The Animal Rights Faq for uk.politics.animals (1.1) ================================================== I. This is a list of Frequently Asked Questions and threads that are relevant to the newsgroup uk.politics.animals II. It is biased in favour of animal rights, but will try to remain as factual as possible III. Its purpose is to give background information on the various threads that occur in uk.politics.animals and to give common animal rights and animal welfare responses to them. As such it is hightly orientated towards the issues of hunting but will gradually expand. IV. All comments, contributions and corrections will be taken into account by the maintainer but the maintainer keeps the right to do as he sees fit with them with respect to this FAQ. If you do not like what is contained in this FAQ, some of it does touch on highly debatable ground at which point the animal rights view will be presented, then please responed to the newsgroup. If you really do not like this FAQ then go away and create your own. All flames will be cheerfully ignored. V. The current maintainer is Donal O'Driscoll , but to date he would like to gratefully offer thanks to the following people for their help: Cris Waller, Kevin `Fox' Wright, Austen Jackson, Chris `Spooky' Wright, Eccles, Mark Bartlam, Rosemary Rodd and others who wish to remain nameless. Other references should go out to Janet George, Tim Pinney, Tim Bonner (who corrected many technical points on matters of hunting) Martyn from Grimsby and Kevin O'Donnell and Mark Hitchin for the long arguements and corrections which lead to this project being started. Thank you also to Chris Miles, JJ Quick and David Arno. An extra special thanks must go to Paul Kennedy without whom a vast amount of the material here would not be available. Cheers. VI. This faq will be at some stage found at the webpages http://python.swan.ac.uk/~pydan/ARfaq.txt for this file http://python.swan.ac.uk/~pydan/ARfaq4.txt for the hunting file http://python.swan.ac.uk/~pydan/ARfaq5.txt for the last section and appendices. An unofficial website has also been set up at http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/6423/ where these files can also be found as well as other details and files relevant to uk.politics.animals. It also contains links to the websites mentioned in the text. 0 Contents ========== 0.1 Glossary 0.2 Acronyms 1 What is AR/ an ARA? The Introduction 1.1 Can I be AR? 1.2 Are we nazis and nutters? 1.2.1 "ARAs are nazis/fascists" 1.2.2 "AR is a religion" 1.3 The Treaty of Rome - sentient animals 1.4 Wildlife Protection Act 1.5 How to find out more 1.6 Medical research 2 Organisations 2.0 Why so many groups 2.1 Pro AR/AW 2.1.1 ARC 2.1.2 Animal Aid 2.1.3 ALF 2.1.4 HSA 2.1.5 IFAW 2.1.6 LACS 2.1.7 NAHC 2.1.8 NCDL 2.1.9 PETA 2.1.10 PISCES/CAA 2.1.11 RSPCA 2.1.12 CIWF 2.2 Groups that oppose AR 2.2.1 BFSS 2.2.2 BASC 2.2.3 Countryside Alliance 2.2.4 Game Conservation Trust 3 Campaigns 3.1 Consort 3.2 Farmer Browns/Hillgrove 3.3 Live export 3.3.1 Jill Phipps 3.3.2 Shoreham 3.4 McDonalds 3.5 Waitrose 3.6 Huntingdon Life Sciences 4 Bloodsports 4.1 Foxhunting 4.1.0 Background 4.1.0.1 The Polls 4.1.0.2 The BFSS postcard campaign 4.1.0.3 Hunt Statistics 4.1.1 Some Common References 4.1.1.1 Michael Foster's Bill 4.1.1.2 Pro-Hunt Gatherings 4.1.1.2.1 Countryside Rally (10 July 1997) 4.1.1.2.2 Countryside March (1 March 1998) 4.1.1.3 Anti-Hunt March (2 Aug 1997) 4.1.1.4 James Barrington and the Wildlife Network 4.1.1.5 The Bateson Report and the National Trust 4.1.1.5.1 "Friends of the National Trust"/FONT 4.1.1.6 Forestry Commission and Ministry of Defense issues 4.1.1.7 Tom Worby and Mike Hill 4.1.2 Allegations & Activities - Claims, Refutations and Explainations 4.1.2.1 Hunting and the Economy 4.1.2.1.1 How many are employed by hunting? 4.1.2.1.2 Is the fox a pest? 4.1.2.2 How popular is hunting? 4.1.2.3 Town vs Country 4.1.2.4 The Class Issue 4.1.2.5 Why Hunters Hunt 4.1.2.6 Hunters on the need for hunting 4.1.2.6.1 "Foxhunting controls foxes" 4.1.2.6.2 "Foxes are only tolerated due to hunting" 4.1.2.6.2.1 Aritifical Earths/The Case of the Sinnington Hunt 4.1.2.6.3 "Hunters promote conservation" 4.1.2.6.4 "Cubbing controls foxes" 4.1.2.6.5 "Hunting is not cruel" 4.1.2.6.6 "Foxes die quickly" 4.1.2.7 Hunters and violence 4.1.2.8 On the Fate of Hounds and Horses 4.1.2.8.1 Hunt Trespass 4.1.2.9 Claims made about Hunt Saboteurs 4.1.2.9.1 "Sabs are violent" 4.1.2.9.2 "Sabs hurt and endanger animals" 4.1.2.9.3 "Sabs are all townies and ignorant of the real issue" 4.1.2.9.4 On Hunt Balls 4.1.2.9.5 "Sabs are just criminals/hooligans/trespassers" 4.1.2.10 Terrierwork and Terriermen 4.1.2.10.1 Digging out (new regulations) 4.1.2.11 "Hunting is a freedom and a right" 4.1.3 Draghunting 4.1.3.1 LACS report on Draghunting 4.1.4 Other forms of Fox Control 4.1.4.1 Destruction & Unregistered Packs 4.1.4.2 Foot Hunts and Beagle Packs 4.1.5 Legal Issues 4.2 Hare Coursing 4.3 Mink & Otter Hunting 4.4 Staghunting 4.5 Shooting 4.5.1 Letter from an Ex-Shooter 4.6 Fishing 4.7 Badgers 4.7.1 Badger and the Law in Britain 4.7.2 Badger Baiting And Badger Digging 4.7.3 Badgers and Bovine TB 4.7.4 The National Federation of Badger Groups 4.7.5 Hunters Employees and Badger Baiting 4.8 Cockfighting 4.9 Cormorants 5 Other Issues 5.1 Vivisection 5.2 Veganism and vegetarianism 5.3 Pets 5.4 Quarantine 5.5 Intensive Farming 6 Appendix 6.1 ALF SG statement on the car bombing of a vivisector 6.2 How Tom Worby was killed 6.3 HSA on Angling 6.4 Forestry Commission report on Foxes 6.5 Articles on the Bateson Report 6.5.1 Nature Article on the Bateson Report 6.5.2 Bateson and Wise Letter on the Bateson Report 6.5.3 Bateson's letter to The Times, 6 Feb 1998 6.6 Wild Mammals (Hunting with Dogs) Bill 6.7 Halcombe Harrier Autopsy Report 6.8 Times Article on the Health of Racing Horses 7 Further Reading 0.1 Glossary ============ Blooding - now discontinued practise of smearing a childs face with the blood of a killed fox, once seen as a form of induction into hunting. Bloodsports - refers to any sport that causes suffering and death to animals, such as hunting, shooting, hare coursing. Fishing is a contentious issue in this respect. Brace - two foxes; apparently it doesnt matter if they are alive or dead. Field - the group of riders on a hunt. They are under the charge of a Field Master. Hunt - this is used in several ways, most of the obvious. However, when hunters use the word they tend to refer to a single chase of a fox as opposed to the day's hunt which is how the AR people use the word. Thus a hunter can have several hunts in one day. Huntsman - the person who actually hunts the hounds, ie the one who blows the horn. Often a professional or hunt servant but can also be an amatuer when he will most likely also be Master. Wears a redcoat Hunt Master - the equivalent of a managing director for the hunt Hunt supporters - people who follow the hunt around to watch it, normally in cars. They pay a cap and form a significant part of the hunts funds. Hunts can also have support clubs which raise money for them. Monitors - Members of LACS who film hunts. Pack - refers to the pack of hounds. Point-to-Point - horse events organised by hunts as part of their fund raising. Currently they form a part of the horse racing set up. Pony Club - Horse riding for children, some have links to local hunts Redcoats - refers to the red coats traditionally worn by the master huntsmen and is often used to designate them though hunters themselves dont use the term. Riot - when the hounds follow the trail of another animal. Or when they escape control of the huntsmaster. Sabs - hunt saboteurs. Scenting - how the hounds follow the fox during the chase. Terrier men - employees of the hunt used to find and kill foxes and look after the hounds. Rarely professional Vivisection - scientists who use animals their research. Originally it refered to those who killed and dissected animals, now more commonly applied to anyone who uses animals for any part of 'scientific' research. Whips/Whipper-in - part of the field but professional, who help the hunts master control the hounds by the use of whips. 0.2 Acronyms ============ ALF - Animal Liberation Front Anti - a person who opposes animal abuse, generic term but most often used to represent someone who is anti-hunt AH - anti hunt AR - animal rights ARA - animal rights activist ARL - animal rights loon ARN - animal rights nutter AW - animal welfare BASC - British Association for Shooting and Conservation (aka British Assosiation for Slaughter and Cruelty) BFSS - British Field Sports Society FC - Forestry Commission FH - Foxhounds HSA - Hunt Saboteurs Assosiation IFAW - International Fund for Animal Welfare (sometimes pronounced 'ifor') LACS - League Against Cruel Sports MoD - Ministry of Defense MFH - Master of Foxhounds (aka Huntsmaster) NAHC - National Anti-Hunt Campaign NCDL - National Canine Defense League NFU - National Farmers Union NT - National Trust RSPCA - Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals WWF - World Wildlife Fund 1. What is AR/ an ARA? The Introduction ======================================= An animal rights activist is a person who believes that animals have some form of rights. What are these rights is still being debated and you will not find an answer set in stone. Most people however will take the works of the philosophers Peter Singer and Tom Regan as being a good bench mark. There are other excellent introductions on the net, especially on the Environlink server at http://envirolink.org/arrs/ What sort of rights? Well that depends on the individual. What is the core of aAR the fact that animals do have some rights, and do have intellgience and therefore it is wrong to cause them suffering at the hands of humans. Animal rights activists will normally campaign against all forms of suffering and seek to change the status quo. Though there is a lot of over lap, it is not the same as being as supporter of animal welfare, where animals are respected but not generally allowed rights. Many ARAs will see the welfarists as more interested in dealling with the status quo than actively changing it, though animal welfare does form a basic building block for animal rights. It is also a belief in animal rights that as humans who have cultivated the majority of the earths surface and influence almost every aspect of the earth we have a responsibility to the animal that we come into contact with. 1.1 Can I be AR? (Direct Action vs welfarism) -------------------------------------------------- That is up to you. Most AR groups tend to be seperate from the welfarist ones though we will all know each other. Both are involved with animals on a practical level, but differ crucially in their philosophy and often in their tactics. It is best to look around and ask to find what best suits you. 1.2 Are we nazis and nutters? ----------------------------- Believe it or not on these newsgroups you will find people who do not believe that animals even have feelings. Thus here, as on campaigns ARAs are often abused by the animal abusers and their supporters. Their main insults are that we are simply lunatics and nazis. Contrary to media and animal abusers opinions we are neither. AR has quite a well thought out philosophy and modus operandi. We do what we feel is nessecary to relieve the suffering of animals and it is up to yourself to come to your own decisions with out listening purely to the propaganda of one side. We are not nazis and many of us have a very good social awareness. Please do not judge us by how we look - that is something best left to the narrow minded. At a demo you will find a vast collection of people from punks to pensioners, and appearance doesnt matter as what does is your motivation. Mostly people call us nazis and nutters because we disagree with them and they have no arguements to back themselves up. 1.2.1 ARAs are nazis/fascists ----------------------------- A claim usually based on the fact that Hitler and his nazi party enspoused vegetarianism. The pro hunt people on this newsgroup (and elsewhere) put a lot of emphasis on the supposed links between AR philosophy and that of the nazis. Somewhat ironic considering that propably the formost proponent and influencial philosopher in Animal Rights/Liberation, Peter Singer, is Jewish and lost relatives in the Holocaust. On nazis, they may have espoused some sort of pro animal ideology, but has been pointed out before, many of their motives were completely different, such as who needs animals to work on when you have jews. Similarly their reforms of some slaughter houses also had an anti-semitic origin. Another common myth is that Hitler was vegetarian; now no vegetarian eats lamb, though that is what is recorded in the diaries of Hitler's chef. Nor would any AR proponent ever test out their cynide pill on their pet dog. Then we also have Goering who raised 100 Polish villages to make way for his personal hunting ground. [source: Times, 29 Nov 1997] Why the nazis espoused an apparent animal right program is not clear to us but the ideologies of the modern AR movement are wide and varied, built on individual groups and people. No one person can truely say they speak for everyone, or sum up everyones belief in one pithy statement. Even just saying that ARAs are against animal cruelty is dangerous as the definition of cruelty again speaks different meaning to each individual. This is not the same as the common focus of nazi ideologism, which had a clear leader, clear structure and clear set of political beliefs. It is on this point that any comparison with the history of the nazi party instantly falls down. On other points of right wing beliefs being associated with the animal rights movements, where is the racism and homophobia - when there are black, asian, jewish and gay campaigners this just doesnt stand up. Yet on the other hand you have the racist comments by Rose Whitcombe, a joint master of the Ytene Mink Hunt, the homophobic remarks made by speakers at the Countryside Rally, and the attendance of BNP supporters handing out their leaflets at the Countryside March - leaflets that talk about the rural countryside/traditions in the same way as many hunters and openly espouse a pro-hunt agenda. Apparently the BNP's website has been claimed that their presence was well recieved at the March. [Anti-Fascist Action] ARAs as a rule dont believe that all hunt supporters are fascists and nazis, butit is one of the most demeaning arguements we could possibly have. It does justice to no-body and only insults the sufferers. The use of such arguements are cheap and show a lack of any other substance. 1.2.1 AR is a religion ---------------------- A common claim by some of the more extreme opponents of AR, that is completely unfounded. Some religions such as pagans, buddhist and hindu sects have animal rights incorporated into their faith, but they are just one section of the people involved. There is no over all church or single theological teaching as is claimed. Normally used as an attempt to paint people involved in AR as being mindless fanatics which is not true. People using this arguement tend to be morally bankrupt and try to cover up the fact that they have absolutely no compassion. 1.3 The Treaty of Rome ---------------------- The Treaty of Rome is the nearest thing the European Union has to a constitution. At the 1997 International Governmental Conference the fifteen heads of state adopted a protocol which added to the Treaty of Rome a protocol declaring that animals are indeed sentient beings. This is legally binding with the result that future laws and policies must now "pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals". This means that animals are no longer classed as goods or agricultural products but as living creatures capable of feeling pain and suffering. [source: Compassion in World Farming press release of 18/6/97] 1.4 Wildlife Protection Act --------------------------- There are various laws to protect animals in Britain, but most of them were gathered together in this act. Its basic premise makes it an offense to be cruel to any wild animal, and gives the police powers to arrest and prosecute under it. One of the biggest complaints from an AR perspective is that when it was being passed through under the last Tory government the pro hunt lobby managed to have it watered down in order to leave their pasttime untouched. The RSPCA have used its quite successfull in prosecuting animal abusers. Other relevant laws are the Badger act and the Wildlife and Countryside Act. Domesticated and captive animals are also protected from all types of physical cruelty under the 1911 Protection of Animals Act, though it does not protect animals "temporarily confined" as in trapping and hunting. Again hunting is exempt from this law. For further details on the legal aspects of animal welfare then please contact the RSPCA; for the application of these laws to hunting and similiar activities then contact LACS 1.5 How to find out more ------------------------ There is a vast quantity of stuff on AR and AW to be found all over the place. There are numerous sites on the internet, some of which will be given in the course of this faq. The best way to deal with the internet is to work out what it is you want to know about and go to a search engine. Yahoo (http://www.yahoo.com ) is quite good for this. Your local groups will also have plenty of information and will be more than happy to talk to you. 1.6 Medical Research -------------------- Ooh this is a hot one and until someone comes up with a good contribution it will not be dealt with in this faq as the current maintainer does not feel he knows the arguements well enough to deal with its complexities. 2 Organisations =============== In this section you will find a brief note of the main AR and AW groups as well as some from the 'other side' that come up in discussion on uk.politics.animals . There shall be a brief description of their nature and purpose followed by contact and web details. 2.0 Why are there so many groups? ------------------------------ Well because there are so many issues and everyone wants to do what they personally feel is best. Most of these groups are single issue ones focusing on particular campaigns. There is no single AR/AW organisation that represents everyone as there is no definitive philosophy on the rights of animals. Though there are various umbrella organisations. The majority of groups tend to be local ones tackling local problems, which then come together to support bigger campaigns as organised by some of the national groups. It also means that people coming in can always find their own level of entry. However, there is a lot of overlap and good communication which is why together they can be seen as a movement and not just a lot of splinter groups. 2.1 Pro-AR/AW ------------- 2.1.1 Animal Rights Coalition ----------------------------- This is the name given to the grassroots network of local organisations working for animal rights in the UK. Formed in 1991 by the people involved at an activist level to fill the gap left as the large national organisations in existance became more distant It is a way of bringing everyone together and allowing people to support other campaigns, as well as providing advice and printing facilities. It publishes the newsletter ARCnews monthly, informing people of how demos went and what are being planned. Anyone involved in animal, environmental or human abuse campaigns or even just interested can get in touch. Find them on the internet at http://envirolink.org/arrs/arc/ email: james@arcnews.demon.co.uk or snail mail address: ARCNEWS PO Box 339 Wolverhampton WV10 7BZ England. Tel: 01902 711935 2.1.2 Animal Aid ---------------- Not a direct action group as say HSA or some of those represented by ARC, they try to educate people on aspects of animal abuse, being particularly good with respect to vegetarian and anti-vivisection campaigns. However their philosophy is firmly animal rights. Their literature forms excellent introduction to many issues. Website: http://www.animalaid.u-net.com/ Email: info@animalaid.org.uk Snail mail address: Animal Aid The Old Chapel, Bradford Street, Tonbridge, Kent, UK, TN9 1AW Telephone: UK (01732) 364546 Fax: UK (01732) 366533 2.1.3 Animal Liberation ----------------------- For those to whom animal rights is not enough, at the far end of the spectrum. Called by the police "urban terrorists not connected to the IRA" these are people who actively rescue animals from institutions like mass breeders and vivisection labs. Often these activists will go under the name of the 'Animal Liberation Front', ie the ALF. Not representative of everyone in animal rights as is often claimed. Nor is it a single organisation, but a gathering together people who believe that animal liberation and direct targeting of buisness involved in animal abuse is nessecary. The majority of actions are actual animal liberation ones where animals are rescued from vivisection labs, breeding factories and the like while not harming humans. Opponents often refer to an incident in the eighties (?date) when a bomb was placed under the car of a vivisectionist that harmed his wife and child. Such actions are not supported by the majority of ARAs and no longer occur. Actions which deliberately involve the harming of humans or animals are not recognised as ALF actions. The ALF disclaimer/press release from the time of the incident can be found in the appendix. There is a website for them a: http://www.animal-liberation.net/ A faq specific for them is at: http://www.flashback.se/archive/alf_faq.html or try http://www.hedweb.com/alffaq.htm The followng is a fake website: http://www.america.net/~jwest/alforg.htm 2.1.3.1 ALF Support Group/ ALF Press Office ------------------------------------------- These are NOT the ALF. They are both mutually independant organisations with different purposes. The Support Group produce a magazine used to raise funds for those in jail or facing trial for actions (guilty or not guilty) relating to animal rights/liberation actions. The Press Office is an independant organisation used to release information on animal liberation activities. UK - Animal Liberation Front Supporters Group BCM 1160, London, WC1N 3XX, England Email: 100302.1616@compuserve.com Assume all e-mail and regular mail is read by the authorities They encourage the use psuedonyms, etc. when writing. 2.1.4 Hunt Saboteurs Assosiation -------------------------------- The Hunt Saboteurs Assosiation, aka HSA, is an umbrella organisation representing various direct action anti hunt groups around the country. Hunt saboteurs are people who believe that the fox's life is paramount and it is therefore vital that action is taken to prevent them being hunted. As they are prepared to go out an actual help the fox by hindering the hunts they are said to be involved in direct action. They normally work by following the hunt around and giving aid to the fox in order to allow it to escape or else hamper the hunt in its efforts to find one. They use a variety of techniques, often based on the methods of the hunts themselves such as horns, whips and voice calls. Commonly known as sabs, their methods of directly dealing with the hunt has caught them up in various controversies over the years, leading to numerous allegations against them. By far the most common myth spread about them is that they dont care about animals. This is untrue for the vast majority of, if not all sabs. There is a website for them at http://envirolink.org/arrs/HSA/hsa.shtml email: hsa@gn.apc.org and they can be contacted at PO Box 2786, Brighton, UK. BNQ 2AX telephone (+44) (01273) 622827. 2.1.5 International Fund for Animal Welfare ------------------------------------------- One of the largest animal welfare organisations in the world it is well funded and is noted for its success in tackling specific issues on national and global platforms. Its stated aims are to " promote and ensure the just and kind treatment of animals as sentient beings." Works on a variety of issues and is seen by ARAs as one of the worthy national organisations Not liked at all by the pro hunt lobby for the fact it donated £1million to the Labour party and for its large advertisement campaigns against bloodsports. They have got together with LACS and the RSPCA to run the The Campaign for the Protection of Hunted Animals that targets hunting in the United Kingdom. The have a website at http://www.ifaw.org/home.htm The Campaign for the Protection of Hunted Animals is at http://195.40.65.35/fox/ email: ifaw@easynet.co.uk 2.1.6 League Against Cruel Sports --------------------------------- History The League Against Cruel Sports (LACS) was set up in 1924 with the mission "To oppose the cruelty of hunting and promote kindness to animals". It has pioneered many bills, especially the Wild Mammals (Protection) Bill, and the Badgers Act Policy: Today The League campaigns against all hunting with dogs, shooting birds for sport, ferreting and falconry. It supports other organisations world-wide who oppose sports such as bullfighting. In the field and Parliment: The League campaigns peacfully and politically, and does not sabotage foxhunts. Instead LACS hunt monitors, clearly identified by tabards and badges film the hunt legally and peacfuly from the footpaths, the public highway and public land. Footage obtained is used for various campaign purposes. LACS is campaigning as a partner in the Campaign For The Protection Of Hunted Animals, which consists of LACS, IFAW & RSPCA. Conservation: LACS also contributes to conservation by maintaining many sancturies in The West Country, the flagship sanctury being Barronsdown. These provide sanctuary for hunted deer in the region. Contact: Details of LACS, including leaflets and press releases can be found at: web: http://www.league.uk.com/ e-mail: League@CompuServe.Com Address: 83-87 Union Street, LONDON Telephone: 0171 403 6155 Fax: 0171 403 4532 2.1.7 National Anti-Hunt Campaign --------------------------------- NAHC is small national organisation that lobbies for the abolution of hunting. It was them who organised the anti-hunt march in London on August 2nd. Most of their activity is directed in raising the issue of hunting among the people, media and politions. They have a large petition still on going and have presented a vast number of signitures to MPs. One of the main issues surrounding the NAHC is that one of its leading members is Niel Hansen, who served time for sending a false bomb to the PR woman of a multinational. Many pro hunters use this to claim that they are a terrorist organisation and supporting them is the same as supporting the ALF. This is not true - NAHC is concerned with ending bloodsports and is not represented by the ideals of one of its members. People who harp on about Niel are trying to avoid the issues around hunting. There is a website, albeit it hasn't been updated since 1995, at http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/NAHC/info.html Snail mail: PO Box 66, Stevenage, Herts, SG1 2TR. Tel: 01438 746372 2.1.8 National Canine Defense League ------------------------------------ An organisation that looks after the rights of dogs.They support the view that foxhounds can become pets and have urged the Quantock hunt to pass their hounds onto draghunts. Currently seeking to work with the government and the RSPCA to deal with the issue of hounds when hunting is banned. They do not seem to be on the internet as yet. Snail mail: 17 Wakely Street, London EC1V 7LT Tel : 0171 837 0006 Fax : 0171 833 2701 2.1.9 People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals ------------------------------------------------ Not to be confused with the spoof 'People for Eating Tasty Animal'. A large US organisation for animal rights involved in various different campaigns at all levels. Opponents of animal rights like to use quotes from its founder Ingrid Newkirk as being representative of everyone in AR. Strong with regards to its believes on animals. They have been involved in exposing Huntingdon Life Sciences in the US an host a page on the UK case with the same firm who have been caught in the act abusing animals at http://www.peta-online.org/temp/index.htm Their website is at http://www.peta-online.org/ Snail mail to: United Kingdom: PETA Europe LTD P.O. Box 3169 London NW1 2JF England Phone: [+44] 181-785-3113 Fax: [+44] 181-785-2922 email: peta@norfolk.infi.net 2.1.10 PISCES/CAA ----------------- UK based organisation that opposes fishing. It has now returned to its original name of the Campaign for the Abolition of Angling [CAA] Their website is at: http://host.envirolink.org/pisces/ Snail mail to: BM Fish, London UK WC1N 3XX. Tel: 0171 2783068 Email: caa@londonaa.demon.co.uk 2.1.11 Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals ------------------------------------------------------------- Probably the oldest and largest animal welfare charity. Quiet wealthy, recieving much in legacies and large donations. It is run by a central council and operates on a regional basis employing people to respond to tips on possible cases of animal abuse and also by running shelters for animals. They also prosecute numerous people they catch abusing animals. Often work closely with the police to protect animals. There is currently much controversy surrounding them with ARAs and pro-hunters claiming that each other has infiltrated them to its detriment [Telegraph 11th Feb 98] though the pro-hunt lobby has failed to date to overthrow the RSPCA's anti-hunt policy. At its AGM members voted strongly in favour to continue in this position - the motion against hunting was passed by 294 to 5 with 3 absentions. [Independent Sun, 28 Jun 1998] They were also very active in supporting Michael Foster's bill. There is also a lot of problems with them from all sides concerning their attitudes to animals and people, and over the amount of money they have and how little is actually spent on animals. There are also complaints about inspectors not answering calls etc. Their website is http://www.rspca.org.uk/ email: webmail@rspca.org.uk An unofficial website is at: http://www.airflow.demon.co.uk/rspca.htm snail mail: RSPCA Causeway Horsham West Sussex RH12 1HG Tel: 01403 264181 Fax: 01403 241048 2.1.12 Compassion In World Farming ---------------------------------- Lobby and activist group that promotes better conditions for animals on farms around the world and for the ending of intensive farming methods. Also involved in the Stop Live Exports campaign. Has videos of factory farming methods available and they have a good webpage detailing factory farm horrors at http://www.ibmpcug.co.uk/~ciwf/status.html with facts and references that was prepared for the campaign to change the Treaty of Rome. Website at: http://www.ibmpcug.co.uk/~ciwf/index.html Snail mail to: Compassion in World Farming Charles House, 5A Charles Street Petersfield, Hampshire GU32 3EH ENGLAND Tel: 01730 264208 / 268863 Fax: 01730 260791 CIWF Farm Animal Hotline: 01730 263252 Email: tmobrien@ciwf.win-uk.net 2.2 Groups that oppose AR ------------------------- 2.2.1 British Field Sports Society ---------------------------------- **UPDATE** The BFSS have changed their name to Countryside Alliance. Represents the hunters, shooters and the hare coursers of the UK. Claims also to represent the anglers as well but the anglers are not having this as they dont want to be assosiated with bloodsports. Its principle purpose is to lobby on behalf of people involved in bloodsports. Claims the support of all the countyside which polls consistantly prove wrong. A member of the Countryside Alliance for which it organised the Countryside Rally, and is a sponsor of the Game Consevation Trust. Makes numerous claims of varying merit on hunting. Janet George, their chief press officer is a regular contributer to u.p.a Currently lobbying hard against the bill by Michael Foster to end hunting with hounds (see section 4 under bloodsports). Also claims to be a conservation organisation and to be defending the countryside, but only does so when it suits it - ie when there are animals to be killed by hunters. As the current maintainer of this FAQ is very opposed to the BFSS and what it stands for this is all they are going to say, unless some representatives of the BFSS wish to write an article to take the place of this one - of reasonable length please. A good directory of bloodsport related organisations and magazines can be found on their page at http://www.bfss.org/directory.html See also the Countryside Alliance (number 2.2.3 in this section) and the Countryside Rally (section 4.1.1.2) Their webpage is at: http://www.bfss.org/ Snail mail to their new address British Field Sports Society The Old Town Hall 367 Kennington Road London SE11 4PT Tel: 0171 582 5432 Fax: 0171 793 8484 0171 793 8899 email: info@bfss.org 2.2.2 British Association for Shooting and Conservation ------------------------------------------------------- Self proclaimed "voice of shooting", it is the biggest organisation representing those who enjoy shooting in the countryside. The British Association for Shooting and Conservation Ltd was founded in 1908 by Stanley Duncan as the Wildfowlers' Association of Great Britain and Ireland and incorporates the Gamekeepers' Association of the United Kingdom, founded in 1900. Not mentioned much on u.p.a Contact details: BASC Ltd Marford Mill Rossett Wrexham LL12 0HL UK email: enquiries@basc.org.uk website: http://www.basc.org.uk/ 2.2.3 Countryside Alliance -------------------------- Formed by the BFSS, the Countryside Movement and The Countryside Buisness Group, the latter which has since merged with the BFSS. It is headed by Robin Hanbury-Tenison who is also head of the BFSS. It is a group of organisations that got together overtly to promote countryside issue by organising the Countryside Rally on July 10th, 1997. Opponents of hunting say that the various groups are nothing but cover groups for the BFSS and they all in fact represent the same people. AH people say that the Countryside Rally was set up by hunters purely to promote the hunting issue, whereas the hunters say that this is totally untrue and that it only turned out that way when Michael Foster announced his Hunting against Hounds bill. Prior to the Countryside Rally it seems that both the CM and the CBG merged with the BFSS, with the Executive Chairman of the Countryside Movement, Sir David Steel, becoming Deputy Chairman of the BFSS. It has now "merged" with the BFSS, which essentially meant that the latter merely changed their name. 2.2.4 Game Conservancy Trust ---------------------------- "The Game Conservancy Trust is a registered charity which seeks to promote the conservation of game in the British countryside. Over 50 scientists are engaged in detailed research of game ecology and farmland wildlife. Using their results, Game Conservancy Ltd advises landowners, farmers and other conservationists on practical management techniques which will benefit game and wildlife. We are a membership-based organization with a membership of around 26 000 members." From their website. ARA may view them with a pinch of salt in that they are linked with bloodsports such as shooting and fishing, practicioners of which form a significant part of their membership. contact details: Game Conservancy Trust Fordingbridge, Hampshire, SP6 1EF Tel 01425 652381 Fax 01425 655848 website http://www.game-conservancy.org.uk e-mail: game-conservancy@ukonline.co.uk 3 Campaigns =========== Mostly the large UK ones at the moment - see ARCnews and similar sites for information on the numerous ones and calls for action that are going on all the time. 3.1 Consort ----------- Consort Beagle Services was a large kennels set of the Harewood Road between Ross and Hereford that bred beagles for vivisection. It closed in July 1997 after a year long intensive campaign, several national demos resulting in heavy handed police brutality and some of the first instances of the use of cs gas in this country. On its closing many beagles were purchased by various animal welfare and animal rights groups. 3.2 Farmer Browns/Hillgrove Cattery ----------------------------------- Just outside Oxford city, next to his holiday homes Christopher Brown and his family breeds cats for vivisection. He also ran some holiday homes on his farm but has since been taken off the Caravan Club register. The scene of increasingly larger demos as the campaign against his buisness grows. There is now a lot of local support for the campaign to close him down and indeed one local reverend even went as far as to say it was morally our duty to campaign and if the law had to be broken in order to end the cruelty the so be it. Many protesters and police have fallen ill as a result of him spraying organophospates on the hedgrows and roads around his farm. The campaign is very strong and ongoing with regular vigils and national demos. In Feb 98 it was featured in a tv documentary, `The Force', on Thames Valley police who are comming under financial pressure and admit that they are acting more like Farmer Brown's private security. The money spent on Hillgrove could have brought out the farm and business several times over and now stands at close to a million pounds. Thames Valley Police needed a special Home Office grant to keep it up their level of policing. A webpage with much more detail can be found at http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/arc/campaigns/hillgrove.html The cats from Hillgrove are exported as far as Austrailia as well as to the notorious labs of Huntingdon Life Sciences and the military testing labs at Porton Down. They are in particular demand as they are supposedly "specified pathogen free' - ie kept and breed in special sterile conditions. However, in a recent court case it came out that these conditions are blatantly being broken by Christopher Brown which does not bode well for the science being performed with them. Cats are currently used at the Institute of Neurology in London (some to be used in a 'model of craniovascular pain' according to a 1996 paper) originally came from Hillgrove. In the UK, cats have the misfortune to be popular for experiments on the brain, the eye and nerve damage and for testing the physiological effects of chemicals. St Thomas's Hospital researchers recently published a paper reporting how '15 cats were submitted to brain death by rapid inflation of an intracranial balloon. A 1994 Oxford University research paper reports injecting fluorescent tracer into the brains of cats and kittens who had been 'obtained from an isolated, pathogen-free breeding colony' (quite possibly Hillgrove) and 'monocularly deprived'. They were then killed and their brains cut up for analysis. Sheffield University has been using cats in nerve-damage experiments. Also, since 1993, more than 45 million dollars has been spent in sleep deprivation studies. These experiments involve a wide variety of animals, including rats, primates, cats, mice, and rabbits. Cats, who normally nap throughout a 24 hour period, are tied to moving treadmills and forced to walk until they collapse. Adrian Morrison, of the University of Pennsylvania, is yet another person involved in these experiments. Given more than one million dollars for his "work", he's suctioned out pieces of cats' brains and then watched what happened when they weren't allowed to sleep. He's also electrically burned out portions of cats' brains, used plexiglass devices to keep them from shutting their eyes, and crushed their spines prior to depriving them of sleep. 3.3 Live Exports ---------------- This is the big campaign protesting against the export from British ports and airports of live farm animals on their way to Europe. The main bone of contention was the cruel conditions in which the animals were transported, especially veal calves. The campaign was a high profile one for sometime, especially at places like Coventry, Shoreham and Brightlingsea where there were numerous clashes with authority. Ultimately successful in changing conditions for animals. In Nov 97, Peter O'Sullevan handed the government a petition signed by 800,000 people supporting a ban on live exports. There is a website at http://www.chaos.org.uk/~maureen/lexports.html where contact numbers for further details on how it all went. Another webpage worth visiting for details of the ongoing campaign in Dover is http://www3.mistral.co.uk/rfield/ 3.3.1 Jill Phipps ----------------- Jill Phipps was a protestor killed by a lorry carrying live animals at Coventry Airport. There is debate as to how she died - police reports and witnesses disagreeing - and the merits of her death on talk.politics.animals 3.4 McDonalds ------------- A legitimate target for practically every social, animal, environmental campaign going. Hard to know where to start on this one, so the best thing to do is to send you to the McLibel website http://www.McSpotlight.org/ - which is now one of the biggest and most popular websites in the world. For those few of you who havent heard McDonalds won a very hollow victory against David Morris and Helen Steel for distributing leaflets claimed by McDonalds as libelous.These leaflets are probably now among the most widely distributed in the world as a result. McDonalds are not pressing to collect the damages they were awarded and have dropped other actions against the still defiant Morris and Steel. It cost McDonalds in the region of £10m while Morris and Steel defended themselves. Relevant to AR in that the judge upheld the allegations that McDonalds are involved in cruelty to animals via the chicken side of its business, something which the RSPCA are said to be investigating. 3.5 Waitrose ------------ Waitrose are a supermarket chain subsiduary of John Lewis Partnership. They own several estates in the UK where executive staff can visit, get drunk and go shooting anything in sight. Most of these people have no experience of guns before. The NAHC has called for a boycott of Waitrose and John Lewis stores until this practice has stopped. These shoots have already been sabbed and a libel action against NAHC by Waitrose has been dropped. For further details contact NAHC (section 2.1.7). 3.6 Huntingdon Life Sciences ---------------------------- Formerly Huntingdon Research Centres (and not to be confused with Hypermedia Research Centre), this UK company (with US premises) has been at the centre of several storms over its research using animals and their treatment of them. It has several buildings throughout the UK and US where it does work with animal for a variety of companies. a)The beagles: several companies including Proctor & Gamble planned hired HLS to carry out experiments on 49 beagles for a fracture cream which would have involved the dogs having their legs broken in other test it. This lead to a huge outcry in the US when ARAs broke the story and involved the actress Kim Bassinger. The storm of publicity lead to the cancellation of the proposed experiment though the dogs remained in the hands of HLS. {source: various press articles and personal communications] Update: the dogs have since been sold to animal welfare/rights groups and Yamanouchi Ltd of Japan, behind the research has said that it is cancelling the experiments altogether. b)"It's A Dog's Life" UK Documentary Channel 4 showed a documentary on 26 March, 1997 taken inside the premises of one of HLS's English research centres. (A .mov file from it can be downloaded from the website http://www.peta-online.org/temp/index.htm) Called "Countryside Undercover: It's A Dogs' Life" it had clear pictures of employees abusing animals physically and mentally and one man hurling a beagle against a cage wall. One of these employees already had a conviction for animal abuse. There had also been several official visits by government inspectors which failed to uncover this abuse. As a result there has been an outcry and HLS is under pressure. Its shares were suspended and many companies employing its services have pulled out. Following a Home Office inquiry the UK government has required it to meet 16 stringent conditions by the end of November if it is to regain its licences. If these conditions are not met then it is likely that the company will be forced to close its animal research side which accounts for one third of its staff. It is estimated to have 100,000 animals including 1,000 beagles and 700 monkeys. Several members of staff have been sacked already and two people are being investigated for criminal offenses relating to it. Over 20 hours of film where taken of which only a part were shown on television.[source: Electronic Telegraph, Friday 25 July 1997; P.E.T.A.]. c)US video Sponsored by PETA a video of similar animal abuses occuring in one of HLS's US laboratories was released by an infiltrator. PETA are currently in court on this one so theres a media blackout on it, though the judge has thrown out part of HLS's case in favour of PETA. Developements as a result have been that David Christopher, Research Laboratories Director of HLS, resigned from the Animal Procedures Committee; and that the Research Defence Society announced in its July newsletter that it had suspended HLS from its corporate membership. To further HLS's headaches, Camp Rena was set up outside their main complex in Cambridgeshire and in Cheshire and the pressure is being kept up with siege like conditions being enforced on the workers. An eviction of it cost HLS something like £200,000 and the site simply moved else where. A fourth such camp has opened. The bad news is that the UK government have granted HLS back their license saying that they have met the necessary criteria. However in the US they effectively lost their suit against PETA though PETA had to destroy the video footage they had gained. HLS estimated that they lost around $10 million in buisness due to PETA. In April 1998 as a result of the PETA video a US Dept of Agriculture investigation, HLS were found guilty of 23 violations of the Animal Welfare Act, fined and forced to improve conditions. In Suffolk towards the end of 1997 a license application to breed beagles to replace Consort was rejected. In September, Robert Waters and Andrew Gash admitted cruelty to dog and were handed community service orders as well as having to pay £250 in costs each. [source: Road Alert; PETA online; various private communications and newspapers] An address for HLS is: Personnel Office Huntingdon Life Sciences PO Box 2 Huntingdon Cambridgeshire PE18 6ES Telephone 01480 890500 ext 17005 (24-hour answerphone) It has a website at: http://www.get.co.uk/getads/huntingd/hunframe.htm