20510.  Reps to U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, DC 20515.  If you don't know who represents you, call
1-800-688-9889.  Here's the text:

Dear:

This is about legislation which gets introduced year after year but
somehow never gets enacted into law - that is, the Downed Animal
Protection Act, whose number this year is S. 850.  This bill would ban
the sale of sick and/or injured (downed) animals at stockyards.=20
Currently, there are NO laws to protect these animals, who are routinely
beaten, shocked with electric prods, and dragged by chains (sometimes
pushed with a forklift!) to slaughter.  They are also often
abandoned or dumped alive on stockyard "deadpiles."  We=92re not even
close to being a compassionate society.

Please cosponsor S. 850 and help eliminate the suffering many sick and
injured farm animals are forced to endure, ensuring that downers are
humanely euthanized.  Be on the lookout and vote against any amendments,
usually pushed by the meat industry, which would allow auctions and
stockyards to transport downed animals to slaughter.  There is no way
sick and injured animals can be humanely transported. =20

Sincerely yours,
    Letter to copy on downed animals
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 97 07:33:17 UTC
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Reward Offered In Frog Abuse Case
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

(Norman, OK USA): An animal sanctuary is offering a $200 reward to find
those responsible for severing a large bullfrog's left foot.

The amphibian is being treated with antibiotics at WildCare Foundation.
Second Chance Animal Sanctuary is offering the reward.

Mary Freiburger of Norman said she found the frog a week ago near
Crossroads Blvd. There were about seven boys on bicycles nearby,
and Freiburger said she saw five frog carcasses on the sidewalk.

"I picked up the frog, got him in my car, and started telling the kids
I was going to call the police," she said.

WildCare officials hope the frog can be released. The stub on his leg is
healing.


-- Sherrill
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 09:07:22 -0500
From: Liz Grayson <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Letter to copy on downed animals
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1


Dear Jeanlee,

Does this bill look to ban the sale of sick (downed) animals at
stockyards, ban the transportation of all sick and/or injured animals
or demand that all sick and/or injured animals be euthanized?

Liz


jeanlee wrote:
>
> Hi All-
>
> This letter to copy and send goes to your representatives and senators.
> The text that follows is for your senators.  For your representative,
> CHANGE the two references to the number of the bill - the House bill is
> H.R. 453.  Same name of bill.  Senators go to United States Senate,
> Washington, DC  20510.  Reps to U.S. House of Representatives,
> Washington, DC 20515.  If you don't know who represents you, call
> 1-800-688-9889.  Here's the text:
>
> Dear:
>
> This is about legislation which gets introduced year after year but
> somehow never gets enacted into law - that is, the Downed Animal
> Protection Act, whose number this year is S. 850.  This bill would ban
> the sale of sick and/or injured (downed) animals at stockyards.
> Currently, there are NO laws to protect these animals, who are routinely
> beaten, shocked with electric prods, and dragged by chains (sometimes
> pushed with a forklift!) to slaughter.  They are also often
> abandoned or dumped alive on stockyard "deadpiles."  WeÆre not even
> close to being a compassionate society.
>
> Please cosponsor S. 850 and help eliminate the suffering many sick and
> injured farm animals are forced to endure, ensuring that downers are
> humanely euthanized.  Be on the lookout and vote against any amendments,
> usually pushed by the meat industry, which would allow auctions and
> stockyards to transport downed animals to slaughter.  There is no way
> sick and injured animals can be humanely transported.
>
> Sincerely yours,
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 16:42:39 GMT
From: Chris Wright <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (UK) Beagles rescued from research breeder
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Thanks to a personal donation of 15,000 pounds from Liz Stewart of
Dorset Animal Rescue, 50 beagles have been bought from the now closed
Consort Kennels in Herefordshire. Consort bred beagles specifically for
use in laboratory experiments but recently closed in the face of
mounting public opposition. The beagles were due to be sold off to
research establishments for use in tests until Liz stepped in.

Homes are now being sought for the dogs which know no life other than
the concrete runs that they've spent their entire lives in.
Consequently, they've never been on a lead, never been house-trained and
never run around on grass. The dogs will need a lot of love, care and
time to get over their ordeal.

Anyone who wants to give a home to one of these dogs, or wishes to give
a donation to help Liz recoup some of the money (the British Union for
the Abolition of Vivisection have donated 5000 pounds) should contact
her:

Liz Stewart, Dorset Animal Rescue, Stourton Caundle, Sturminster Newton,
Dorset. Tel: [phone]

Sarah Kite of the BUAV said "These dogs are the lucky ones. Last year
6,555 beagles were used in experiments, many in toxicity studies on
agricultural, industrial or household chemicals."

The Daily Mirror has been instrumental in publicising the plight of the
dogs and their assistance has been invaluable. As they observed in their
editorial today: "The Mirror has saved 50 beagle puppies destined for
experiments. They can now live happily. But we should not rest until
dogs are now longer used for barbaric tests."

Chris Wright
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 97 12:10:28 PDT
From: "bhgazette" <[e-mail]>
To: "AR News" <[e-mail]>
Subject: "Compassion for Animals"
Message-ID: <[e-mail]822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"


Kristin von Kreisler says she has compiled stories of how
animals have shown compassion toward humands and other
animals; the result is  "Compassion of Animals," which will be
published in November.  Ms vonKreisler believes there are lots
of people in the AR movement who will want to read this book,
 and she would like to hear from folks who are:

1)  willing to read galley proofs and review the book for their
inhouse publication (I'm sure she'd like for your newsletter to
have a fairly large audience!);

2) willing to print press release of the book;

3) willing to send her  anecdotes of how animals have shown
compassion (she's planning a second book).

Contact her at
[e-mail]
(Or is it compuserv.com????)

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 97 12:10:28 PDT
From: "bhgazette" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: "Compassion for Animals"
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


Kristin von Kreisler says she has compiled stories of how
animals have shown compassion toward humands and other
animals; the result is  "Compassion of Animals," which will be
published in November.  Ms vonKreisler believes there are lots
of people in the AR movement who will want to read this book,
 and she would like to hear from folks who are:

1)  willing to read galley proofs and review the book for their
inhouse publication (I'm sure she'd like for your newsletter to
have a fairly large audience!);

2) willing to print press release of the book;

3) willing to send her  anecdotes of how animals have shown
compassion (she's planning a second book).

Contact her at
[e-mail]
(Or is it compuserv.com????)

    "Compassion for Animals"
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 18:20:40 +0000 (GMT)
From: Pat Fish <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Court TV: Kennel Abuse case (Swen & Jeanette Bergman)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


On Friday, Court TV is running the trial of Swen & Jeanette Bergman's puppy
mill, where several dogs died.  They're up on animal cruelty charges.

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 11:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [CA] New Age Hunting
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>From The Vancouver Sun - Friday, August 15th, 1997

This little piece ran in a section called "OUT TAKES" in the Recreation &
Fitness section, which was compiled by Dawn Hanna.

"New Age Hunting

>From the 'what-will-they-stoop-to-next?' department comes a new video called
The Sacred Hunt. It's a product of the infamous Marty Stoufler (pictured
right) - the same guy who brought us Wild America and who is under review in
the U.S. for such antics as seeking permission from the Denver Zoo to shoot
footage of "wild" polar-bear cubs in the facility's fake den, tying a rabbit
to a post with fishing line, then letting a raccon attack it and a
miscellany of other incidents of mistreating animals. And it's funded by a
dozen or so hunting organizations. Here's some Orwellian prose from the
accompanying press release:

' From the outsidem hunting may appear to be egoic [sic] domination of
nature, but from the inside the hunter's relationship to the animal is
precisely the opposite, one of kinship, interdependence and transdendence.
Respect, admiration, even reverence charaterize the hunter's innermost bond
to wild animals.'

Hey, no surprise to us. We've always seen hunters - just at the moment
they're about to let fly that bullet or arrow - call out ' I respect and
admire you, wild animal. With your untimely death, we, your brothers and
sisters, are more connected to the spirit within. Yeeee-ha!"

[Dawn Hanna can be contacted at: [e-mail]

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 11:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: [e-mail] (pawsinfo)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Dallas World Aquarium Inia Import Permit - Comment Period[US]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Posted by Bob Chorush<[e-mail]>
***********

The Dallas World Aquarium has filed for a permit with NMFS to capture and
import four amazon river dolphins from South America to Dallas.  Listed
below is the summary from the Federal Register. There is a 30 day comment
period.

As noted in the summary, "Historically, study results conclude that due to a
number of factors this species has fared poorly in captivity in the United
States, with an average longevity of 32.6 months for the 35 animals for
which data was available."

Inia will very likely be listed as endangered in the near future. Since the
Dallas World Aquarium has not demonstrated any intent to study the return to
the wild of this species, it must be assumed, that if captured, these four
animals will die at the aquarium, probably in short order, thereby
diminishing the native population. The native population is relatively
unstudied and no cencus has been taken. This capture, if allowed, would do
nothing to improve habitat or chances for survival of the remaining members
of this population nor would it likely provide information or individuals
from captivity to restock this population.

Despite differing opinions on the keeping of dolphins in captivity, granting
of this permit would appear to negatively impact the native population while
adversely affecting the health and longevity of the captured animals.

The Progresive Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) will be filing comments to
oppose this capture and import.



DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 080797A]

 Marine Mammals; Public Display Permit (PHF# 852-1356)

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Receipt of application.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that The Dallas World Aquarium, Inc.,
1801 North Griffin, Dallas, TX 75202, has applied in due form for a
permit to import Amazon River dolphin (Inia geoffrensis), for purposes
of public display.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 15,
1997.

ADDRESSES: The application and related documents are available for
review upon written request or by appointment in the following offices:
    Permits Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
    1315 East-West Highway, Room 13130, Silver Spring, MD 20910,
    (301/713-2289); and
    Regional Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS, 9731 Executive
Center Drive North, St. Petersburg, FL 33702, (206/526-6150).
    Written data or views, or requests for a public hearing on this
application, should be submitted to the Chief, Permits Division, F/PR1,
Office of Protected Resources, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring,
MD 20910. Those individuals requesting a hearing should set forth the
specific reasons why a hearing on this particular application would be
appropriate. The holding of such a hearing is at the discretion of the
Director, Office of Protected Resources.
    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal
Register, NMFS is forwarding copies of this application to the Marine
Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The subject permit is requested under the
authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended
(MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and the Regulations Governing the
Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals (50 CFR part 216).
    The applicant requests authorization to import four Amazon River
dolphins (Inia geoffrensis). The Venezuelan Service Agency for the
Protection, Restoration, Promotion and Rational Utilization of the
Wildlife and Aquatic life of the Country has issued a capture license
to the applicant. The dolphins would be collected from the Apure River
near San Fernando, Venezuela, and maintained at the J.V. Seijas
Aquarium in Valencia, Venezuela, until the public display facility at
the Dallas World Aquarium receives final approval from the Department
of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). As
any issues relating to the care and maintenance of captive marine
mammals are within the purview of APHIS, under the Animal Welfare Act,
copies of the application are also being sent to APHIS for review.
    The Dallas World Aquarium is open to the public on a regularly
scheduled basis with access that is not limited or restricted other
than by charging an admission fee; and offers an educational program
based upon the educational standards of the American Zoo and Aquarium
Association.
    The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources (IUCN) has included this species in the 1996 IUCN Red List of
Threatened Animals under the category ``vulnerable'', i.e., taxa
believed likely to move into the Endangered category in the near future
if causal factors continue operating. Population data concerning Inia
geoffrensis in Venezuela is limited and the application states that no
census has been taken of the subject wild population/stock. Therefore,
NMFS has concerns about the status and conservation of the dolphins in
the Orinoco river system and the potential

[[Page 43517]]

impacts of the permanent removal of four sub-adults from this
population/stock.
    Additionally, NMFS is concerned that holding this species in
captivity may involve a significant risk to the health and welfare of
the animals held. Historically, study results conclude that due to a
number of factors this species has fared poorly in captivity in the
United States, with an average longevity of 32.6 months for the 35
animals for which data was available. (See Inia geofffensis in
Captivity in the United States, Melba C. Caldwell, David K. Caldwell
and Randall L. Brill. 1989. Proc. Workshop on Biology and Conservation
of the Platanistoid Dolphins, Wuhan, People's Republic of China. The
World Conservation Union (IUCN), Occasional Papers of the IUCN Species
Survival Commission, Number 3. 35-41.) The applicant has addressed, in
part, some of the survivability factors raised in the Caldwell study,
citing successful behavioral experiences with this species at the J.V.
Seijas Aquarium in Valencia, Venezuela. The applicant submitted
additional information on August 4, 1997, to address the concerns cited
above; however, several aspects of these concerns persist. As a result,
before decision is made to issue or deny issuance of a permit, NMFS is
soliciting information that will assist the agency in determining
whether: (1) The applicant meets the three public display criteria; (2)
the proposed activity is humane and does not present any unnecessary
risks to the health and welfare of the marine mammals; (3) the proposed
activity by itself or in combination with other activities, will not
likely have a significant adverse impact on the species or stock; and
(4) the applicant's expertise, facilities, and resources are adequate
to accomplish successfully the objectives and activities stated in the
application.

Dated: August 8, 1997.
Ann D. Terbush,
Chief, Permits and Documentation Division, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 97-21464 Filed 8-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F



Bob Chorush  Web Administrator, Progressive Animal Welfare Society (PAWS)
15305 44th Ave West (P.O. Box 1037)Lynnwood, WA 98046 [phone] ext
862, [phone] fax
email [e-mail]      http://www.paws.org

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 15:10:08 -0700
From: Sean Thomas <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: The Bear Facts
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------7B281D02BA"

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]

National
Highlights
[Image]National
News
[Image]Across
Canada
[Image]News in
Depth
                  FRONT PAGE | CITY | SPORTS | BUSINESS | NATIONAL | WORLD
                                        | EDITORIALS
                    ENTERTAINMENT | YOUR MONEY | INTERNET | COLUMNISTS |
                                         CLASSIFIED

                 [National - Ottawa Citizen Online]

                                  Thursday 14 August 1997

                 Britain ponders fake-fur guard hats

                 Canadian bearskin raises ire of animal rights activists

                 Stephen Smith
                 The Ottawa Citizen

                 Britain's new defence          Reuter / A soldier guards
                 minister has ordered a
                 review of the use of        St. James Palace wearing the
                 real bearskin -- real       busby.
                 Canadian bearskin -- on
                 the hats of the famous
                 Royal Household guards.

                 The review is the latest sign of the new Labour
                 government's willingness to question popular British
                 traditions, such as the fox hunt, that are not so popular
                 with Britain's animal rights groups.

                 (Defence Minister) Lord Gilbert has asked to see the
                 rationale behind the army's continued use of bearskins,"
                 ministry spokesman Alan Patterson said from London. Lord
                 Gilbert "involves himself in animal rights issues," Mr.
                 Patterson said.

                 The 50-centimetre-tall hats made with the fur of Canadian
                 black bears sit atop the red-coated foot guards of the
                 Royal Household Divisions five Guards regiments -- the
                 Grenadier, Coldstream, Scots, Irish and Welsh Guards --
                 perform the ceremonial guard duties at Buckingham Palace
                 and other Royal sites in London.

                 According to a tradition cited by both Mr. Patterson and
                 Capt. Rob Foster, adjutant for Ottawa's bearskin-wearing
                 Governor General's Foot Guards, the hats have been a
                 familiar feature of the five Guards regiments since the
                 Battle of Waterloo in 1814. The bearskins, originally
                 worn by French troops in Napoleon's army, were adopted by
                 the British guards as a symbol of their triumph at
                 Waterloo.

                 Capt. Foster said the bearskins were originally intended
                 to stop cavalry charges by frightening the horses. Bear
                 fur, he said, is known to make horses "skitterish." The
                 other notable advantage of bearskins was the added height
                 they afforded infantry soldiers, Capt. Foster said.

                 "It made them look more ferocious."

                 In this age of synthetics, alternatives to natural
                 bearskins are on the market. But the synthetic bearskins
                 aren't too fond of wetness, which rainy London has plenty
                 of.

                 "The artificial fur flattens down in the rain and clumps
                 together, looking very scruffy and not at all in keeping
                 with the rest of the Guards uniform, which is very
                 smart," Mr. Patterson said. "And it's important that they
                 look smart."

                 But the British army hasn't ruled out an artificial
                 alternative to the bearskins. "We move with the times. We
                 take into consideration animal rights."

                 Whether natural or artificial, the bearskin hat is no
                 bargain. Animal Action, an Ottawa-based animal rights
                 group that wants to stop the use of bearskins in Canadian
                 regiments like the GGFGs, said a new, natural,
                 Made-in-England bearskin hat costs the army in excess of
                 $1,200.

                 "There's no justification -- either for blowing away a
                 bear or spending taxpayers' money," said Animal Action
                 co-director Len Goldberg.

                 Yet Capt. Foster said new bearskins are simply not an
                 option for his unit.

                 "The ones we use now are, on average, 25 years old. When
                 they become worn-out, we refurbish them using the same
                 bear's fur," he said.

                 The impact of a potential ban on Britain's use of
                 bearskins would not affect Canada's fur industry, said
                 Tina Jagros, vice-president of marketing at the North
                 American Fur Auction in Toronto. She said the 50 Canadian
                 pelts purchased each year to make 150 bearskins for the
                 British guards are but a drop in the bucket.

                 Ms. Jagros said where a ban would have an impact is in
                 the native communities that hunt the bears. And if the
                 aim is save bears, she said, the ban won't stop their
                 being killed.

                 "You won't save bears -- they will still be hunted for
                 meat," she said. "The hunt won't be affected but you will
                 be hurting a part of society that could use the money
                 most."

                  FRONT PAGE | CITY | SPORTS | BUSINESS | NATIONAL | WORLD
                                        | EDITORIALS
                    ENTERTAINMENT | YOUR MONEY | INTERNET | COLUMNISTS |
                                         CLASSIFIED
                                     FEEDBACK | GATEWAY

                             Copyright 1997 The Ottawa Citizen
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 15:10:08 -0700
From: Sean Thomas <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: The Bear Facts
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


-----------------------------  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: 137


Ottawa Citizen   Hit reload or refresh if you're not getting today's
Online           date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   [Image]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   [Image]

[Image]
[Image]
[Image]

National
Highlights
[Image]National
News
[Image]Across
Canada
[Image]News in
Depth
                  FRONT PAGE | CITY | SPORTS | BUSINESS | NATIONAL | WORLD
                                        | EDITORIALS
                    ENTERTAINMENT | YOUR MONEY | INTERNET | COLUMNISTS |
                                         CLASSIFIED

                 [National - Ottawa Citizen Online]

                                  Thursday 14 August 1997

                 Britain ponders fake-fur guard hats

                 Canadian bearskin raises ire of animal rights activists

                 Stephen Smith
                 The Ottawa Citizen

                 Britain's new defence          Reuter / A soldier guards
                 minister has ordered a
                 review of the use of        St. James Palace wearing the
                 real bearskin -- real       busby.
                 Canadian bearskin -- on
                 the hats of the famous
                 Royal Household guards.

                 The review is the latest sign of the new Labour
                 government's willingness to question popular British
                 traditions, such as the fox hunt, that are not so popular
                 with Britain's animal rights groups.

                 (Defence Minister) Lord Gilbert has asked to see the
                 rationale behind the army's continued use of bearskins,"
                 ministry spokesman Alan Patterson said from London. Lord
                 Gilbert "involves himself in animal rights issues," Mr.
                 Patterson said.

                 The 50-centimetre-tall hats made with the fur of Canadian
                 black bears sit atop the red-coated foot guards of the
                 Royal Household Divisions five Guards regiments -- the
                 Grenadier, Coldstream, Scots, Irish and Welsh Guards --
                 perform the ceremonial guard duties at Buckingham Palace
                 and other Royal sites in London.

                 According to a tradition cited by both Mr. Patterson and
                 Capt. Rob Foster, adjutant for Ottawa's bearskin-wearing
                 Governor General's Foot Guards, the hats have been a
                 familiar feature of the five Guards regiments since the
                 Battle of Waterloo in 1814. The bearskins, originally
                 worn by French troops in Napoleon's army, were adopted by
                 the British guards as a symbol of their triumph at
                 Waterloo.

                 Capt. Foster said the bearskins were originally intended
                 to stop cavalry charges by frightening the horses. Bear
                 fur, he said, is known to make horses "skitterish." The
                 other notable advantage of bearskins was the added height
                 they afforded infantry soldiers, Capt. Foster said.

                 "It made them look more ferocious."

                 In this age of synthetics, alternatives to natural
                 bearskins are on the market. But the synthetic bearskins
                 aren't too fond of wetness, which rainy London has plenty
                 of.

                 "The artificial fur flattens down in the rain and clumps
                 together, looking very scruffy and not at all in keeping
                 with the rest of the Guards uniform, which is very
                 smart," Mr. Patterson said. "And it's important that they
                 look smart."

                 But the British army hasn't ruled out an artificial
                 alternative to the bearskins. "We move with the times. We
                 take into consideration animal rights."

                 Whether natural or artificial, the bearskin hat is no
                 bargain. Animal Action, an Ottawa-based animal rights
                 group that wants to stop the use of bearskins in Canadian
                 regiments like the GGFGs, said a new, natural,
                 Made-in-England bearskin hat costs the army in excess of
                 $1,200.

                 "There's no justification -- either for blowing away a
                 bear or spending taxpayers' money," said Animal Action
                 co-director Len Goldberg.

                 Yet Capt. Foster said new bearskins are simply not an
                 option for his unit.

                 "The ones we use now are, on average, 25 years old. When
                 they become worn-out, we refurbish them using the same
                 bear's fur," he said.

                 The impact of a potential ban on Britain's use of
                 bearskins would not affect Canada's fur industry, said
                 Tina Jagros, vice-president of marketing at the North
                 American Fur Auction in Toronto. She said the 50 Canadian
                 pelts purchased each year to make 150 bearskins for the
                 British guards are but a drop in the bucket.

                 Ms. Jagros said where a ban would have an impact is in
                 the native communities that hunt the bears. And if the
                 aim is save bears, she said, the ban won't stop their
                 being killed.

                 "You won't save bears -- they will still be hunted for
                 meat," she said. "The hunt won't be affected but you will
                 be hurting a part of society that could use the money
                 most."

                  FRONT PAGE | CITY | SPORTS | BUSINESS | NATIONAL | WORLD
                                        | EDITORIALS
                    ENTERTAINMENT | YOUR MONEY | INTERNET | COLUMNISTS |
                                         CLASSIFIED
                                     FEEDBACK | GATEWAY

                             Copyright 1997 The Ottawa Citizen

    The Bear Facts
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 15:14:38 -0700
From: Sean Thomas <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Health Canada Website, www.hwc.ca
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

You can post comments regarding Helath Canada's misuse of primates on
their website.  It's located at www.hwc.ca (go to the guest book or
email them directly).  Let them know that sanctuary is the only option
for it's 750 macaques.

Sean Thomas
Co-Director, Animal Action
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 15:24:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US) Oklahoma Horse Abuse Case
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>


According to a local Oklahoma City news:

A Norman, Oklahoma woman who faces trial on animal cruelty
charges says her horses were not mistreated.  But an animal
advocate, a local vet and prosecutors disagree.  They say the
eight horses were near starvation when they were taken from
the Thunderbird Riding Stables in late March of this year.
  After a preliminary hearing, Judge Reg Gaston ordered Cindy
Steveson to face trial on the animal cruetly charges. Steveson has
filed a civil suit to the get the seized horses returned to her.
  In an interview, Steveson said the horses looked thin because
they were old and had weathered a hard winter.  She said the
horses were kept in a pasture during the winter, not in a stable.
  "Some of them don't winter well.  They did look bad; I won't say
they didn't look bad.  They would naturally gotten fat here anyway.
It's just a natural thing.  Anybody who knows anything about
pasture animals knows that,"  she said.
  But the spokesperson for a local Norman humane society said
there was nothing natural about the horses' condition.  They
tried to work with Steveson and her husband to get them to see the
horses had a problem on several different occasions.  They then
met with the Cleveland County DA office and charges were filed
against Steveson.
   The horses are being kept by volunteers in Norman, Oklahoma City
and Purcell.  "At this point the horses have recovered tremondously.
At the prelim hearing, we showed her a picture of one of the horses,
and she said it wasn't her horse.  She didn't recognize her
own horse.  That's how drastic the change was," the spokesperson said.
One other horse has gained more than 200 lbs and all the horses
have gained more than 100 lbs.
    When officials went to seize the horses in March, the spokesperson
said each of them had a saddle and rider on its back.  Four were
still on the trails. "It's awful to think that anyone could have gotten
on the backs of these skeletons and ridden them for pleasure.  They
were barely holding themselves up, much less someone riding them."
   Steveson said she did use the horses for riders on a sporadic basis.
She said only children rode them, not heavier grown adults.  Steveson
said the horses lose muscle tone if they are not excercised.
    "I don't feel like I did anything wrong.  I don't feel like I mistreated
my
horses at all.  I haven't been allowed to say anything in my defense.
My grandmother looks pretty bad too, but nobody mistreats her.  Older
horses don't always look fat.  They do in the summer, but not in the
winter," said Steveson.
     The humane group's spokeperson said their goal is not just a
conviction in the case, but that they want guildlines put in place to ensure
the health of the other horses at the stable.

                                                For the Animals,

                                                Jana, OKC





Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 13:08:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike Markarian <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail],
        [e-mail]
Subject: Ct. Gov. Signs Bill to Ban the Drowning of Wildlife
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 15, 1997

CONTACT: Laura Simon, [phone]

GOVERNOR SIGNS BILL TO BAN THE DROWNING OF WILDLIFE
Bill Sets National Precedent for Nuisance Control Industry

HARTFORD, CT -- Governor John Rowland held a ceremonial signing today at
11:00 AM in the Governor's Office on a new law which prevents nuisance
wildlife control  trappers from killing wildlife in cruel ways.

The bill was triggered by public outrage in September, when nuisance trapper
Michael Lipsett was arrested for animal cruelty after drowning  two raccoons
at a West Haven public marina.  Lipsett's defense was that this practice is
common.  Nuisance wildlife trappers are licensed by the Department of
Environmental Protection and can charge a fee -- usually hundreds of dollars
-- for removing wild animals from people's homes.  Many nuisance trappers
drown animals in 55-gallon steel drums or inject them with acetone.

The Act to be signed by the Governor will require that nuisance trappers
follow humane euthanasia guidelines of the American Veterinary Medical
Association and that they receive mandatory training in non-lethal, humane
methods of alleviating nuisance problems.  There is also a "truth in
advertising" clause stating that nuisance trappers cannot advertise their
services as "humane" unless their techniques truly are.

The Fund for Animals' wildlife hotline in Connecticut received numerous
complaints from citizens who were upset about methods used by nuisance
trappers.  Says Laura Simon, The Fund's Urban Wildlife Director who staffs
the hotline, "People want to see animals treated humanely, even in
situations when the animal may be perceived as a nuisance.  There's no
excuse for nuisance trappers to use barbaric methods when humane
alternatives exist."

Says Julie Lewin, The Fund's Connecticut Coordinator, "Nuisance control has
gone out of control, and this is the first time nationwide that the industry
has been regulated."

# # #

http://www.fund.org

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 97 14:50:42 UTC
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Richard Leakey Event on Oct. 29, 1997
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

October 29th: Join Moody Gardens in Galveston, Texas, USA in honoring
anthropologist Richard Leakey, the 1997 Moody Gardens ENVIRONMENTAL
LEADERSHIP AWARD winner.

Known for his important discoveries concerning the origin of man as
well as his efforts to save the African elephant from extinction,
Leakey will speak at a dinner at 7:30pm in the Moody Gardens Convention
Center. Public is invited, reservations required.

Call: 1-800-582-4673, ext. 209.

It will be on a Wednesday night. There are directions to Moody Gardens
in Galveston, Texas and other information at their web site:
http://www.moodygardens.com


-- Sherrill
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 16:32:26 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Student Abolitionist League)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Huntington Alert!!
Message-ID: <v01540b12b01a2c79b0ec@[204.141.118.250]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Action Alert!!

PETA will be leafletting in Milford, NJ all day this Sunday against
Huntington Life Sciences' animal abuse in Britain (this doesn't violate the
gag order, which only covers the American investigation.)  They'll be
meeting up at 10 AM.  For more info call Jason Baker at PETA (757) 622-PETA
ext. 490 or if you aren't able to rendezvous at 10, beep Jason  at (800)
820-5790 and he'll tell you where you can meet up.  Call PETA to get PETA
belieives they may be able to shut Huntington down with a little more
effort, so participation is crucial.
(somone please forward this to the NJ activist list)

****Call the Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade-NYC upcoming events hotline
at [phone]*****

"Somewhere the monkeys are screaming.  And screaming. And screaming."
 -Animal Man # 4  Grant Morrison, Writer (Available from Student
Abolitionist League's Lending Library)


Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 00:08:28 +0200
From: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Cats set on fire by mad "people"
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

> For those who would like to help ...
> Write to me if you'd like to see the letter I sent to the dean, president,
> and chancellor of the University.
>
> >Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 16:45:21 -0500
> >From: David Gulbransen <[e-mail]>
> >Organization: Vervet Logic
> >To: [e-mail]
> >Subject: Please Help!
> >
> >On the morning of August 10, 1997 police arrested Indiana University
> >Students Errett Rouch and Blake Case at their Bloomington home.
> >According to police, Rouch and Case used hair spray and a cigarette
> >lighter to set several neighborhood housecats on fire.
> >
> >The two students have been charged with animal cruelty, a class "A"
> >misdemenor under Indiana law. Despite the serious nature the
> >accusations, they face a maximum of one year in jail.
> >
> >One of the cats, 6 year-old Olivia, is hospitalized in Indianapolis with
> >third-degree burns over 40% of her body. Although she is expected to
> >survive, Oliva will undoubtedly be permanantly disfigured.
> >
> >IU officials are currently considering disciplinary action against the
> >two. Under the Indiana University Student Code of Ethics, the students
> >may be expelled permantly for their actions. However, the University
> >remains undecided on their course of action.
> >
> >We have designed an on-line petition asking that these two "students"
> >be punished to the maximum extent of the law and permenently expelled
> >from Indiana University. Please help us make our message heard:
> >
> >       The petition can be found at:
> >
> >               http://cat.plaidhamster.com
> >
> >       And letters of support and disgust can be sent to:
> >
> >               Myles Brand, President, Indiana University
> >               [e-mail]
> >
> >               Kenneth R.R. Gros Louis, Chancellor, IU Bloomington
> >               [e-mail]
> >
> >Thank you for your compassion and support!
> >
> >David Gulbransen
> >Luke Heidelberger
> >
> >
> -
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 20:49:02 -0400
From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US/UK) U.K. Youth Ate 'Mad Cow'-Risky Meat
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from Yahoo news page:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday August 15 6:30 PM EDT

U.K. Youth Ate 'Mad Cow'-Risky Meat

By Theresa Tamkins

NEW YORK (Reuters) -- So far, at least 20 young adults in the UK and France
have developed a fatal neurological disorder that may have been caused by
eating meat from cows with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or "mad
cow disease."

Now a study appearing in this week's British Medical Journal reveals that,
if indeed BSE can cause human disease, the typical diet of teenagers and
young adults may raise their susceptibility to the illness.

An analysis of eating habits in the UK showed that teens and young adults
were indeed more likely to be eating "riskier" meat products in the late
1980s, the time when the BSE was at its peak among cattle.

The new variant of the human neurological disorder, Creutzfeldt-Jakob
Disease or CJD, does not usually strike younger people. CJD, (which has yet
to be conclusively linked to BSE) follows disease stages characterized by
confusion, disorientation, coma and death.

The survey of 2,197 people showed that 45% of 16 to 24 year olds ate
hamburgers and kebabs, compared to only 13% of those aged 50 to 64,
according to lead study author Dr. Sheila Gore, a senior statistician at
the Medical Research Council (MRC) Biostatistics Unit in Cambridge, U.K.

"The quantities consumed by those who ate these products also decreased
noticeably with age," she wrote. Meat pie and meat pastry consumption was
also higher in the younger age groups, though beef consumption increased
with age. And older individuals also reported eating other meat products
more often than younger people.

Beefburgers and the meat pies may contain mechanically recovered meat, a
potential source of contamination with the agent that causes BSE, write the
study authors.

"Mechanically recovered meat is basically meat that is removed from an
animal's carcass using things like high-powered water jets," said Jon Cope,
a spokesperson for the MRC, a government-funded agency in the U.K. that
allocates research grants. "It's the sort of thing that goes into pies and
pasties and mince meat and that kind of thing."

Mechanically recovered meat is now strictly regulated. Since 1996, the
recovered meat can only come from young cows under 30 months old and the
use of the spinal column is prohibited. Brain and other nervous system
tissue is thought to be the primary source of the agent that cause BSE.

"Mechanically recovered meat whilst it's certainly not being posited as the
cause of the new variant CJD, its one of the things that could cause it,
because of the inaccuracy of the tools and the water jets could come into
contact with the spine and other parts of the cow that are suspect," said
Cope.

Because the surveys conducted in the 1980s were not designed to answer
questions about BSE, it's not clear if all the meat products were
beef-derived or from pork or other sources.

"Improved categorization of the data -- for example, to differentiate pork
from steak and kidney pies and types of sausage and burger -- would be
needed," Gore concluded. SOURCE: British Medical Journal (1997;315:16-32)

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 21:01:23 -0400
From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Admin Note--was...Re: Letter to copy on downed animals
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Keep personal e-mail _personal_--do not post 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:  [e-mail]

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: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 21:10:43 -0400
From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US) U.S. Expands Hamburger Recall
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from AP Wire page:
----------------------------------
 08/15/1997 19:29 EST

 U.S. Expands Hamburger Recall

 By CURT ANDERSON
 AP Farm Writer

 WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government expanded its recall of ground beef
 produced by an Arkansas company to 1.2 million pounds Friday because of
 new evidence of possible contamination by E. coli bacteria.

 Anyone who has purchased frozen ground-beef patties since June 4 should
 check their freezers to determine if certain Hudson Foods Co. products
 are there. If so, the product should be returned to the point of
 purchase, said Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman.

 The tainted beef came from the Hudson Foods plant in Columbus, Neb., and
 government officials are trying to determine if other contaminated
 products were produced there.

 ``USDA is conducting a thorough investigation at the plant to ensure that
 no unsafe product is being allowed to go into commerce,'' Glickman said.

 Much of the ground beef probably has already been eaten, officials said.
 USDA is assuming the hamburgers were distributed to all 50 states.

 The Nebraska plant produces frozen ground-beef patties for such national
 chains as Burger King, Boston Market, Wal-Mart and Sam's Club, officials
 with Rogers, Ark.-based Hudson have said.

 Wal-Mart Stores Inc. pulled all Hudson's ground beef from Wal-Mart and
 Sam's Club stores nationwide earlier this week, spokeswoman Daphne Davis
 said. Customers can return any patties they purchased for a full refund,
 no matter when it was bought.

 ``We want them to have peace of mind,'' she said. Ms. Davis did not know
 how much Hudson's ground beef that might involve, or which stores might
 have sold it.

 Burger King said Friday it had found no evidence that any hamburger it
 bought from the company on the production days in question was tainted
 with E. coli. The suspect ground beef was produced at Hudson's Nebraska
 plant on June 4, June 5 and June 9.

 Burger King said it does its own E. coli screening tests on beef patties
 and also thoroughly cooks every burger at 155 degrees for at least 15
 seconds, enough to kill the bacteria.

 ``We are confident that Burger King Corp.'s stringent quality standards,
 inspection policies and cookout requirements ensure the continued safety
 of our customers,'' the company, with headquarters in Miami, said in a
 statement.

 Another large customer, Colorado-based Boston Market, said it had
 purchased about 16,000 pounds of Hudson beef produced on the suspect days
 but that those patties were long gone from its restaurants. It also does
 extra tests and cooks beef at properly high temperatures, the company
 said.

 Although Hudson had voluntarily recalled some 40,000 pounds of hamburger
 earlier this week, federal officials say there appeared to be some
 unwarranted delay in determining how much beef may have been contaminated
 with E. coli.

 ``USDA will pursue the appropriate corrective action,'' said Cathy
 Woteki, undersecretary for food safety.

 A spokesman for Hudson did not immediately return repeated telephone
 calls seeking comment Friday, but before the expanded recall, spokesman
 John White told the Columbus (Neb.) Telegram that the contamination
 appears to have come from a specific load of beef trimmings.

 ``We have a lot of technology to detect it at that plant, but it's still
 a tough thing to do,'' White told the newspaper.

 E. coli bacteria can cause severe diarrhea, cramps and dehydration and
 can be fatal, although no deaths have been associated with this
 ground-beef recall, officials said. The young, elderly and people with
 weak immune systems are most susceptible.

 The initial Hudson recall began after health officials in Colorado traced
 the illnesses of about 20 people to hamburger patties they ate in early
 June.

 The federal Centers for Disease Control has asked all state health
 departments to check on local cases of E. coli illness to determine if
 there are others linked to the ground beef, a spokesman said.

 In January 1993, an outbreak of E. coli poisoning traced to contaminated
 and undercooked burgers from Jack in the Box fast-food restaurants
 resulted in three deaths and hundreds of illnesses, mostly in Washington
 state. After that, the government began a public education campaign
 designed to encourage adequate cooking of burgers.

 The government recall covers Hudson frozen-beef patties produced on the
 dates in question. Officials have not yet identified every batch of
 hamburger that could be contaminated, but so far, officials said
 consumers should check specifically for these codes:

 --All 48-ounce packages of ``Hudson Beef Burgers, Individually Quick
 Frozen'' that contain 12 quarter-pound patties. The code 156A7 is on the
 bottom of the package.

 --All 3-pound packages of ``Hudson 100% Pure Beef Patties, Individually
 Quick Frozen'' that contain 12 quarter-pound patties. The code 156B7 is
 on the bottom.

 --All 15-pound boxes of ``Hudson 60 -- 1/4 -lb. Beef Patties, Uncooked
 Individually Quick Frozen'' containing 60 quarter-pound patties. The
 codes 155B7, 155A7, 160A7 and 160B7 would appear on the bottom.

 --All three products contain the code ``Est. 13569'' in the USDA
 inspection seal on the label.

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 21:13:55 -0400
From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US) Clinton Signs Tuna-Dolphin Bill
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from AP Wire page:
----------------------------------
 08/15/1997 17:15 EST

 Clinton Signs Tuna-Dolphin Bill

 WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Clinton signed legislation Friday that could
 allow tuna caught in large dolphin-trapping nets to be sold on grocery
 store shelves.

 The tuna-dolphin bill, an issue in Congress for several years, cleared
 Congress Aug. 1 after the House accepted a Senate compromise agreeable to
 the White House and many environmental groups.

 The new law lifts a 1990 embargo on imports of tuna from the Eastern
 Pacific, where the nets can scoop up dolphin with the fish.

 The House version passed in May would have immediately given the new
 imports the ``dolphin-safe'' label, but the Senate altered that to give
 the Commerce Department until March 1999 to study the fishing procedure
 before making a preliminary ruling on whether the label could apply. A
 final ruling by the commerce secretary would be due by Dec. 31, 2002.

 The problem of dolphins swimming with schools of tuna occurs mainly in
 the tropical eastern Pacific Ocean. The 1990 embargo was imposed after
 the huge encircling purse-seine nets were blamed for the deaths of
 hundreds of thousands of dolphins a year. Since then, however, techniques
 have been introduced that are safer for the dolphin.

 ``The act recognizes that ongoing international efforts have been a
 tremendous success,'' the president said in a statement. ``Dolphin
 mortalities have been reduced by more than 98 percent from previous
 levels. Foreign nations, whose fishing fleets have contributed to this
 success, will no longer face U.S. embargoes on their tuna products if
 they continue to participate effectively in this international program.''

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 18:50:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [CA] New Age Hunting (Correction)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Sorry, I made an error with the e-mail address for Dawn Hanna. The correct
address is:

[e-mail]

BTW, just wanted to point out that the statement about hunters having
respect for the animals they are about to blast away, was quoted from the
press release - not written by Dawn Hanna herself.

David

Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 22:28:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: largest hamburger recall in history (USA)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

By Doug Palmer

WASHINGTON (Reuter) - The U.S. Agriculture Department Friday announced the
largest recall of U.S. ground beef products in history, giving consumers one
more reason to look twice at their burgers before taking a bite.

Hudson Foods Inc., an Arkansas-based meat processor, is voluntarily recalling
at least 1.2 million pounds of frozen hamburger nationwide due to possible
contamination with a deadly strain of the E. coli bacteria.

The amount is far beyond any previous ground beef recall and 60 times the
20,000 pounds that USDA initially said Hudson Foods was recalling. The size
of the recall could continue to mount as USDA investigates the matter.

``It's enough to make somebody a vegetarian,'' said Michael Jacobson,
executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest.
``Clearly, the company has not been as careful as it should,'' he said.

Hudson Foods, which is primarily a poultry processor, began the recall this
week after ground beef product from its Columbus, Nebraska plant was tied to
16 cases of E. coli contanimation in Colorado in July.

Five people were hospitalized for treatment, according to Colorado health
officials. The strain of E. coli suspected of contaminating the beef can
cause bloody diarrhea and dehydration, and in some, life-threatening kidney
failure.

``Unfortunately, these microorganisms are all around us,'' USDA
Undersecretary for Food Safety Catherine Woteki told CNN. ''They occur
naturally in cattle and at times during slaughter and processing there is
some contamination that occurs.''

At this point, consumers should do two things to protect themselves, Woteki
said.

They should check to see if they have any of the potentially contaminated
product. They should also, as a general rule, cook all ground beef to least
160 degrees Farenheit to kill any bacteria that is present, she said.

As part of its investigation, USDA also wants to know why it took Hudson
Foods so long to provide full production reports for the days when the
contamination occured.

The at least 1.2 million pounds of hamburger so far involved in the recall
were processed at the firm's Columbus, Nebraska, facility on June 4, 5 and 9,
the department said.

Consumers who have bought Hudson Farms frozen ground beef patties since June
4 to return any unused portion to where it was purchased, the department
said.

The frozen patties were distributed nationwide in retail groery stores,
wholesale stores and in fast food restaurants.

Sara Lilygren, spokeswoman for the American Meat Institute, said consumers
should keep the recall in perspective.

``A product recall is a sign that the system is working'' to keep unsafe food
out of the mouths of consumers, Lilygren said. ''The U.S. meat supply is
among the safest in the world.''

But Jacobson of CPSI said meat and poultry should always be treated with
caution, due to the potential health risk.

``I think consumers should assume that meat and poultry is contaminated and
treat it as such,'' he said.

That means cooking it to the proper temperture and washing up to avoid
spreading potentially deadly bacteria, he said.

Bob Hahn, a food safety expert at Public Voice, a consumer advocacy group,
agreed.

``The message consumers have to take home is that they have to take some
action to protect themselves,'' he said.

Even with continuing improvement in meat inspection, ''noboby can give you a
guarantee that any particular piece of meat is safe,'' Hahn said.   The
specific Hudson Food products so far subject to the recall are the following:


All 3-pound packages of ``Hudson Beef Burgers, Individually Quick Frozen,''
containing 12 quarter-pound frozen patties, with the code 1567A on the botton
of the bag.

All 3-pound packages of ``Hudson 100 Percent Pure Beef Patties, Individually
Quick Frozen,'' containing 12 quarter-pound frozen patties, with the code
156B7.

All 15-pound boxes of ``Hudson 60 quarter-pound Beef Patties, Uncooked
Individually Quick Frozen,'' containing 60 quarter-pound frozen patties, with
the code 155A7, 155B7, 160A7 or 160B7 on the bar code of the side panel of
the box.


20:05 08-15-97
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 22:06:53 -0400
From: Vegetarian Resource Center <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
Subject: Hudson Foods hamburger recallexpanded to 1.2 million pounds
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hudson Foods hamburger recallexpanded to 1.2 million pounds
By Curt Anderson, Associated Press, 08/15/97

WASHINGTON (AP) - The government expanded its recall of
ground beef produced by an Arkansas company to 1.2 million
pounds Friday because of new evidence of possible contamination
by E. coli bacteria.

Anyone who has purchased frozen ground-beef patties
since June 4 should check their freezers to determine
if any of the Hudson Foods Co. products are there.
If so, they should be returned to the point of purchase,
said Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman.
The tainted beef came from the Hudson Foods plant
in Columbus, Neb., and government officials are trying
to determine if other contaminated products were produced there.

``USDA is conducting a thorough investigation at the plant to
ensure that no unsafe product is being allowed to go into
commerce,'' Glickman said.

Much of the ground beef probably has already been eaten, officials
said.

The Nebraska plant produces frozen ground-beef patties for such
national chains as Burger King, Boston Market, Wal-Mart and
Sam's Club, officials with Rogers, Ark.-based Hudson have said.

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. pulled all Hudson's ground beef from Wal-Mart
and Sam's Club stores nationwide earlier this week, spokeswoman
Daphne Davis said. Customers can return any patties they
purchased for a full refund, no matter when it was bought.

``We want them to have peace of mind,'' she said. Ms. Davis did
not know how much Hudson's ground beef that might involve, or
which stores might have sold it.

Burger King said Friday it had found no evidence that any
hamburger it bought from the company on the production days in
question was tainted with E. coli. The suspect ground beef was
produced at Hudson's Nebraska plant on June 4, June 5 and June 9.

Burger King said it does its own E. coli screening tests on beef
patties and also thoroughly cooks every burger at 155 degrees for
at least 15 seconds, enough to kill the bacteria.

``We are confident that Burger King Corp.'s stringent quality
standards, inspection policies and cookout requirements ensure
the continued safety of our customers,'' the company, with
headquarters in Miami, said in a statement.

Another large customer, Colorado-based Boston Market, said it
had purchased about 16,000 pounds of Hudson beef produced on
the suspect days but that those patties were long gone from its
restaurants. It also does extra tests and cooks beef at properly high
temperatures, the company said.

Although Hudson had voluntarily recalled some 40,000 pounds of
hamburger earlier this week, federal officials say there appeared to
be some unwarranted delay in determining how much beef may
have been contaminated with E. coli.

``USDA will pursue the appropriate corrective action,'' said Cathy
Woteki, undersecretary for food safety.

A spokesman for Hudson did not immediately return a telephone
call seeking comment.

E. coli bacteria can cause severe diarrhea, cramps and
dehydration and can be fatal, although no deaths have been
associated with this ground-beef recall, officials said. The young,
elderly and people with weak immune systems are most
susceptible.

The initial Hudson recall began after health officials in Colorado
traced the illnesses of about 20 people to hamburger patties they
ate in early June.

The federal Centers for Disease Control has asked all state health
departments to check on local cases of E. coli illness to determine
if there are others linked to the ground beef, a spokesman said.

In January 1993, an outbreak of E. coli poisoning traced to
contaminated and undercooked burgers from Jack in the Box
fast-food restaurants resulted in three deaths and hundreds of
illnesses, mostly in Washington state. After that, the government
began a public education campaign designed to encourage
adequate cooking of burgers.

The government recall covers all Hudson frozen-beef patties
produced since June 4. Officials have not yet identified every batch
of hamburger that could be contaminated, but so far, officials said
consumers should check specifically for these codes:
All 48-ounce packages of ``Hudson Beef Burgers, Individually
Quick Frozen'' that contain 12 quarter-pound patties. The code
156A7 is on the bottom of the package.

All 3-pound packages of ``Hudson 100% Pure Beef Patties,
Individually Quick Frozen'' that contain 12 quarter-pound patties.
The code 156B7 is on the bottom.

All 15-pound boxes of ``Hudson 60 _ -lb. Beef Patties,
Uncooked Individually Quick Frozen'' containing 60 quarter-pounds
patties. The code 155B7 appears on the bottom.

All three contain the code ``Est. 13569'' in the USDA inspection
seal on the label.

AP-ES-08-15-97 1850EDT
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 23:34:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: department of defense online database
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Please check out this database. It lists some of
the animal research projects that our tax dollars are
going to. I typed in "animal" and it returned 831 items.
Hmm, war- what is it good for?

Department of Defense Research Database
http://dticam.dtic.mil/dodbr/
---------------------------------------------------------------

Richmond Animal Rights Network
http://members.aol.com/novenaann/organiz2.htm
[e-mail]
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 23:37:15 -0400
From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US) Soy, Fiber Diet Cuts Endometrial Cancer
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from Yahoo news page:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday August 15 2:02 PM EDT

Soy, Fiber Diet Cuts Endometrial Cancer

NEW YORK (Reuters) -- Consuming a plant-based diet low in fat, high in
fiber, and rich in whole grains, vegetables, fruit and legumes --
especially soy beans -- could reduce the risk of endometrial cancer.

The new findings, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, may
partly explain the lower rates of uterine cancer in Asian countries
compared with those in the United States and may point the way to more
effective cancer prevention.

As with breast and ovarian cancers, rates for endometrial cancer are lower
in Japan, China, and other Asian countries than they are in the United
States and Europe.

In recent years, researchers have focused on possible dietary factors that
might influence these differences -- chief among them the possibility that
dietary fat increases the risk of endometrial cancer.

"It has been proposed that the reduced risk of breast cancer among Asians
in Japan and China may be attributable to their high intake of dietary
fiber and soy products," say researchers at the Cancer Research Center of
Hawaii at the University of Hawaii in Honolulu.

"A similar rationale may be applied to uterine cancer," they add, noting
that a reduced consumption of dietary fiber and soy products and increased
consumption of dietary fat may explain the increase in uterine cancer found
among Asians who have migrated to the West.

The researchers led by epidemiologist Dr. Marc T. Goodman studied 332 cases
of endometrial cancer diagnosed in Hawaii between 1985 and 1993. Cases
included the five main ethnic groups of the state: Japanese, Caucasian,
Native Hawaiian, Filipino, and Chinese. For comparison, a group of women
(average age 58) matched for age and ethnicity was also studied.

All participants were interviewed using a diet history questionnaire that
included over 250 food items. Non-dietary risk factors for endometrial
cancer were also evaluated, including never having given birth, never
having used oral contraceptives, or history of fertility drug use or
estrogen use. Other risk factors include diabetes mellitus, high blood
pressure or obesity.

As expected, non-dietary risk factors were tied to an increased likelihood
of endometrial cancer. For example, the cancer risk among estrogen users
was 2.6 times that of estrogen "never-users" and the cancer odds increased
sharply with continued estrogen use.

In regards to diet, "Energy intake from fat but not from other sources was
positively associated with endometrial cancer," the researchers write.
Among women who consumed the most dietary fat, the risk was 1.6 times
greater than those who consumed the least fat.

However, women who consumed the most fiber from cereals, vegetables, and
fruit had a 29% to 46% reduction in cancer risk compared to those who ate
the least amount of fiber.

In addition, several groups of phytoestrogen-rich foods -- including
legumes, tofu and other soy products -- was linked to a lower risk of
endometrial cancer. Phytoestrogens are compounds of plant origin that have
effects similar to those of the hormone estrogen. Women who ate the highest
amount of foods rich in these compounds had a 54% reduction in cancer risk,
compared with those who consumed the least.

Phytoestrogens compete with estrogen for cell receptor binding sites. In
doing so, they help control the level of estrogen circulating in the blood.
The researchers say an "anti-estrogenic effect" of phytoestrogens may block
the development of endometrial cancer by reducing hormonal activities that
cause endometrial cells to proliferate uncontrollably.

According to Goodman and his colleagues, the link between soy product
consumption and the risk of endometrial cancer was independent of other
established risk factors with the exception of estrogen use and pregnancy.

"Women who had never been pregnant and who consumed less than nine grams of
soy products a day were at 4.52 times the estimated risk of endometrial
cancer," write the researchers.

Among women who had never used estrogen, risk was increased by 80% among
those who consumed less than nine grams of soy products a day. Among
estrogen users, however, the level of soy intake "had little influence" on
the odds of developing endometrial cancer.

The researchers conclude, "These findings and those of other investigators
suggest a practical strategy for the prevention of endometrial cancer;
namely, weight control through the reduction of energy intake, especially
from fat and protein, and an increase in soy and fiber, mostly from
vegetables and fruits." SOURCE: American Journal of Epidemiology
(1997;146(4):294-306)