Reposted from Earthjustice Blog:

http://earthjustice.org/blog/2014-may/victory-d-con-to-be-killed-off

VICTORY: D-CON TO BE KILLED OFF

By Terry Winckler | Friday, May 30, 2014

d-CON products

d-CON—the rodent killer that also poisons children and slaughters cats, dogs and a host of wild creatures—will stop being made by year’s end under an agreement reached by the manufacturer and the Environmental Protection Agency.

This is a major victory for Earthjustice and the groups it represented in working with the EPA to end production and sales of the rodenticide, said Greg Loarie, the Earthjustice attorney who led the effort. The EPA sought a total ban on the poison after its maker, Reckitt Benckeiser, refused to take more modest safeguarding steps.

An anti-coagulant, d-CON and products like it kill mice and other rodents, which in turn are eaten by such predator species as hawks, owls and coyotes, and pets like cats and dogs. An estimated 60,000 children are poisoned by the products each year.

The manufacturer has known for years about d-CON’s unintended deaths and injuries, but refused to adopt even the smallest protections for children and wildlife, Loarie said.

“Under the deal, Reckitt would agree to stop production by Dec. 31, 2014, and stop distribution after March 2015.  Retailers could then continue to sell what they have until it’s gone,” Loarie said.

http://earthjustice.org/blog/2014-may/victory-d-con-to-be-killed-off

I don't know what causes the average burn out point for Animal Rights Activism saturation. 

But I do know that small breaks now and then are needed, from focusing on relentless Wolf Buddy deaths by poaching and hunting, or any other Buddy horror, in order to continue on the path of A.R. Activism. 

#WolvesDoNotQuit, but we are also not radical idiots. Don't get crazy, folks, it will set us back.

Here's to a little hope that there are plenty of decent humans on Earth, who do care for our Buddies. 

#SpayAndNueter 
#AdoptDontShop

THE BIGGEST THREAT TO U.S.WILDLIFE?

CATS

Reposted from ANIMALS

http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/01/31/the-biggest-threat-to-u-s-wildlife-cats/

Michael Duva / Getty Images
RELATED

By Kharunya Paramaguru @Kharunya

Jan. 31, 2013

Friendly Felines are Really Natural Born Killers, US Study Finds Reuters Alert Net
http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/friendly-felines-are-really-natural-born-killers-us-study-finds

Follow @TIMENewsfeed
Earlier this month a New Zealand economist named Gareth Morgan made plenty of enemies among cat lovers by insisting that mankind needed to ditch its feline friends before they decimate local bird and animal species.

According to a new study, published Jan. 29 by the journal Nature Communications, 
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v4/n1/full/ncomms2380.html
things may be even worse than Morgan thought.  Cats are apparently responsible for killing birds and mammals on a massive scale. Based on a systematic review and quantitative estimates never before conducted in the mainland U.S., researchers found that house cats were responsible for the deaths of between 1.4 and 3.7 billion birds and between 7 and 20 billion mammals each year.

The cute, purring bundles of fur have long been recognized for their killer instinct and excellent hunting ability, and have been blamed for the global extinction of up to 33 species, reports the BBC. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21236690

( VIDEO: Welcome to Your Cat’s Dream Home)
http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/01/25/video-welcome-to-your-cats-dream-home/

The new research, by scientists at the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute (SCBI) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, challenges previously held assumptions about the volume of animals killed by cats. “For the last 20, 30, 40 years the number that has been batted around as a max was about 500 million,” said Peter Marra, one of the senior authors behind the study, to National Geographic.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/29/130129-pets-cats-killers-birds-animals-science/

The authors discovered that the majority of kills could be attributed to ownerless cats, including barn cats, strays and feral colonies. The research showed that the animals largely prey on non-native mice and rats in densely populated urban areas, while in rural areas they target mice, shrews, voles, squirrels and even rabbits.

(MORE: Cat Travels 200 Miles to Return to Owners and Baffle Scientists)
http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/01/23/cat-travels-200-miles-to-return-to-owners-and-baffle-scientists/#ixzz2JTyxgcE8

Faced with the staggering numbers, the study’s authors have gone so far as to suggest that cats are “likely the single greatest source of anthropogenic mortality for U.S. birds and mammals.”

According to Reuters, domestic cats are classified among the 100 worst non-native invasive species in the world. The authors suggest that owners could do more to limit the impact of their pets: “A major reason for the current nonscientific approach to management of free-ranging cats is that the mortality from cat predation is often argued to be negligible compared with other (human-caused) threats.”

(MORE:  New Zealand Economist: Abolish Pet Cats to Save Birds )
http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/01/23/new-zealand-economist-abolish-pet-cats-to-save-birds/#ixzz2JTwQNgKy

But it will be difficult convincing American cat lovers of that. Cat ownership has risen from about 56 million in the mid-1990s to 80 million today. The American Cat Fanciers Association also questioned the findings. “Yes, they’re going to catch the occasional bird. But I don’t personally believe they’re responsible for mass death and destruction,” Carol Barbee, president of the association, said to Reuters.
http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/friendly-felines-are-really-natural-born-killers-us-study-finds

MORE: Killer Kitties: Study Proves They’re Not as Innocent As They Look
http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/08/09/killer-kitties-study-proves-theyre-not-as-innocent-as-they-look/#ixzz2JU0SKTDu


http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/01/31/the-biggest-threat-to-u-s-wildlife-cats/

#STOPANIMALCRUELTY 
#BANTRAPPING 
#STOPPOACHING 
#STOPTROPHYHUNTING
#CAPTIVITYKILLS 
PETITIONS :

http://noanimalsuffering.blogspot.com/

PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE, IT IS UP TO US TO BE THEIR VOICES. 
THANK YOU.

#STOPANIMALCRUELTY

http://noanimalsuffering.blogspot.com/p/stopanimalcruelty-petitions.html

#BANTRAPPING

http://noanimalsuffering.blogspot.com/p/bantrapping.html

#STOPPOACHING

http://noanimalsuffering.blogspot.com/p/stoppoaching-petitions.html

#STOPTROPHYHUNTING

http://noanimalsuffering.blogspot.com/p/stoptrophyhunting.html

#CAPTIVITYKILLS
http://noanimalsuffering.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html

Melissa Bachman ~ Official Website

http://www.melissabachman.com/

UPDATED : November 27. 2013 
4 Petitions to sign & share
 #STOPTROPHYHUNTING


REMOVE ALL OF MELISSA BACHMAN'S 
DISTURBING VIDEOS FROM YOUTUBE
http://www.yousign.org/en/melissa-bachman-youtube

TAKE MELISSA BACHMAN OFF THE AIR
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/387/581/929/stop-melissa-bachman/

END MELISSA BACHMAN'S TELEVISION CAREER. STOP THE KILLING OF INNOCENT ANIMALS!

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/777/390/520/end-melissa-bachmans-television-career-stop-the-killing-of-innocent-animals/#

HELP PROTECT AFRICAN LIONS FROM HUNTERS 

http://www.ifaw.org/united-states/get-involved/help-protect-african-lions-hunters

O

This petition is now closed, but I'm leaving the link up so that you can see what you all did.

 Petition closed: With 487, 628 supporters. Go folks, GO!

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: DENY FUTURE ENTRY TO MELISSA BACHMAN.

http://www.change.org/petitions/the-government-of-the-republic-of-south-africa-deny-future-entry-to-melissa-bachman

VICTORY! Anti-Hunters Petition; 
Melissa Bachman Cut from National Geographic Show

http://emptyallcages.com/2012/09/24/natgeo-cuts-bachman/

Lion Huntress Melissa Bachman Under Fire Over Gruesome Photo

http://www.thewrap.com/melissa-bachman-protest-big-game-hunting-animal-rights

Melissa Bachman Twitter Fury: Death Wishes, Vicious Insults Follow South African Lion Hunt

http://www.ibtimes.com/melissa-bachman-twitter-fury-death-wishes-vicious-insults-follow-south-african-lion-hunt-1475462

Show presenter Melissa Bachman slammed after posting photo of lion she killed in South Africa 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/tv-presenter-slammed-photo-lion-killed-article-1.1519039

TV host Melissa Bachman criticized for smiling photograph of herself with dead lion

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/11/18/tv-host-melissa-bachman-criticized-for-smiling-photograph-of-herself-with-dead-lion/

Big game backlash: Protests against celebrity hunter Melissa Bachman mount

http://news.yahoo.com/melissa-bachman-big-game-protest-161458798.html

MELISSA BACHMAN'S SPORT KILLING OF A LION SENDS 

THE WRONG MESSAGE

Posted: 11/19/2013 6:35 pm

North American Regional Director, International Fund for Animal Welfare, Jeffrey Flocken 
African Lions, Hunting, Ifaw, International Fund For Animal Welfare, Melissa Bachman, Trophy Hunting, Green News

Here is a short test -- which of the following items are illegal to import into the United States?

a). Drugs
b). Lion Carcass
c). Firearms
d). Live Birds

Actually, they are all illegal, with the exception of the lion carcass -- which is incentive enough for those like television host, Melissa Bachman, to travel to Africa to hunt and kill one of the world's most iconic but also severely imperiled species just for the "sport" of it and a photo op.

With as few as 32,000 lions remaining in the wild, the once ubiquitous animals are rapidly disappearing from the African landscape. Habitat loss and human-wildlife conflict are the primary reasons, but trophy hunting is responsible for the slaughter of about 600 of the animals each year.

And, approximately 60 percent of all lions killed for sport are shipped to the U.S. as trophies -- an act made possible by the fact that the African lion is not protected currently by the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA).

In fact, lions are the only great cat not protected by this law. However, the U.S. government is currently considering a scientific petition to list African lions as Endangered under the ESA.

The petition was written by the International Fund for Animal Welfare, along with other animal protection groups like Born Free and Humane Society International, and if it is successful, American trophy hunters will no longer be able to bring lion trophies or parts for commercial sale back into the U.S.

Which brings us again to Melissa, and the other American hunters who engage in vainglorious trophy hunts.

The African lion is a species that is experiencing a downward spiral toward extinction. The sport killing of these cats clearly sends a message that these majestic animals are more valued dead than alive, as the much-publicized image of Melissa grinning over the slain great cat certainly echoes.

We hope that Americans will speak up for lions and let the U.S. government know that lions should be conserved and protected -- not shot for fun. Tell the US Fish & Wildlife Service to list African lions as endangered throughout their range under the ESA.

This is how Americans can make a real difference in helping imperiled species like lions (helpafricanlions.org) by celebrating their conservation -- not by glorifying their needless slaughter.

Jeff Flocken is the North American Regional Director for the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW). To learn more about IFAW's work to protect African lions, visit HelpAfricanLions.org.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-flocken/melissa-bachman-lion_b_4303215.html
African Lions, Hunting, Ifaw, International Fund For Animal Welfare, Melissa Bachman, Trophy Hunting, Green News

U.S. OFFERS REWARD IN WILDLIFE-TRADE FIGHT

By THOMAS FULLER

Published: November 13, 2013

BANGKOK — Taking a page from the battle against international drug cartels, the United States announced on Wednesday a $1 million reward for information to help dismantle one of Asia’s largest wildlife-trafficking syndicates.

In what officials said was the first time such a reward had been offered, the State Department said it was targeting a syndicate based in Laos, the impoverished and authoritarian Southeast Asian country whose government, investigators say, has been uncooperative in stopping a thriving trade of African ivory, rhino horns, tiger bones and endangered animals harvested by the thousands from Asian jungles.

In a statement, Secretary of State John Kerry said the syndicate, the Xaysavang Network, “facilitates the killing of endangered elephants, rhinos and other species for products such as ivory.” The network, he said, spans South Africa, Mozambique, Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam and China.

Investigators say the syndicate is headed by a Laotian businessman, Vixay Keosavang, who was the subject of an article in The New York Times in March.

Reached on his cellphone on Wednesday, Mr. Vixay said he was being framed. “There are people slandering me,” he said. “If you want to know the truth, you should ask Lao officials.”

Asked about rhino horns sent from South Africa and addressed to him personally — evidence that was presented in a trial that concluded last year in South Africa — Mr. Vixay acknowledged that he had received them.

“I admit that I accepted them in good faith,” he said, adding that Laotian officials were aware of the shipments. But, he said, “I never ordered them.”

Bouaxam Inthalangsi, an official at the Laotian Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, said Wednesday that American officials gave him documents last week related to Mr. Vixay and the Xaysavang Network. But he said it was not enough evidence to arrest Mr. Vixay, who is based in Bolikhamxai Province outside the capital, Vientiane.

“According to what we know right now, he can walk free in Bolikhamxai because he is not guilty,” Mr. Bouaxam said. “We must act strictly in accordance with the law.”

Laos, run by an opaque Communist Party, ranks 160th out of 176 countries and territories in the corruption index published by Transparency International, a monitoring group. The authorities in neighboring countries say Laos has increasingly been used as a transit point for trafficked wildlife that is sent to consumers in East Asia, especially China and Vietnam.

Investigators believe that Mr. Vixay has enjoyed a great degree of protection from the Laotian authorities, and they point to voluminous evidence of Mr. Vixay’s wildlife-trafficking operations. A shipment of ivory and rhino horns intercepted by the Kenyan authorities in 2009 was addressed directly to Mr. Vixay’s company, Xaysavang Trading, in Laos.

The largest trove of evidence against Mr. Vixay, investigators say, came during the trial in South Africa of Chumlong Lemtongthai, a Thai national who South African prosecutors say was Mr. Vixay’s deputy.

In the trial, prosecutors laid bare a system in which Mr. Chumlong used Thai prostitutes to pose as rhino hunters, illegally using a loophole in South African law that allows hunters to bring back one horn as a trophy. Prosecutors called this “one of the biggest swindles in environmental crime history.” Mr. Chumlong was sentenced to 40 years in prison, which was reduced to 30 years on appeal.

Invoices presented as evidence in the trial showed that the rhino horns were in Mr. Vixay’s name and sent to his address in Laos. Mr. Vixay said in an interview that he had quit “a long time ago” what he described as his import-export business.

Yet Mr. Vixay’s wildlife-trading business is well known in the village along the Mekong River where his large walled compound is. During a visit by this reporter in February, a security guard who answered the door said the compound contained tigers, bears and other endangered animals whose trade is restricted or banned by a United Nations treaty. Villagers reported seeing regular truckloads of pangolins, an animal that resembles an anteater. Trading in pangolins is illegal under the United Nations treaty.

The United States government has been increasingly aggressive in combating wildlife trafficking, partly out of concern over the slaughter of elephants and rhinos for their tusks and horns. More than 800 rhinos were illegally killed in South Africa this year, far more than in any previous year.

In July, the Obama administration issued an executive order calling wildlife trafficking an “international crisis” and instructing law enforcement agencies to “promote and encourage” actions against trafficking in other countries.

Brooke Darby, the deputy assistant secretary of state for international narcotics and law enforcement affairs, said the trafficking reward program, which in the future could also be used for trafficking in arms, people and counterfeit currency, was modeled on a narcotics reward system that began in 1986 and has given out more than $87 million to informants.

“We want to go after everyone in this process,” she said. “The people who ordered that the poaching be done, the people who accept bribes along the way, the people who forge customs documents, the people who receive the products.”

Ms. Darby would not comment on the specifics of how the United States would try to dismantle the trafficking network in Laos, where security agencies are secretive and where cooperation with foreign governments has been highly circumscribed in other matters. One example of the limited cooperation is what appeared to be the abduction of an American-trained agronomist last December who was last seen at a police checkpoint. Despite numerous requests for information by foreign diplomats in Laos, the police have never fully explained his disappearance.

News of the award came as a surprise both to Mr. Bouaxam, the Laotian official, and to Mr. Vixay.
Steven Galster, the executive director of Freeland, a countertrafficking organization based in Bangkok that has been instrumental in tracking Mr. Vixay, described the reward as a “great development.” “In the world of wildlife trafficking and corruption, you gotta fight money with money,” he said in an email.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/14/world/asia/us-to-offer-reward-in-wildlife-trafficking-fight.html?_r=0

Sign-on Letter – To Kill A Mourning Dove

Please circulate widely

by Exposing the Big Game

From Barry Kent MacKay,  
Born Free USA's Canadian Representative  

http://www.bornfreeusa.org/

Below is a sign-on letter to encourage individuals to send comments opposing the recreational hunting of Mourning Dives and Barrow’s Golden-eye – listed ‘at risk’.

Even if you are skeptical as to whether the letter will make any difference in reversing a ‘political’ decision, please sign-on. If enough of us send the letter, it will likely guarantee that these sorts of political decisions regarding wildlife will not be made easily in the future.

Please free feel to change the letter as necessary.
Detailed background information is below.

To: Stephen Harper; Prime Minister

<mailto:pm@pm.gc.ca>; pm@pm.gc.ca

CC. Jack Hughes, Canadian Wildlife Service : <mailto:jack.hughes@ec.gc.ca>; jack.hughes@ec.gc.ca

Environment critics: Megan Leslie (NDP) megan.leslie@parl.gc.ca and Micheal Harris (PC) michael.harris@pc.ola.org

Kathleen Wynne Ontario Premier premier@ontario.ca

Dear Prime Minister,

I wish to express my strong opposition to the decision by the Conservative government to allow Mourning Doves and Barrow's Goldeneye - a species at risk - to be hunted in Ontario. It has been reported that this decision was made very quietly, so as to restrict public input.

Hunters form a very small minority of Canadians, yet the wildlife they are permitted to kill are part of our shared natural heritage. Therefore it is shameful to deny the majority of us a chance to respond before the final decision was made. We are the people who enjoy the environment in a peaceful and non-destructive way, and wish to continue doing so.

Mourning doves are part of our everyday environment and a symbol of peace, and do not appear to be a migratory species in southern Ontario. Are other small, sociable birds to be the next target?

This appears to be a purely political decision aimed at throwing a "bone" to the sport hunting lobby as you shop for voters.

Most Canadians are not hunters and do not want to see sport hunting promoted to our youth.

The recreational killing of wildlife in no way reflects my/our history, traditions or future.
This is not subsistence hunting, which I can respect, or an economic driver and never was.

In any case, these small birds provide at best a minor source of food delicacies, but are primarily useful for target shooting – a total waste of life.

I am asking that you act quickly to prohibit entirely the killing of Barrow's Goldeneye in all jurisdictions, and also cancel the Mourning Dove hunt in Ontario. I shall also request that the provincial government take appropriate action to bring this to a speedy end.

I look forward to your reply.

Name

Address


Band-tailed pigeon photo ©Jim Robertson

This was first posted by our friend in Activism, Martha Magenta.
Please visit her blog here: http://marthamagenta.blogspot.co.uk/
Thursday, 19 September 2013

HUMAN AND ANIMAL RIGHTS

PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE 

THE ANIMAL BILL OF RIGHTS 

 THANK YOU!

http://org2.salsalabs.com/o/5154/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=5078

How do we know what is right? How should other people be treated? There are debates going on in society about many issues, so obviously there is no easy answer to these questions, even where humans are concerned.
In the case of humans, the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights sets out a list of rights that people should have. These include:

*Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

*No one shall be held in slavery or servitude.

*No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

According to the United Nations, a person may not be killed, exploited, cruelly treated, intimidated, or imprisoned for no good reason. Put another way, people should be able to live in peace, according to their own needs and preferences.

Who should have these rights?
Do they apply to people of all races? Children? People who are brain damaged or senile? The Declaration makes it clear that basic rights apply to everyone. To make a slave of someone who is intellectually handicapped or of a different race is no more justifiable than to make a slave of anyone else.

The reason why these rights apply to everyone is simple: regardless of our differences, we all experience a life with its mosaic of thoughts and feelings. This applies equally to the princess and the hobo, the brain surgeon and the "dunce". Our value as individuals arises from this capacity to experience life, not because of any intelligence or usefulness to others. Every person has an inherent value, and deserves to be treated with respect in order to make the most of their unique life experience.

The idea of human rights and inherent value has not always been accepted.
In previous centuries Africans were captured and taken as slaves to American plantations. They were cruelly treated, and many died or were killed. Families were split apart forever. Slaves were considered to be savages without souls. They were treated as objects to be exploited, with no regard for their feelings or their lives.

During the Second World War, Nazis not only killed millions of Jews in concentration camps, they also carried out scientific experiments on them. Jews were considered to be undesirable and not real humans deserving of respect.

In each case the perpetrators of these atrocities singled out groups that were in some way different, and claimed that they were inferior. This inferiority supposedly justified the appalling treatment. Both slave traders and Nazis denied the inherent value of their victims, and instead treated them as objects to be exploited or destroyed at will.

What about animals?
Do they have inherent value?
Do they, like humans, deserve respect?

There is no doubt that animals experience a life, certainly the vertebrates (animals with backbones), and possibly others. Like us, animals can feel pain and fear, but also excitement and satisfaction. Close contact with animals shows that they look forward to some events, and can clearly get a lot of enjoyment from their lives, be it from basking in the sun, exercising, eating favourite food, or interacting with others, as in playing and mutual grooming.

Certainly animals don't have the same abilities as humans. They can't talk, write books or drive cars, but neither can some humans. Do we say that humans who lack these abilities have no value and no rights? Certainly not, because those people still experience a life which can be filled with positive or negative events.

We don't ask how intelligent a person is before we decide whether to eat them or experiment on them. Regardless of intelligence, their life still has value to them!
Exactly the same is true of animals!

In spite of species differences, we have in common the capacity for experience. As philosopher Tom Regan has said in his argument for animal rights:

”We are each of us the experiencing subject of a life, a conscious creature having an individual welfare that has importance to us whatever our usefulness to others. We want and prefer things, believe and feel things, recall and expect things. And all these dimensions of our life, including our pleasure and pain, our enjoyment and suffering, our satisfaction and frustration, our continued existence or our untimely death -- all make a difference to the quality of our life as lived, as experienced, by us as individuals. As the same is true of those animals that concern us (the ones that are eaten and trapped, for example), they too must be viewed as the experiencing subjects of a life, with inherent value of their own."
If the inherent value of humans means that they have the right to be treated with respect, then the same applies to animals.

The points made earlier about human rights can be rephrased:

Animals may not be killed, exploited, cruelly treated, intimidated, or imprisoned for no good reason. Animals should be able to live in peace, according to their own needs and preferences.

Animal rights and experimentation

If each individual has inherent value, is it justifiable to harm one individual for the benefit of others? Is the evil of violating the rights of that individual outweighed by the good result that may come of it?

The Nazis experimented on Jews, and were condemned for it in the Nuremberg war crime trials. It is accepted that individual humans may not be forced to take part in harmful experiments, even though there is no doubt that better medical knowledge would be gained in this way than by experimenting on other species. This end (better medical knowledge) does not justify the wrong that is done to the individuals that are experimented on. The same principle applies to all people, including those that are brain damaged, senile or mentally ill. They have value in themselves, and are not objects to be used for the benefit of others.

The same is also true of animals. Using them as objects in experiments ignores their right to be treated with respect. To quote Tom Regan again:

”Lab animals are not our tasters; we are not their kings. Because these animals are treated routinely, systematically as if their value were reducible to their usefulness to others, they are routinely, systematically treated with a lack of respect, and thus their rights routinely, systematically violated. This is just as true when they are used in trivial, duplicative, unnecessary or unwise research as it is when they are used in studies that hold out real promise of human benefits. We can't justify harming or killing a human being just for these sorts of reason. Neither can we do so even in the case of so lowly a creature as a laboratory rat."

Humans like to think of themselves as the most important and valuable species on earth. Mostly they don't give reasons for this belief, but if pressed might say humans are more intelligent than other animals. We have already seen that intelligence is not what guides our behaviour towards other humans - we don't experiment on the "mentally sub-normal". Philosopher Peter Singer points out the contradiction in many people's thinking:

”Why do we lock up chimpanzees in appalling primate research centers and use them in experiments that range from the uncomfortable to the agonizing and lethal, yet would never think of doing the same to a "retarded" human being at a much lower mental level? The only possible answer is that the chimpanzee, no matter how bright, is not human, while the "retarded" human, no matter how dull, is. This is speciesism pure and simple, and it is as indefensible as the most blatant racism.
The way animals are exploited and treated without respect is a prejudice like racism. It is saying that some individuals don't count simply because they are of a different race (racism), or a different species (speciesism).

Prejudices have changed slowly over the centuries - it is no longer acceptable to say that people of other races, women, or the handicapped don't count. It is also not acceptable to say that animals don't count. As Peter Singer has said:
"Any being capable of feeling anything, whether pain or pleasure or any kind of positive or negative state of consciousness, must therefore count."

But if it is wrong to violate the rights of individuals by harming them in experiments, how can the suffering caused by diseases be lessened? Here Peter Singer has said:

"If in our present situation we find ourselves faced with the dilemma of inflicting harm on an animal in an experiment, or allowing harm from a disease to go unchecked, the best possible solution is to find a way around such a dilemma."

Medical research would not stop without animals. There is already valuable research going on that doesn't cause harm in the process. For examples see Research without animals and the work of the Dr Hadwen Trust for Humane Research.

This is the way around the ethical dilemma, and the way of the future.

DON'T DE-CLAW CATS!
It is cruel and it HURTS!

The facts about declawing cats:
http://marthamagenta.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/the-facts-about-declawing-cats.html








References:

1.Tom Regan, “The case for animal rights”, in Peter Singer (ed), In Defence of Animals , Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1985

2.Peter Singer, “Ethics and the new animal liberation movement”, in Peter Singer (ed), In Defence of Animals , Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1985

Source: Animal Liberation
http://animalliberation.org.au/animal-liberation/human-and-animal-rights/


In addition: See the Peta website: Alternatives to Animal Testing
http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/alternatives-to-animal-testing.aspx
♥

A.Walker quote 

FACTORY FARMING PRACTICES TO BE BANNED IN THE ACT

20 September 2013 ~ Have your say
The ACT Government is standing up for animals, with three of the cruelest factory farming practices ever inflicted on animals set to be outlawed.
If we had the chance to start over again... would we do things differently? Right now the ACT has a blank slate when it comes to factory farming — its last battery egg facility has shut down and no pigs are currently factory farmed there — so its government is making the most of this opportunity to ensure factory farming cruelty is gone for good.
Next month the ACT Assembly is due to vote on a Bill, introduced by Greens MLA Shane Rattenbury, that will ban three of the cruellest factory farming practices. This is a major precedent — and a major blow to factory farming. And, in even better news, the Bill is expected to pass!
What will pigs and chickens in the ACT be protected from?

PIG CRATES — BANNED 

Imagine being confined to your bathtub, unable to exercise or even turn around. Every day, this level of extreme confinement is a reality for countless pregnant pigs in factory farms. These sensitive and intelligent animals suffer horribly in tiny metal and concrete crates, before being moved to even smaller cages to give birth.

BATTERY CAGES— BANNED 

Crammed into a wire cage with several others, a battery hen in Australia lives in a space smaller than an A4 piece of paper. She is unable to stretch her wings, move freely or perform natural behaviours like building a nest or dustbathing.

DEBEAKING HENS BANNED 

Hens kept in factory farmed conditions often suffer from severe stress, which can lead to cannibalism. The obvious solution to this problem would be to give these sensitive birds more space; but, instead, factory farmed hens often have the tips of their beaks cut off. Birds' beaks are filled with nerves, and cutting off the tip is like slicing off your fingertips. It hurts — a lot.

A KINDER FUTURE

The cruelty of factory farming has only been able to continue because it has been hidden from the eyes of the public. But as more and more political leaders like those in the ACT represent the views of caring people, a world without factory farming comes ever closer.

You can help!
We don't have to wait for governments to free animals from factory farms — or for a 'blank slate' — you can start creating a kinder world with your choices today!

http://www.animalsaustralia.org/features/factory-farming-practices-to-be-banned-act.php