Connecticut For Animals: Abolitionist animal rights activism

HARTFORD MARATHON FOUNDATION and RINGLING BROTHERS CIRCUS . . . RUNNING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION

2008-04-27T09:19:00.009-04:00

As activists and runners, we were disappointed to learn that the Hartford Marathon Foundation has chosen to support Ringling Brother’s Circus and their use of animals through sponsorship of the Red Nose Run. The Red Nose run is a public relations event created by Ringling Brother’s Circus to promote their business and counter the increasing public concern over abuse of animals in the circus.

Many of you are likely aware of recent and extensive media attention exposing the inherent cruelty of circus animal acts. In response to increased public awareness, legislative action in numerous states has focused on the abuse endured by captive animals such as tigers and elephants. We have come to realize that the exploitation and captivity of these amazing creatures are not only inexcusable, but that such treatment reflects the most base and cruel aspects of human conduct.

The wonder and awe with which we view these creatures come from the recognition that they are complex animals with desires and joys of their own. Elephants, like humans, are intelligent and social creatures that live their lives traveling in family groups. The ‘use’ of these animals for petty display and entertainment robs them of their natural existence and robs the children who view them of the notions of respect and compassion that we strive to instill. To date more than sixty municipalities in the US and Canada have banned circus animal acts.

Surely, there are more humane and educational opportunities for HMF to pursue as fundraisers for local groups and organizations. In a letter dated April 15th, 2008, we requested a meeting with HMF board members to express our concerns and offer detailed information regarding Ringling, its practices, and the lives of animals used for entertainment purposes.

We hope that HMF will grant our request.

Please take a few minutes of your time to contact Hartford Marathon Foundation and ask its board members to end sponsorship of the Red Nose Run and their support of animal exploitation.

Remind HMF that humans are not
the only species that
enjoys running free in the warmth of the sun.

Contact the Hartford Marathon Foundation at: info@hartfordmarathon.com

Board of Directors , 140 Hebron Avenue, Glastonbury, CT 06033 Tel: 860-652-8866

"All good things are wild, and free." Henry David Thoreau

For more information about the lives of circus animals, visit these sites (please note, CT for Animals does not necessarily endorse these sites or these organizations):

Born Free USA - associated with the Animal Protection Institute

Circuses.com - People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals

Circuses - Humane Society of the United States

Mercy for Animals

WWAIL 2008 Pt. II: Vivisection: As unscientific as it is cruel

2008-04-21T15:38:00.002-04:00

Hundreds of millions of animals suffer slow, painful deaths at the hands of experimenters at Universities, hospitals and private institutions every year in the U.S. The existing federal regulations do not require that experimenters use alternatives to animals when they are available, they provide only minimal husbandry standards for some animals in laboratories and they do not even cover mice, rats, birds and reptiles (who make up more than 95% of all animals in labs). As a result, billions of our tax dollars are squandered on mislead research that entails confining, mutilating, drugging, and fatally infecting animals with degenerative and infectious diseases in the experiments that will do little, if anything, to improve human health. Continue below for recent research on the failure of animal experiments--

A 2007 article concluded that research has “demonstrated that animal experiments are insufficiently predictive of human outcomes to provide substantial benefits during the development of human clinical interventions, or in deriving human toxicity assessments.”
A 2008 article stated that the successes claimed by proponents of animal experimentation are anecdotal and that sweeping statements about the benefits of animal experimentation are unfounded.
A 2007 article published in the British Medical Journal reported that the “lack of concordance between animal experiments and clinical trials may be due to…the failure of animal models to adequately represent human disease.” Similarly, an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association in concluded that "patients and physicians should remain cautious about extrapolating the findings of prominent animal research to the care of human disease."
The FDA reports that only 8% of all drugs progressing to human trials after demonstration of safety in animal studies will gain approval. Further, roughly 50% of these approved drugs will be withdrawn or receive black-box warning labels after showing side effects or toxicities not detected in animals.
In a 2007 report commissioned by the EPA, the National Science Foundation's National Research Council (NRC) concluded, "Current [animal toxicity] tests...provide little information on modes and mechanisms of action...and little or no information for assessing variability in human susceptibility." The NRC concluded "that a transformative paradigm shift [toward non-animal test methods] is needed to achieve the design criteria set out in the committee's interim report:... (2) to reduce the cost and time of testing, (3) to use fewer animals and cause minimal suffering in the animals used, and (4) to develop a more robust scientific basis for assessing health effects." Based on these concerns, the NRC advocated for a new approach to toxicity testing based on exclusively "computational biology and a comprehensive array of in vitro tests based on human biology."
Still unconvinced? Try here, here and here.

WWAIL Pt. 1: CT events for World Week for Animals in Labs

2008-04-21T15:35:00.005-04:00

This week, Connecticut Activists will protest cruel experiments on mice, monkeys, cats, pigs and other animals at Yale University, the University of Connecticut Health Center (UCHC) and Hartford Hospital in recognition of World Week for Animals in Laboratories, a global event intended to raise awareness about the suffering of hundreds of millions animals:

Tuesday April 22

1:30 – 2:30 p.m., Yale University, 300 George Street, New Haven

Thursday April 24

1:30 – 2:30 p.m., University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington Entrance, Farmington, CT

3:30 – 5 p.m., Hartford Hospital, Hospital Entrance at 80 Seymour Street, Hartford

Click "read more" for further information about the suffering of animals at these institutions and for more information about how you can help.

Yale University

At Yale University, experimenter Marina Picciotto has received more than $15 million of taxpayer money since 1996 for experiments in which she forcibly exposes mice and rats to nicotine by injecting it into their abdomens, placing it directly into holes cut into their skulls or feeding them only water laced with the drug, forcing them to either drink it or die of dehydration (Addy and others 2007, Vieyra-Reyes and others 2008). The animals are then killed by decapitation while fully conscious and their brains are removed to study the effects of the drug exposure. Some of her studies involve hanging mice by their tails from paper clips supposedly to observe if exposure to nicotine effected anxiety and depression-like behaviors (Vieyra-Reyes and others 2008). In other studies by Yale experimenters, monkeys are captured in the wild, isolated in a laboratory, injected with antipsychotic drugs and killed to study their effects on the animals' brains (Elsworth and others 2007).

Take action- Click here to help stop nicotine experiments on animals (link will be live after 1pm on 4/22)

University of Connecticut Health Center
On any given day, there are 9,000 animals suffering inside of UCHC, including kittens who have plastic tubes forced down their throats, rats and cats who have holes drilled into their skulls (Loftus and others 2008) and mice who are locked in cages and have their entire bodies intentionally infested with ticks (Müller-Doblies and others 2007). UCHC is well-known for abusing animals in labs and in January 2008 was ordered to return $65K to the National Institutes of Health for more than 20 violations of animal welfare laws in a monkey laboratory.

Take action- Click here to help permanently end cruel training course at UCHC

Hartford Hospital
Each month, Hartford Hospital conducts a live animal trauma training course (Advanced Trauma Operative Management, or ATOM) in which pigs must suffer through fourteen penetrating injuries such as stab wounds to the abdomen and chest, stomach, inferior vena cava, and heart (Jacobs and others 2006). At the end of the one-day course, the pigs are killed. This month's course is on April 24th, the day of our protest.

Take action- Click here to help end cruel training course at Hartford Hospital

References
Addy NA, Fornasiero EF, Stevens TR, Taylor JR, Picciotto MR. Role of calcineurin in nicotine-mediated locomotor sensitization. J Neurosci. 2007 Aug 8;27(32):8571-80.

Elsworth JD, Jentsch JD, Morrow BA, Redmond DE Jr, Roth RH. Clozapine normalizes prefrontal cortex dopamine transmission in monkeys subchronically exposed to phencyclidine. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2008 Feb;33(3):491-6.

Jacobs LM Jr, Luk SS, Burns KJ. Advanced Trauma Operative Management course: site and instructor selection and evaluation. J Am Coll Surg. 2006 Nov;203(5):772-9. Epub 2006 Sep 20.

Loftus WC, Malmierca MS, Bishop DC, Oliver DL. The cytoarchitecture of the inferior colliculus revisited: A common organization of the lateral cortex in rat and cat. Neuroscience. 2008 Jan 19; [Epub ahead of print]

Müller-Doblies UU, Maxwell SS, Boppana VD, Mihalyo MA, McSorley SJ, Vella AT, Adler AJ, Wikel SK. Feeding by the tick, Ixodes scapularis, causes CD4(+) T cells responding to cognate antigen to develop the capacity to express IL-4. Parasite Immunol. 2007 Oct;29(10):485-99.

Vieyra-Reyes P, Picciotto MR, Mineur YS. Voluntary oral nicotine intake in mice down-regulates GluR2 but does not modulate depression-like behaviors. Neurosci Lett. 2008 Mar 21;434(1):18-22.

Friday, 4/18: Leafletting event at Yale University

2008-04-17T16:40:00.005-04:00

Think you can be a meat-eating environmentalist? Think again! "[The meat industry is] one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global."
-The United Nations

Come and leaflet at Yale at the 2008 Conference of Governors on Climate Change! The main events are Friday, April 18 (tomorrow):

10:00 AM @ Yale Law School Auditorium, 127 Wall Street, New Haven
(The Governor Discussion begins at 10:30)

1:00 PM @ Woolsey Hall Auditorium, 500 College Street, New Haven
(The Global Issues Address begins at 1:30)

Look for Sean, who will be there with the PETA "Chop Chop" flyer and Vegan Outreach literature to distribute to attendees. And keep an eye out for the Governator!

Mad Cowboy: A Lecture by Howard Lyman

2008-04-08T13:23:00.003-04:00

Mad Cowboy: A Lecture by Howard Lyman

With a catered vegan reception
Free and open to all!

Sunday, April 13, 7:30 PM

Room 127, Yale Law School, 127 Wall Street

Howard Lyman, aka "The Mad Cowboy," gained international recognition as Oprah Winfrey's co-defendant in the infamous "meat disparagement" trial (www.madcowboy.com/). He is a former fourth-generation rancher and farmer who walked away from it all to advocate "not only for our health but for our nation's sanity as well." Howard is the past president of both the International Vegetarian Union and EarthSave, as well as the author of Mad Cowboy: Plain Truth from the Cattle Rancher Who Won't Eat Meat. Howard will relate the powerful personal story of his transformation from unhealthy carnivore into one of the world's top vegetarian advocates.

Sponsored by Animal Legal Defense at Yale Law School and Catch a Healthy Habit Cafe (West Haven)

Sat 4/5/08: Protest Yale presentation for kids about the "fun" of vivisection!

2008-04-02T16:12:00.003-04:00

ON ACCOUNT OF THE OUTPOURING OF DISMAY FROM ACTIVISTS, THE 4/5 LECTURE BY VIVISECTOR MARINA PICCIOTTO HAS BEEN CANCELED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

Email Science Saturdays and thank them for choosing compassion over cruelty:

Patricia Wooding, Coordinator of Science Saturdays
patricia.wooding@yale.edu
203.436.8105 (office)

Contacts:

Why we protested against Marina Picciotto's experiments on animals:

This Saturday, Yale University’s Science Saturdays series will be hosting a presentation by a Yale mouse vivisector, Marina Picciotto, who will teach children about her experiments in which she forcefully exposes mice and rats to nicotine and other drugs and then kills them by decapitating them in order to study the effects of the drug on their brains (you can read the announcement here). Some of her studies involve hanging mice by their tails from paper clips to observe the effects of nicotine exposure on their physical activity, and others entail exposing pregnant female rats to cocaine to induce brain damage in their pups and then placing the pups in cages where their feet are repeatedly shocked. All of the animals are killed by decapitation in these studies as well.The press release that was issued in conjunction with the event states that goal of these lectures is “to remind ‘kids of all ages’ that ‘science is fun’ and the photo accompanying the announcement depicts Picciotto playfully holding a mouse in her hand. However, this depiction is a false representation of the reality of animal experimentation and there is nothing fun about “science” that involves the confinement, mutilation and killing of thinking, feeling animals. Yale should be promoting ethical, progressive science, not cruelty to animals under the guise of “fun.” Modern, human-based research using non-invasive brain imaging with fully-consenting humans is ethical, incredibly fascinating to learn about and has been invaluable in our understanding of how the human brain reacts to substance abuse.

Research has shown that many students in all phases of their educational careers are uncomfortable with the use of animals in scientific research and that these effects can be long-lasting. Exposing young people to animal experimentation as “science” can foster a callousness toward animals and nature and even dissuade some students, especially females, from pursuing careers in science (even in fields that do not entail the use of animals).

On top of all of this, it is only insult to injury that Picciotto’s studies force animals to carry the burden of humans’ poor lifestyle choices. Animals are not disposable tools that we have the right to exploit to fulfill the whims of any scientist, or for anyone else’s benefit or curiosities. Mice and rats have rich lives all their own, and these lives should be respected, not violated because they are different. The animals suffer greatly, both psychologically and physically, as a result of being used for experimentation.

NIH orders UConn to return $65K in grant funds

2008-02-04T09:34:00.001-05:00

UConn Told To Return Funds

Violations Of Animal Welfare Rules Prompt Order Against Health Center

By GRACE E. MERRITT |Courant Staff Writer
January 25, 2008

The National Institutes of Health has ordered the University of Connecticut Health Center to return some of the grant money given for brain experiments on monkeys, because of violations of animal welfare regulations.

The federal agency asked UConn this week to return $65,005 of the grant because of violations in the primate lab, where researchers drilled holes into monkeys' skulls and implanted steel coils into their brains to record eye movements for a neuroscience experiment.

Read entire article here.

Read another story from the UConn Daily Campus here.

Editor's note: These kinds of administrative actions should not be viewed as ends within themselves (since the law merely regulates the systematic exploitation of animals in labs), but means by which to hold animal abusers in laboratories legally accountable (since they are unconcerned with the moral implications of their violent work) and keep the discussion of animal rights in the open. JG

Barack Obama on animal rights

2008-02-04T09:09:00.001-05:00

This first quote from Obama is reposted from Primate Freedom blog:

"It has not always been the pragmatist, the voice of reason, or the force of compromise, that has created the conditions for liberty," he writes about the antislavery movement of the 19th century. "Knowing this, I can't summarily dismiss those possessed of similar certainty today--the antiabortion activist ... the animal rights activist who raids a laboratory--no matter how deeply I disagree with their views. I am robbed even of the certainty of uncertainty--for sometimes absolute truths may well be absolute."

Quoted from The Audacity of Hope, in "The Fresh Face," Time, Oct. 15, 2006.

And here is an article from earlier this month:Obama pledges support for animal rights
Wed Jan 16, 1:26 PM ET Yahoo News

Democrat Barack Obama says he won't just be a president for the American people, but the animals too.

"What about animal rights?" a woman shouted out during the candidate's town hall meeting outside Las Vegas Wednesday after he discussed issues that relate more to humans, like war, health care and the economy.

Obama responded that he cares about animal rights very much, "not only because I have a 9-year-old and 6-year-old who want a dog." He said he sponsored a bill to prevent horse slaughter in the Illinois state Senate and has been repeatedly endorsed by the Humane Society.

"I think how we treat our animals reflects how we treat each other," he said. "And it's very important that we have a president who is mindful of the cruelty that is perpetrated on animals."

3/30- Speaking event at UConn-Storrs- "For the Prevention of Cruelty"

2008-02-04T09:02:00.000-05:00

Speaking event at UConn-Storrs

"For the Prevention of Cruelty"
Dr. Diane Beers, Professor of History, Holyoke Community College
Sunday, March 30, 3 p.m.
Biology/Physics Building, Room 130
University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT
No registration needed - Free
Animal rights. Those two words conjure powerful images and reactions: some nod in agreement, while others roll their eyes in contempt. Many people fall uncomfortably in the middle, between endorsement and rejection, as they struggle with the moral, philosophical, and legal questions provoked by the debate. Today, thousands of organizations lobby, agitate, and educate the public on issues concerning the rights and treatment of nonhumans.

Dr. Beers present the history of organized animal advocacy in the United States and demonstrates how the cause has evolved within the broader social context as the country shifted from an industrial to a postindustrial society. Until now, the legacy of the movement in the United Satates has not been examined. Few Americans today perceive either the companionship or the consumption of animals in the same manner as did earlier generations. Moreover, powerful and lingering bonds connect the seemingly disparate American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals of the nineteenth century and the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals of today. Beers' lecture and 2006 book, For the Prevention of Cruelty, tell an intriguing and important story that reveals society's often-changing relationship with animals through the lens of those who struggled to shepherd the public toward a greater compassion. There will be a book-signing afterward.

Earthlings...

2008-01-04T10:23:00.000-05:00

For those of you who haven't seen it yet...
Watch Earthlings here.

Dennis Kucinich animal rights webcast

2007-11-29T12:38:00.000-05:00

Today's roundtable discussion with activists Dr. Elliot Katz, Alex Hershaft, Chris Derose, and Alex Pacheco was the first in a series hosted by Dennis Kucinich called "Dialogue for Democracy. Dennis dicusses veganism, the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act and more. "You can link directly to the webcast via this link.

Boehringer fined $20,060 for animal cruelty

2007-11-15T11:52:00.001-05:00

Boehringer fined $20,060 for animal cruelty
Pharmaceutical company acknowledges 'unacceptable' treatment of lab monkeys
By Susan Tuz
11/15/2007

RIDGEFIELD -- Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc. acknowledged Wednesday that animal handling practices in its laboratory were "unacceptable" in several incidents that brought a $20,060 fine from the U.S. Department of Agriculture last year.

The incidents occurred in 2004 and included the death of a rhesus monkey that was mistakenly steam-washed and severe burns to the pads of another monkey that led to the amputation of several of the animal's digits.

Boehringer issued a statement Wednesday attributed to the company as a whole.

"In 2004, a USDA Inspection Report helped highlight areas where our animal handling practices were simply inadequate and the effects on animals were absolutely unacceptable," the statement reads. "We have done a great deal over the past several years to remedy the situation, including implementing a series of guidelines and safeguards, adding numerous improvements and upgrades to our facility, and increased staffing in an effort to prevent these incidents from occurring in the future."

"We feel confident that these measures will ensure that the issues raised in the 2004 report will not be repeated," the statement added.

When dealing with issues of animal injuries that involve animal rights organizations, the company does not name specific individuals in any way related to the incident, a spokesman said.

Documents received this month from the USDA after a Freedom of Information request from The News-Times in November 2006 also reveal that a dog in the Boehringer laboratory exhibited "unrelieved distress" following experiments on it in excess of USDA allowances.

"The combination of recurrent episodes of elevated body temperature with inappetance (a condition caused by an animal not getting enough nutrition) in Dog No. 1654 would be considered to be distressful to the animal," the May 4, 2005, report reads. The problem was corrected by July 1, 2005, the report added.

On April 5, 2004, a beagle was found dead in its
Documents Click to enlarge Click here to see the original News-Times letter requesting the records

Click to enlarge Click here to read the USDA's response

Click to enlarge Click here to read the USDA's full report on Boehringer Ingelheim (6.4 MB)
cage, the USDA report also said.

"The front half of the dog's body had passed through the vertical bars of the enclosure door and the animal was wedged between the bars," the report reads. "Modification to caging was made within one day after the dog was found dead."

The report goes on to cite a rhesus monkey found dead June 1, 2004, after its cage had been steam-washed at the laboratory. Three employees moving monkeys from cages to be cleaned and then running the cages through the steam cleaner did not seen the small monkey in the cage, Boehringer's inspection into the incident revealed.

On Sept. 14, 2004, a cynomolgus monkey was used in an experiment. Two days later it was noticed that skin had sloughed off its hand pads, and several digits had to be amputated.

It was determined that "thermal injury because of inappropriate use of supplemental heat sources during recovery from anesthesia" caused the injury, the USDA report reads.

"The animal was later identified as having an abnormal physical condition, but personnel failed to promptly notify the attending veterinarian," the USDA report said.

Boehringer's report on the incident said the employees involved were sanctioned, and action was taken from the time of the report to ensure similar incidents did not happen in the future.

On Oct. 30, 2004, a rhesus monkey was found dead in its cage following a toxicology study preparation five days earlier. It was determined the animal died from "self-inflicted trauma" resulting from the way it was handled, the Boehringer and USDA reports read.

Numerous minor violations in the storage of animal food and distress in primates were cited in the USDA report.

USDA spokesman Karen Eggert said Wednesday that a fine of $20,060 reflects "a number of violations. We fine up to $2,500 per violation."

USDA and Boehringer records reflect that the pharmaceutical company contacted the USDA itself when "noncompliance" with the Animal Welfare Act was found at the company.

"We have a lot of facilities that self-report when finding an employee was noncompliant, and that is the right thing to do," Eggert said. "We work with companies to ensure that they're comfortable reporting to us."

Eggert said the USDA responds to "a few hundred" animal abuse reports yearly. Not all of the reports end up being actual violations, but "we take all complaints of noncompliance seriously and ensure no harm or danger to animals is involved," she said.

Michael Budkie, executive director of SAEN (Stop Animal Exploitation Now), based in Cincinnati, reported the violations and the fine brought against Boehringer to the press.

"It's very important for the public to know about situations like this," he said Wednesday. "You have to wonder if they can't follow basic animal safety measures and you see them engaging in sloppy science ... what that means for the effect their practices could have on people who use their products."

Budkie also noted "when a primate is killed in a cage because employees can't check to make sure of the presence of the animal before putting the cage into the washing system, that's just plain carelessness."

He thinks the $20,060 fine Boehringer paid was inadequate, while noting that it is high for a USDA fine in such instances.

"If you had a speeding ticket and the fine was $3, would you care?" he asked, noting that with Boehringer's financial standing that is what the $20,060 fine amounted to.

Boehringer's statement Wednesday, along with acknowledging the "unacceptable" effects on animals, said "as required under current drug development laws and regulations, animal studies must be carried out as part of the drug development process."

"At Boehringer Ingelheim, we are committed to advancing the health of patients in the United States and around the world through innovation and scientific discovery," the statement added.

"The company takes all issues pertaining to animal research very seriously, and we are committed to the highest standards for the humane care and treatment of animals used throughout our laboratories."

Hartford Courant Op-Ed: 7 y.o. CT AR activist speaks up for animals.

2007-11-12T13:06:00.001-05:00

Is An Animal A Thing? Or A Being?

By JAMPA WILLIAMS |and NOAH S.B. WILLIAMS

Hartford Courant Op-Ed
November 11, 2007

Recently, my son Noah ran afoul of his school's curriculum when he refused to classify an animal as a "thing" during a grammar lesson.

Thing, as in "person, place or thing," a time-worn method of identifying whether something is a noun. Noah, being 7 and an animal lover, would not back down and "correct" his classification of animals, which he felt should be regarded as "beings," and he was less than fully cordial when his teacher gently insisted he change his response. Noah felt that, rather than "persons, places and things," the classification system should be "Beings, Places and Things."As Noah's mother, it is my responsibility to instill in Noah the proper habit of cordiality and respect when disagreeing with others. I encouraged him to show greater respect for his teacher in the style of his response, but I also told him I was proud of him for speaking up on behalf of beings who cannot speak up on behalf of themselves.

Language is powerful. I am raising Noah with an abolitionist ethic. He is conscious of the vulnerability experienced by any being on this earth who is regarded as a thing, as an "it," rather than as a sacred companion in our midst.

To be regarded as a thing is to be regarded as an object lacking liberty, protection or rights. A being regarded as a "thing" or an "it" lives or dies, thrives or suffers, according to the consent or even whims of those who hold power over him or her. Often, human beings have bestowed and continue to bestow upon other human beings the classification of "it," and the results are, and always have been, horrific and unconscionable. Treating any sentient being as a "thing" or an "it" produces results no less horrific, no less cruel.

Noah wrote this essay when I encouraged him to find a positive way to express his beliefs. He wrote from the very heart of his heart, where his love for all beings warms his very existence.

As one of Noah's heroes, environmental activist Sarah Uhl wrote, after she read Noah's essay: "How far removed from the earth and our roots we have come if we cannot recognize that humans are animals and animals are beings!"

Here is Noah's essay.

Why Animals Should Not Be Called Things

By Noah S.B. Williams

Animals should not be called things because they are beings, not things.

Shame on the people who call animals things.

If I could I would give the person who first called animals things a talking-to. I would not call animals things.

Think about this. If you loved someone, would you call them a thing? I wish no one had ever called animals things.

Why would you call your pet a thing?

A rug or something is a thing, but not an animal. He or she is not a thing! This is not funny, it's all true. I would not lie to you about this. It's not a joke.

Do not lie to me, either.

Jampa Williams is a poet, writer and activist in West Hartford. Noah S.B. Williams is a second-grader and political activist in West Hartford.

FREE showing of Peaceable Kingdom (A Tribe of Heart Documentary)

2007-11-08T12:26:00.000-05:00

Come to a free showing of the documentary Peaceable Kingdom, Tuesday 11/13 at 6:10 pm in Room 129 of the Yale Law School!

The Yale Animal Rights Network, Yale Animal Legal Defense, and Yale Vegans are co-sponsoring a showing of the Tribe of Heart documentary Peaceable Kingdom on Tuesday, Nov. 13 at 6:10 pm in Room 129 at the Yale Law School (127 Wall Street). Snacks will be provided.

Peaceable Kingdom is a touching story of former animal farmers turned animal activists."Breaking generations of silence in the agricultural community, the film exposes the disparity between the storybook image of farming taught to us as children and the stark reality of today’s industrialized factory farms. Peaceable Kingdom explores the human-animal connection through the inspiring stories of former farmers and animal rescuers who find healing and hope when they open their hearts to abused animals saved from factory farms. Much more than an exposé, Peaceable Kingdom offers an uplifting message of compassion and respect for all living beings." (From the Speak Out for Species website)

For more information on this event or the Yale Animal Rights Network, contact Chelsea.

Herbivore Interview w/Justin Goodman

2007-11-06T19:51:00.000-05:00

Connecticut activist Justin Goodman is interviewed in this month's issue of Herbivore Magazine about grassroots animal rights activism and the problems with animal testing. There are also interviews with Skinny Bitch author Rory Freedman and journalist Will Potter. If you enjoy it, subscribe!

Animals Don’t Belong In Circuses

2007-10-20T15:04:00.000-04:00

A life spent in confinement and isolation. . .:

The natural needs of wild animals cannot be met in traveling shows. Animals enslaved in circuses lead miserable lives confined to cages, transport, and chains. Family bonds are torn apart. Animals are tortured into performing tricks; tricks that inflict further pain and suffering. Consider the elephants now touring with Ringling’s Blue Unit:

Unnatural unhealthy lives:
Ringling boasts that its trains crisscross the country 11 months of the year, logging more than 25,000 miles. The elephants are forced to travel in extreme temperatures in cramped cars, eating and sleeping in their own excrement, for most of their lives. When not in transit, they are chained in tiny pens. They are trained through the violent use of bullhooks and electric shock, and perform only out of fear that they will be subjected to yet more pain.

In the wild elephants roam for miles every day, foraging, swimming, and playing with their families. Ringling’s elephants never get to engage in any of these natural behaviors. The only “exercise” they get is performing tricks that are not only unnatural, they are often harmful to their bodies. Ringling’s claim that the tricks you see are based on natural elephant behaviors is simply false. Wild elephants do not stand on their heads or on two legs, and they do not walk
trunk to tail.

The results of these conditions are dire. Many of the Ringling elephants show signs of neurotic behavior, such as swaying and head-bobbing, from boredom and severe stress. They are also prone to foot and bone disease, a leading cause of premature death in captive elephants, the result of standing too long on hard surfaces in their own waste. And a number of Ringling’s elephants have been diagnosed with or exposed to a human strain of tuberculosis, Mycobacterium tuberculosis (TB). Several elephants, including some from the Blue Unit, were pulled off the road because of exposure to TB. TB is known to thrive in the cramped, close quarters that these elephants are forced to endure day in and day out.

Families torn apart:

In the wild, elephants spend their lives together in herds of related females – the female babies stay with their mothers and aunts for life, caring for one another. The male babies do not leave the herd until they are nearly adults – into their teens. The entire herd helps to love and nurture the babies.

Of the seven elephants known to be touring with the Blue Unit, 3 were stolen from their mothers in Asia as infants,, and brought here to perform in the circus. The other 4 were bred by Ringling or other facilities for circus performance, and were torn from their mothers while still nursing to be trained for performance.

Four of Ringling’s baby elephants have died since 1998.
Sara, the baby elephant performing today, has been on the road with no mother to protect her since she was two years old. She is now six.

Ringling claims to be “conserving” an endangered species, but none of Ringling’s elephants has any hope of ever being returned to the wild Ringling’s captive breeding program is all about replenishing its supply of tormented performers who will die prematurely as the result of their treatment at Ringling’s hands. It is not at all about helping elephants in their natural habitats.

What you can do:

Please make this your last circus that uses animals for entertainment. Tell your friends and family. Remember, these animals suffer only because people continue to make their exploitation profitable.

GET ACTIVE!!!

Come on out to the circus demonstrations.
Feel free to contact Justin or Derek, authors at Connecticut for Animals. Tell us what you care about and what you want to see happen. We are all far more powerful and far more effective when we work together.

Vist these sites for more information about elephants, the circus, and what you can do:

Elephant Voices - An amazing place to learn about elephants in the wild - their magnificence and the dangers they face.

The Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee - Go back to the top of this post and take a look of the picture of the elephant being loaded into the tiny boxcars. Imagine what that life is like and then visit this site to see the best that we can do for these animals that can't be returned to the wild. We can only imagine how much happier these elephants are.

"The Elephant in the Room" by Leslie Griffith - Nice old fashioned reporting uncovering some of the darker dealings of Kenneth Feld and his company, Feld Entertainment (aka Ringling Brothers.

"Star Treatment" a Telegraph Magazine article discussing some of the excellent work of Pat Derby, former "Flipper" trainer who nows runs a sanctuary and does tremendous work regarding animals exploited by the entertainment industry. She founded the organization PAWS (Performing Animal Welfare Society).

This is perhaps one of the most sad and tragic things I have ever seen and a powerful reminder of what exploitation means.

Maple Farm Sanctuary volunteer trip recap- 9/29/07

2007-10-02T20:52:00.001-04:00

Activists from all ends of Connecticut visited the Maple Farm Sanctuary in Mendon, MA this past weekend to work on a series of projects including putting up new fencing, building a new stall for Max the cow and some much needed weeding. MFS's 2nd Annual Fundraiser takes place on October 21st and visitors will be able to meet all 80 of the residents of the farm, including the wonderful individuals in the photos below. Your can view the web flyer for the fundraiser here. If you would like to volunteer at MFS, please get in touch with us via email (justin_goodman@sbcglobal.net).

Photos by Derek Oatis.

UConn vivisector violates conflict of interest policy

2007-09-18T09:27:00.000-04:00

Cloning And Conflict At UConn
Audit Finds Yang's Private Firm, Campus Lab Shared Address
By GRACE E. MERRITT | Courant Staff Writer

September 14, 2007

STORRS - Internationally known cloning expert Xiangzhong "Jerry" Yang violated conflict of interest policies when he didn't disclose that he was running a private company at the same address as his University of Connecticut laboratory, a university audit has found. Running both operations out of the university blurred the line between the two, compromised open bidding standards and raised questions about whether he complied with conditions of federal research awards, the audit found.

The audit found that Yang failed to keep the activities carried out by faculty members working in his lab separate from those of researchers working in Evergen, a private company he founded on campus.

Yang, a UConn professor famous for being the first to clone a calf in the United States using adult cells , runs the university's Center for Regenerative Biology.

UConn officials say the problems are being addressed. There are no investigations underway and no disciplinary action has been taken against Yang, they say.

The audit found that Yang should have filed forms to disclose that he and his wife, Cindy Tian, who is also a faculty member, have "significant financial interest" in the company and that he had significant management control over the company.

The audit found that Yang didn't disclose that he used research grants given to the center to purchase supplies from Evergen and to pay two Evergen employees on a project basis. Evergen is part of UConn's technology incubation program, which aims to accelerate the successful establishment and development of entrepreneurial companies by providing laboratory/office space and an array of support resources and services which are available through the various departments and functions at the university.

The audit also found that Yang initially sought to have an exclusive contract to sell cow embryos from his own company to the university. The university purchasing officials denied that request, saying it was an ethics violation. Subsequently, Yang submitted the lowest bid to UConn and was awarded the purchase contract. In all, UConn bought $45,670 worth of embryos from Evergen between August 2003 and January 2007.

Although Evergen was the lowest bidder for the embryos, the auditors questioned whether the bid process was truly open and public. The audit concluded that the company "should not enter any contracts with the university unless it is awarded through an open and public process." Auditors also concluded that a faculty member should not make any official decisions on behalf of the university that will have a financial impact on a company in which he or she has a financial interest.

"The auditors wanted to ensure adequate separation between Evergen and the university," UConn spokeswoman Karen Grava said. "They wanted to make sure someone independent selects where to purchase the products."

In response, UConn put Ian Hart, an associate dean, in charge of administrative oversight of the center in April. Unlike Yang, Hart has no financial ties to Evergen.

Yang, who is ill from his seven-year battle with cancer, had been chairman of the board of Evergen until recently. He has stopped managing the company and has handed the reins over to Jack Xiu. The company is looking for a CEO, Hart said. Yang is too ill to comment, Hart said.

Because grants were used, the audit also questions whether Yang is complying with the terms and conditions of active federally funded research awards.

Auditors traced 12 shipments of bovine embryos charged to a federal grant delivered between April 2005 and October 2006 from Evergen's Pennsylvania facility to personnel at Evergen in Storrs rather than to a faculty lab. There is no evidence to support the assertion that the embryos were received by UConn researchers or graduate students and used on UConn research projects, the audit states.

"At a minimum, it creates the appearance that a business with which the faculty member is associated is receiving a financial benefit by virtue of his position," auditors wrote, of Yang.

Grava said Yang is working to rectify the problems.

"As a result of the audit, issues have been identified and he has agreed to straighten them out," Grava said. "In some cases, he misunderstood what forms needed to be filed and he's doing that now."

The audit also took Yang to task for accepting honorariums and travel expense reimbursements for trips he makes to speak or give advice on his area of expertise. The audit pointed out that the state code of ethics prohibits him from accepting honorariums while participating in events as a representative of the university.

Contact Grace E. Merritt at gmerritt@courant.com.

http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-ctyang0914.artsep14,0,2920463.story

ACTION ALERT! Come Protest the Guilford Fair Saturday, Sept. 22

2007-09-17T16:58:00.000-04:00

PLEASE JOIN THE PROTEST OF THE GUILFORD FAIR!!! Local Activists will protest, leaflet, and more to urge Connecticut citizens NOT to support the exploitation of animals for their amusement. The 'star' of the show and the focus of our protest will be Dondi, a 34 year old Asian elephant who has spent her entire life deprived of the companionship of other elephants, abused, and exploited for the entertainment of circus-goers.

Please plan to meet on SATURDAY MORNING, Sept. 22, at the intersection of Stonehouse Lane and Lover's Lane in Guilford no later than 11:30. Directions to the Guilford Fair

The Guilford Fair has traditionally been a celebration of the exploitation of animals used as food. The Fair has also been the site of horse and oxen pulls, exotic animal displays and "petting zoos". This year the Guilford Fair includes all of these events as well as Dondi.

Dondi is a 34 year old Asian elephant who has spent her entire life deprived of the companionship of other elephants, abused, and exploited for the entertainment of circus-goers. She was born in a logging camp in Thailand and taken from her mother when she was about 9 months old, despite the fact that, in the wild, she would have stayed in her mother’s company, in a herd with other closely related elephants, for life. She was brought to this country in 1974 and has lived with Phil and Francine Schacht since then, performing with them and their son Joshua in a seemingly endless list of circuses all over the country. They travel tens of thousands of miles each year. Dondi lives either chained inside a small metal trailer or chained or in a small enclosure outside the performance venues, at times with no shade or shelter. She is sometimes used to give rides, too.

The Schachts repeatedly refer to Dondi as part of their family. (In an interview, Ms. Schacht said, “We love Dondi like our own baby, but we realize God put animals on this earth to serve people." ) They claim that she would not be happy without their company. Elephants are known to be extremely social animals; Dondi has rarely, if ever, been permitted the company of others of her kind.

Elephant advocates that have seen Dondi in various locations over the past several years have expressed growing concern for her mental and physical health. She is frequently reported to have bullhook wounds. Her behavior is not that of a healthy elephant – she constantly sways, cries out, and hits at objects near her: stereotypic behaviors that usually indicate severe stress or boredom.
Many have expressed concern that she is near a breaking point.

Dondi will be appearing with the Schachts at the Guilford Fair this weekend, September 21, 22, and 23 – she will be performing and giving rides. The Fair will also feature numerous other exploited animals: there will be pig races,
ox pulls, and animals who have been raised to be food.
Elephant Appreciation Day is held annually on September 22 to honor one of the world’s most beloved animals. This year, please appreciate Dondi by asking the Schachts to stop exploiting and abusing her, and by asking the Guilford Fair management to stop endorsing this exploitation. Appreciate Dondi the elephant by allowing her finally to be an elephant, to roam in the company of other elephants, as she was meant to do.

Please email
Justin
Derek for More info:

The Guilford Fair is being held this weekend:
Friday, September 21st, 2007:
1:00 p.m. - 11:00 p.m.
Saturday, September 22nd, 2007:
9:00 a.m. - 11:00 p.m.
Sunday, September 23rd, 2007:
9:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.
Event Times and Directions to the Guilford Fair

CT hunting season begins on 9/15

2007-09-11T10:31:00.000-04:00

Keeping in the spirit of yesterday's post regarding the decline of hunting in the U.S., I wanted to alert everyone that bowhunting season here in Connecticut begins this weekend (9/15). The 1% of Connecticut residents who do still hunt are going to inflict a lot of suffering and violence in the coming months. Visit the CT Department of Environmental Protection's (ha!) website to view hunting area maps, training course schedules and more. Also, please be sure to familiarize yourself with the State law that has been enacted to protect the woods-dwelling human animals who tote guns and crossbows.

Hunting's Decline

2007-09-10T17:22:00.000-04:00

It's a beginning, but it's still a long road left. I do have to say, the statistics are in our favor, and I am particularly proud to have the Pacific States, and New England as the lowest percentage. 1% in Connecticut. 1% in the Pacific States. This is nothing but a good thing.

AP) -- Hunters remain a powerful force in American society, as evidenced by the presidential candidates who routinely pay them homage, but their ranks are shrinking dramatically and wildlife agencies worry increasingly about the loss of sorely needed license-fee revenue.

Observers say increasingly urban and suburban culture is contributing to the decline in hunters and fishers.

New figures from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service show that the number of hunters 16 and older declined by 10 percent between 1996 and 2006 -- from 14 million to about 12.5 million. The drop was most acute in New England, the Rocky Mountains, and the Pacific states, which lost 400,000 hunters in that span.

The primary reasons, experts say, are the loss of hunting land to urbanization plus a perception by many families that they can't afford the time or costs that hunting entails.

"To recruit new hunters, it takes hunting families," said Gregg Patterson of Ducks Unlimited. "I was introduced to it by my father, he was introduced to it by his father. When you have boys and girls without a hunter in the household, it's tough to give them the experience."

Some animal-welfare activists welcome the trend, noting that it coincides with a 13 percent increase in wildlife watching since 1996. But hunters and state wildlife agencies, as they prepare for the fall hunting season, say the drop is worrisome.

"It's hunters who are the most willing to give their own dollar for wildlife conservation," Patterson said.

Compounding the problem, the number of Americans who fish also has dropped sharply -- down 15 percent, from 35.2 million in 1996 to 30 million in 2006, according to the latest version of a national survey that the Fish and Wildlife Service conducts every five years.

Of the 50 state wildlife agencies, most rely on hunting and fishing license fees for the bulk of their revenue, and only a handful receive significant infusions from their state's general fund.

"They're trying to take care of all wildlife and all habitats on a shoestring budget," said Rachel Brittin of the Washington-based Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.

In New Hampshire, only multiple fee increases -- which produced numerous complaints -- have enabled the Fish and Game Department to keep revenues robust. Its ranks of registered hunters has dropped from 83,292 in 1996 to 61,076 last year, according to department spokeswoman Judy Stokes.

"We hear concerns about land access," Stokes said. "People grew up hunting -- you went out with your family, your uncle. And now you go back, and there's a shopping plaza or a housing development. Some of your favorite places just aren't available anymore."

National hunting expert Mark Damian Duda, executive director of Virginia-based research firm Responsive Management, says America's increasingly urban and suburban culture makes it less friendly toward the pastime.

"You don't just get up and go hunting one day -- your father or father-type figure has to have hunted," Duda said. "In a rural environment, where your friends and family hunt, you feel comfortable with guns, you feel comfortable with killing an animal."

Indeed, hunting remains vibrant in many rural states -- 19 percent of residents 16 and older hunted last year in Montana and 17 percent in North Dakota, compared with 1 percent in California, Connecticut, Massachusetts and New Jersey. Nationally, 5 percent of the 16-and-over population hunted in 2006, down from 7 percent in 1996.

As their ranks dwindle, hunters are far from unified. The often big-spending, wide-traveling trophy hunters of Safari Club International, for example, have different priorities from duck hunters frequenting close-to-home wetlands.

One rift involves hunters disenchanted with the National Rifle Association, which runs major hunting programs and lobbies vigorously against gun control. A Maryland hunter, Ray Schoenke, has formed a new group, the American Hunters and Shooters Association, primarily as a home for hunters who would support some restrictions on gun and ammunition sales.

"The NRA's extreme positions have hurt the hunting movement," Schoenke said. "Soccer moms now believe hunters have made things more dangerous."

Political support for hunting remains strong, though, with several states recently enshrining the right to hunt and fish in their constitutions.

Last month, President Bush ordered all federal agencies that manage public lands to look for more room for hunting. In the 2004 presidential campaign, both Bush and Democratic rival John Kerry courted hunters' and gun owners' votes. A camouflage-jacketed Kerry even toted a shotgun during a goose hunt.

Among the 2008 candidates, Democrat Bill Richardson aired a TV ad showing him hunting, while Republican Mitt Romney was derided for calling himself a lifelong hunter even though he never had state hunting licenses.

Public support for hunting also is high, in part because huge deer populations have become a nuisance in many areas. Duda's surveys indicate less than 25 percent of Americans oppose hunting, although groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals denounce it as cruel.

Most major animal-welfare and conservation groups don't campaign to end hunting, but some lobby against specific practices such as bear hunting or "canned" hunts in which game is confined in fenced areas and shot by hunters who pay large sums for the opportunity.

"As a matter of principle, we should not condone the killing of any animal in the interest of sport," said Andrew Page of the Humane Society of the United States. "But as a matter of pragmatism, we target those practices that even hunters would agree are egregious."

The Humane Society welcomed the new federal data showing a surging number of birdwatchers, wildlife photographers and other wildlife watchers. They increased from 62.8 million in 1996 to 71.1 million in 2006, spending $45 billion on their activities compared to $75 billion spent by hunters and anglers.

"The American attitude regarding wildlife is changing," Page said. "I suspect the day will come when a presidential candidate goes to a local humane society to adopt a homeless animal, rather than go the field and pose as hunter with a gun."

However, hunting groups and state wildlife agencies are striving to reverse the decline by recruiting new hunters. Vermont's Game and Wildlife Department, for example, sponsors thrice-annual youth hunting weekends, offers low-cost youth licenses and teaches firearms safety and outdoor skills each summer at youth conservation camps.

Another initiative is Families Afield, sponsored by three national hunting groups; it aims to ease state restrictions on youth hunting. At least 12 states have obliged, enabling thousands of youths to sample hunting before taking required hunter education courses.

Other programs seek to attract more women, though few promote racial diversity. More than 90 percent of U.S. hunters are male; roughly 96 percent are white.

Rob Sexton, a vice president of the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance, said one upside of the shrinking numbers is that hunting groups are more motivated to seek remedies, such as access to more land and less burdensome regulations.

"There are still a lot of us," he said. "Hunting is a great passion for our people."

On non-violent direct action.

2007-09-09T01:09:00.000-04:00

Professor Gary Francione recently posted a piece on his blog titled, "A Comment on Violence" outlining his various criticisms of the use of "violence" in the AR movement. Rick Bogle of the Primate Freedom project wrote a very thoughtful response. However, neither addressed the fact that the very definition of "violence" within, and external to, the animal rights community is currently up for debate, an issue that is fundamental to any discussion on the topic since many would suggest, as I do, that the American AR movement has been entirely non-violent until this point. As we all know, the ALF and its sympathizers define violence as physical violence against animals (human and non-). This definition is not at odds with those offered by scholars of non-violent social movements and I am going to draw on the work of one political scientist specifically to illustrate this point. Gene Sharp, researcher and founder of the Albert Einstein Institution, a non-profit organization which studies and promotes the use of nonviolent action, also contends that “violence is…physical violence against persons to inflict injury or death…not as a term of moral or political opinion” (Sharp 2003:1).

"Violence," and "terrorism" for that matter, are all too commonly used as politically-charged terms to describe forms of activism that people think is untoward. Sharp goes on to accurately note that “some people regard nonviolent [action] anything they regard as good, and “violent” anything they dislike." I think that he hits the nail on the head. Defining violence using these more objective criteria, we find that no activities undertaken by American animal rights activists (and very few carried out by AR activists worldwide), would fall under the "violence" heading.

The activities of almost all AR activists should be classified as “non-violent resistance and direct action” (1959:44-45), a term which refers to protest tactics that do not entail physical violence, but in which members of the nonviolent group commit either acts of omission (refraining from participating in culturally expected activities or rituals, e.g., veganism) or acts of commission (participation in acts not expected by custom and that are forbidden by law, e.g., physical obstructions, forms of property destruction that do not risk injury (window smashing, gluing locks, graffiti)(Sharp 1959:44).

An overwhelming majority of the tactics employed by activists are actually included in Sharp’s list of 198 Methods of Nonviolent Action (1973). Those that aren't, rather than being classified as violence, can be defined as "sabotage" which refers to "acts of demolition and related destruction directed against machinery, transport, buildings…and the like. Because these are acts against property, there are not included in the definition of violence” (Sharp 1973:608). David Barbarash's philosophy on direct action is consistent with such a definition as he has stated that, “[W]hen certain buildings, tools and other property are being used to commit violence, the ALF believes that the destruction of property is justified.”

Many advocates and activists eschew the use of these confrontational, non-institutionalized, albeit nonviolent, tactics to promote the objectives of the AR movement and have often made the claim that these activities are alienating and counterproductive.

However, it is important to note that, historically, the looming presence of militant factions of activists within a movement has served to benefit the movement at large by generating visibility for movement concerns, swaying public opinion and by making the once extreme demands of the moderates appear more reasonable and thereby improving their bargaining position.

Researchers have suggested that this phenomenon, aptly termed the "positive radical flank effect," has operated in such a way within the struggles for women’s and civil rights, and, most recently, within the modern AR and environmental movements.

AR/AW activists who denounce groups like the ALF are then, in some ways, biting the hand that feeds them.

(The intention of this elucidation is not to completely sidestep the fact that the use of certain forms of sabotage can potentially cause unintentional harm to human and non-human animals, nor to trivialize the repercussions that an event like that could potentially have for the progress the AR movement has made in general. It is simply to clarify the terms that are commonly used to describe certain forms of activism and explain the virtues of nonviolent direct action in the broader context of social justice movements.)