Author: Kristin Stone

Hubbali—In a two-day capacity building workshop, Humane Society International/India sensitized officers of the Forest Department at Hubbali, Karnataka on the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 and the legal protection conferred to snakes.

The workshop also touched upon breaking the myths around snakes during the festival of Nagpanchami and the cruelty inflicted on snakes during this festival. The session also gave a practical, hands-on experience to officers on humane snake handling and rescue. This will equip officers responding to rescues with correct techniques of handling snakes using the right equipment.

“The capture and display of snakes is an offence under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. Snake charmers take advantage of the demand for live snake worship during Nagpanchami,” said Sumanth Bindumadhav, wildlife campaign manager of HSI/India. “Weeks ahead of the festival, snake charmers capture the snakes, pull their fangs out, stitch their mouths shut and keep them in dirty, cramped baskets with no access to light, fresh air, food or water. We are happy to work with the Forest Department of Karnataka and the Hubbali’s Forest officers here to help prevent cruelty to snakes and celebrate a cruelty-free Nagpanchami using snake idols made of mud or clay.”

HSI/India has launched an animal welfare program in Hubballi. In June, HSI/India conducted a first aid training for pet parents and citizens of Hubballi.

Media Contact: Neelam Naseeb, nnaseeb@hsi.org, +919205104695

THIMPHU—Humane Society International—in a joint project with the Department of Livestock, Ministry of Agriculture and Forest, Royal Government of Bhutan—has conducted its second dog population survey in Bhutan since 2009, when the country’s National Dog Population Management and Rabies Control Project was launched. Approximately 85,000 dogs in Bhutan have undergone sterilization and anti-rabies vaccination since that time.

After researchers analyse the results, they will be able to determine the pet population per 100 humans. The findings will be crucial to designing responsible pet ownership and community engagement programs.

Two surveys were conducted from June 24 to July 10: a street dog population count and a Knowledge Attitude Practice survey. The surveys counted the street dog and household pet dog population, and documented attitudes and practices of humans towards their dogs. HSI and the Department of Livestock staff conducted the street dog population survey in the eight districts of Thimphu, Paro, Samtse, Chhukha, Bhumthang, Trashignag, Sarpang, and Samdrupjongkhar.

Key categories of data collected were: total number of street dogs, number of sterilized dogs, number of unsterilized dogs, number of lactating females, number of pups, body condition and skin condition. These details were recorded via an Open Street Map tracker application designed for accurate GPS tagging of the dogs’ exact locations.

The household pet dog survey was conducted in Thimphu and Paro Valley to document pet information, history of dog bites and general attitudes related to street dogs. The responsibility and commitment level of the owners, whether the dog is allowed to roam freely or not, and the health and well-being of the dog were also assessed.

Key survey insights:

• 21 percent of urban households in Thimphu and Paro city own pet dogs.
• 40 percent of rural households own a pet dog.
• 60-80 percent of dogs in Bhutan are sterilised and vaccinated.
• Canine transmissible venereal tumors were common among street dogs before the project started in 2009. In the 2018 survey, no dogs were found with CTVT in Thimphu city. The HSI team suggests this to be the direct consequence of the NDPM program.

Dr. Hiruka Mahat, deputy chief veterinary officer with Bhutan’s National Centre for Animal Health, stated, “The Monitoring Evaluation Impact Assessment, which includes the KAP survey and street dog count, are vital tools to gauge the impact the National Dog Population Management and Rabies Control Project had on having a sustainable dog population in the country since its inception in 2009. The KAP survey has helped us determine any improvement in community knowledge and perceptions towards free-roaming dogs and its control programme and how the public perception has changed over time. This would enable us to have appropriate strategies in place that would go a long way in achieving the project goals.”

Dr. Amit Chaudhari, senior program manager, monitoring and evaluation, HSI/India, said, “It is important to understand the impact of dog sterilization intervention in Bhutan. After almost 10 years of the sterilization project, we can see what trends are developing. We conducted the first survey for Bhutan in 2015, in which we found higher sterilization rates in urban areas (67 % sterilized street dogs in Thimphu city and 73.8 % in Paro) than in rural areas (45.5 % sterilized street dogs in Thimphu rural areas and 57.6 % in Paro rural areas). Now, three years later, we can compare both situations and learn more about complex dog dynamics.”

Media Contact: Simran Dhaliwal, 8980266688, sdhaliwal@hsi.org

HYDERABAD—The High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad has impleaded at least 17 elected representatives of Andhra Pradesh for the deliberate violation of the ban on cockfighting as well as encouraging gambling and the sale of illicit liquor. Despite the Court reiterating the ban in December 2016 and again in January 2018, large scale cockfighting took place in various districts of Andhra Pradesh in 2017 and 2018. Humane Society International/India has been campaigning to end cockfighting in Andhra Pradesh, and assists in legal intervention against the cruel and illegal practice.

The 17 public representatives include a member of Parliament, members of the Legislative Assembly, and members of district and village councils.

N. G. Jayasimha, managing director of Humane Society International/India, said, “We welcome the order of the Honourable High Court. It is high time that legislators are held responsible for not only disobeying the law themselves but also misguiding the public and getting them to do the same. A practice that glorifies so many illegal activities should have no place in a civilized society.”

Give now to support our lifesaving work.

Important points from the High Court order with case no: W.P. (PIL) No.320 of 2014 and W.P. (PIL) M.P. No.305 of 2016 IN W.P. (PIL) No.177 of 2016:

1. Government of A.P. shall, at the earliest and in any event not later than 31 January 2017, constitute Societies for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in all Districts of the State of Andhra Pradesh strictly in accordance with the 2001 Rules.

2. The District Collectors of all the Districts, more particularly of West Godavari, East Godavari, Krishna and Guntur, shall constitute joint inspection teams, for each Mandal in their respective Districts, consisting of a police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police, the Tahsildar, and a representative of either the Animal Welfare Board of India or a member of a non-governmental organization espousing the cause of animals or persons involved in the prevention of cruelty to animals. Two police constables and a photographer shall assist each of these inspection teams, which shall be constituted on or before 07 January 2017. These joint inspection teams shall be provided necessary assistance by the District Administration to tour all villages in their Mandal and identify playgrounds/cock-pits where such events are proposed to be held.

3. The District Collector/the Commissioners of Police/Superintendent of Police of the District, on being informed of the places where such playgrounds and cockpits have been formed, shall take immediate action to ensure that such playgrounds are not utilized for conducting cockfights, if need be, by exercising powers under Section 144 Cr.P.C.

4. The Joint inspection team shall be entitled to seize instruments used or intended to be used for the cock fights, and any money which may have been collected towards betting at such events.

5. All the District Collectors, the Commissioners of Police and the Superintendent of Police, more particularly from these four Districts, shall ensure effective implementation of the provisions of the 1960 and the 1974 Acts. They shall be held personally responsible for lapses, if any, on their part in ensuring its proper and effective implementation during the ensuing Sankranthi festivals.

6. The District Collectors and the Superintendents of Police may, if need be, organize village level meetings to inform the general public of the provisions of the 1960 and the 1974 Acts, the need to ensure its effective implementation, and to prevent cruelty to animals i.e., cocks/roosters.

7. As held by the Supreme Court, in Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja: (2014) 7 SCC 547, the District Collectors, the Commissioners of Police and the Superintendent of Police shall be entitled to take disciplinary action against the erring Tahsildars and Police officers for their failure to ensure effective implementation of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act, 1974 and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.

Media Contact: Neelam Naseeb, nnaseeb@hsi.org, +91-9205104695

LUCKNOW—Humane Society International/India has written to the Honourable Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Shri Yogi Adityanath, urging him to take back the state elephant Rangmala and other elephants who have been transported illegally to Rajasthan’s Amer Fort.

The elephants, who are now being used for joyrides at Amer Fort, are in a dire state, living in inadequate facilities and facing abuse. 56-year-old Rangmala had no transport certificate or ownership certificate and one of her tusks has been illegally removed.

Take action: Say no to cruel elephant rides.

N.G. Jayasimha, managing director of HSI/India said, “We are appalled at the illegalities taking place at the Amer Fort, and we appeal to the government of Uttar Pradesh to bring its valuable elephants back home where they belong. They are the state’s natural treasures and should not have been moved to Rajasthan to be used as entertainment.”

Letters were also sent to the Chief Ministers of Delhi, Assam, Nagaland and Andaman and Nicobar Islands—other states whose elephants have been taken illegally to Rajasthan.

Humane Society International/India has a campaign to end elephant rides at Amer Fort, sending more than 100 notices on various violations to the Rajasthan Forest Department. In May, the Forest Department was ordered to move 10-year-old Suman to a state elephant sanctuary after she was rescued from illegal captivity. Suman is the daughter of Champa, who died while working at Amer Fort. Take action and donate to help.

Media Contact: Neelam Naseeb, nnaseeb@hsi.org, +919205104695

An Inquiry by the Environment Food and Rural Affairs Committee, launched in response to investigations by Humane Society International/UK and media partners, published its report today calling on Government to hold a public consultation to consider whether to ban the import and sale of animal fur in the UK, post-Brexit. The report, welcomed by HSI/UK which leads the #FurFreeBritain campaign, also calls on the Government to introduce a new mandatory fur and animal product labelling regime to enable consumers to make informed buying choices.

In response to the Committee’s question “Should the UK ban fur?” HSI/UK presented detailed evidence of the inherent cruelty of fur farming and trapping, as well as the “moral inconsistency” between the UK’s ban on fur farming and the importation of fur, described by the charity as “outsourcing cruelty”. Despite UK-wide bans of fur farming on ethical grounds since 2003, and EU bans on the sale of cat and dog fur (2007) and seal fur (2010), the UK still allows the import and sale of fur from a range of other species such as fox, rabbit, mink, coyote, racoon dog and chinchilla. The vast majority of these animals are factory-farmed in battery cage systems in countries such as China, Poland and Finland. According to the most recent trade statistics from HM Revenue & Customs, in the last year* the UK imported almost £75 million of animal fur (£74,154,873). It’s a double standard that HSI/UK hopes to see outlawed.

Take Action: Call for a #FurFreeBritain.

HSI/UK Executive Director Claire Bass said, “The UK was the first country in the world to ban fur farming, after the British public, politicians and veterinary experts concluded that it is an inhumane and completely unnecessary industry. So it is total double standard for us to still be importing and selling fur from animals still suffering the same conditions we banned here. The UK Government has the opportunity to blaze a trail as the first country to ban the sale of all animal fur, so we are delighted that EFRA Committee members are pressing government to launch a public consultation to help inform and build that case. Our #FurFreeBritain campaign already has the support of the British public, veterinary experts, as well as an ever-growing list of retailers and designers who see that the future of fashion is fur-free. With innovation in textiles offering high quality humane alternatives to real fur, the fur trade’s days are clearly numbered, but it can’t end quickly enough for the hundreds of millions of animals trapped and tormented in tiny cages. A UK ban would be a major nail in the coffin of this morally bankrupt industry.”

The EFRA report is extremely critical of the mis-sale of animal fur as fake fur, a scandal exposed by HSI UK, and urges decisive action from retailers and Trading Standards to ensure that consumers are not sold “fake faux fur”. Evidence presented to the Committee by HSI/UK underlined deficiencies in the current labelling laws, including that there is no legal requirement to use the specific word “fur” on items containing real fur. Evidence submitted by HSI/UK showed the Committee numerous examples of real fur being sold as fake fur on the UK high street and online, commonly containing labels such as “100% acrylic”. The Committee acknowledged the extent of the problem, stating that “the current labelling system is confusing, not-fit-for purpose, and with a high degree of non-compliance. It is also not being enforced.” The report recommends that a new labelling law should ensure that items containing fur should list the species, country of origin and method of production.

HSI’s campaign for a fur import ban was also discussed in Parliament on June 4th in a Westminster Hall debate at which 32 MPs from across the political spectrum passionately spoke out in favour of banning fur imports from the United Kingdom, calling the fur trade “vile”, “loathsome” and the “grimmest of human activities”. Some of the fur ban’s most vocal political advocates include Kerry McCarthy, Sir Roger Gale, Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell MP, Tim Loughton, Daniel Zeichner, Caroline Lucas, Maria Eagle and Zac Goldsmith.

The campaign has also garnered strong celebrity support; 31 of the country’s biggest celebrities – including Dame Judi Dench, Ricky Gervais, Alesha Dixon, Paloma Faith and Evanna Lynch, sent a letter to the Prime Minister calling for a fur import ban. The full letter and list of signatories can be read here.

And last month, Environment Secretary Michael Gove received a letter from 50 veterinarians and animal experts speaking out against cruel fur farming. The full letter and list of signees can be read here. Take action and donate to help.

Fur facts:

• More than 130 million animals suffer each year in the global fur trade, the majority reared in terrible conditions on fur factory farms. This number does not include rabbits, whose numbers (in the hundreds of millions) are not reported by the fur trade.
• There is no legal requirement to use the specific word “fur” on items containing real fur. EU regulations require items defined as “textile products” that contain animal fur to carry the confusing wording “contains non-textile parts of animal origin” however this does not clearly tell consumers that it means “real animal fur,” and in practice this wording requirement is rarely adhered to at all, as evidenced in our report, “Mislabelled and misleading”. Products sold online are exempt even from the above confusing wording requirement, and footwear or non-garment accessories such as handbags and keychains are also excluded.
• Around the world in countries such as the U.S., France, Poland and China, wild species are kept in small, barren battery cages for their entire lives before being killed by gassing or electrocution.
• Wild animals such as coyotes fair no better – they can languish in agony in cruel traps for hours or even days before dying from dehydration, starvation or attacks by predators, or being shot or crushed to death when the trapper returns.
• A 2018 YouGov poll commissioned by HSI UK shows that more than two-thirds of the British public support a UK fur import ban, with only 8 percent opposed to the idea.
• In recent times there has been a fast-growing list of designers who have stopped using fur – Gucci, Versace, Michael Kors, Donna Karan and Jimmy Choo – who join those with long-standing fur bans, such as Hugo Boss, Armani, Tommy Hilfiger and Vivienne Westwood.

* (April 2017 – March 2018 inclusive)

Media Contact: Harriet Barclay hbarclay@hsi.org

Aguascalientes, Ags.—The Aguascalientes State Environmental Protection Agency (PROESPA) and the animal protection organization Humane Society International/Mexico organized a three-day event that included round tables and a series of conferences, the goal being to professionalize efforts to protect animals, standardize protocols and propose improvements to local laws already in force.

“These have been three very productive days. The issue has awakened a lot of interest and it’s been great to see so many people, groups, organizations, boards and authorities finally come together to standardize protocols and professionalize this endeavor that has gathered such momentum in recent years,” said Felipe Márquez, manager of the HSI Mexico program against animal cruelty.

PROESPA, the Animal Health, Control and Welfare Center, the State Prosecutor’s Office and the Gendarmerie were just some of the authorities that met at the Railway Museum with animal protection organizations, independent rescuers and veterinary boards to discuss proposals to improve and update Aguascalientes’ animal protection laws.

The conferences were given by experts in different fields, like the lawyer Ana Larre, who worked with HSI on a bill to get dog fights prosecutable under the Federal Penal Code, Dr. Claudia Edwards, an animal behaviorist who specializes in felines and the running of shelters, and the veterinary Edgar Islas, who gave a talk on the importance of communications within organizations.

Likewise, Dr. Susan Monger and veterinarian Juan Carlos Almarez Ortíz, both instructors at International Veterinary Consultants, gave a specialized conference on neutering.

These round tables are expected to produce a series of bills that will be presented to the incoming Legislature with a view to reforming the State Animal Protection Law, Animal Protection Regulations for the Municipality of Aguascalientes, the State Penal Code and even the Aguascalientes Political Constitution.

Media Contact: Magaly Garabay, mgaribay@idee.agency

LONDON—Home Office statistics published today detailing the United Kingdom’s use of animals in scientific procedures in 2017 [1] have been sharply criticised by Humane Society International/UK as exposing the government’s complacency and continued, embarrassing failure to use its regulatory and research funding powers to curb out of control animal breeding by universities and other laboratories.

According to the statistics, 3.79 million procedures on living animals were authorised by UK authorities in 2017, of which almost 2 million (half the total number) were associated with the production of genetically altered animals. Surplus animals from continuous breeding programmes are not used for any specific testing or research purpose, and as such their production cannot be claimed to advance scientific knowledge or medical progress. The current trend flies in the face of a July 2011 government commitment by then the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department to work to reduce the use of animals in scientific research [2].

Sign the pledge to Be Cruelty-Free.

Troy Seidle, vice president for Research & Toxicology at HSI, said: “It is disgraceful that seven years after the UK government’s pledge to reduce animal use in scientific research, the animal body count remains high year on year, with no meaningful or effective strategy in place to address the number one cause: out-of-control breeding of engineered animals. Once again, Humane Society International calls on the government to require increased use of cryopreservation, the freezing of sperm or embryos, to short-circuit this appalling breed-kill cycle. As the department responsible for authorising animal experiments, the Home Office has all the authority it needs to require universities and other institutions to adopt more efficient strategies to minimise over-production of genetically modified animals — all that’s missing is the motivation to act.”

HSI tabled a Parliamentary question in September last year to enquire what steps the Home Secretary would be taking to reduce this overbreeding of genetically altered animals in the UK [3]. The response was bland, generic and ultimately reveals the lack of governmental appetite to meet this issue head-on, culminating in the breeding and death of almost 2 million animals this year. The Home Office publication of an Assessment Framework for the Efficient Breeding of Genetically Altered Animals [4] may appear to address the issue, but the lack of enforcement of this ‘advisory’ document means that it is essentially toothless and merely pays lip service to the overall mandate of the European Directive 2010/63/EU to replace animal use in scientific research and to the coalition government’s pledges made in 2010 to reduce the use of animals in scientific research [5].

Facts:

• Despite the ever-increasing growth in animal procedures, there is no corresponding increase in human therapeutics making it to the clinic, with both the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Administration approving lowest number of new drugs in 2016 [6,7].
• Some genetic mutations cause catastrophic defects, such as mice born with shortened limbs, with no limbs, with the front of their head missing [8]. If the mice survive birth, they could have significant developmental defects affecting their limbs, eyes, brain or hair; they may be predisposed to tumour formation, or they could be subjected to deliberate, repeated and ultimately fatal infections to assess the impact of the mutation on their response [9].
• Advances in gene sequencing and phenotypic analysis in humans is ushering in the era of precision medicine, and focused funding and efforts on human-relevant technologies like these are more likely to provide disease understanding and much-needed new treatments [10].

ENDS

Contact: Dr Lindsay Marshall, 07719 531 675, lmarshall@hsi.org

Notes to editors:

1. 2017 Home Office statistics: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/724611/annual-statistics-scientific-procedures-living-animals-2017.pdf

2. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm110718/wmstext/110718m0001.htm#1107182000388

3. https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2017-09-04/6958/

4. https://org.uib.no/dyreavd/Documents/GAA%20tool.pdf

5. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/277942/bis-14-589-working-to-reduce-the-use-of_animals-in-research.pdf

6. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/developmentapprovalprocess/druginnovation/ucm483775.htm

7. Mullard, A. (2017). EMA drug approval recommendations. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 16;77. doi:10.1038/nrd.2017.17

8. Turgeon B, Meloche S (2009). Interpreting neonatal lethal phenotypes in mouse mutants: insights into gene function and human diseases. Physiol Rev. Jan;89(1):1-26. doi: 10.1152/physrev.00040.2007

9. Holtzclaw JD, et al. (2004). Enhanced pulmonary and systemic response to endotoxin in transgenic sickle mice. AJRCCM. 169(6)2004.

10. Aronson SJ, Rehm, HL (2015). Building the foundation for genomics in precision medicine. Nature. 526: 336-342. doi:10.1038/nature15816

WASHINGTON—Yesterday, South Africa’s Department of Environmental Affairs announced the 2018 lion bone export quota. The approved quota of 1,500 skeletons is effective from June 7, 2018.

Humane Society International/Africa’s executive director, Audrey Delsink, issued the following statement:

“The lion bone trade is South Africa’s claim to shame. Last year’s quota of 800 was shocking enough: the increase to 1,500 in 2018 has no scientific basis and is a blatant license to kill for the lion breeding industry. An expanded export quota for captive lion skeletons normalizes and exacerbates demand for parts of lions and even other big cats, such as tigers, as research and seizures have shown.

Give now to help protect lions and other animals worldwide.

“It is unconscionable that thousands of lions kept in captivity will soon meet their fate in slaughterhouses across South Africa. The quota increase may even incentivize the creation of new breeding facilities; a travesty when the current facilities are fraught with deplorable animal welfare and provincial irregularities as demonstrated recently in the Orange Free State Wag n Bietjie case. Humane Society International calls on South Africa and the importing countries—Laos and Viet Nam—to take the high road and end their role in this gruesome trade.”

Background:

• The African lion is listed in Appendix II in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) with a zero export quota for wild specimens for commercial purposes. However, an annotation to the listing allows South Africa to establish annual export quotas for trade in lion parts for commercial purposes, derived from captive breeding operations.
• According to a report submitted to the 30th meeting of the CITES Animals Committee in July 2018, Viet Nam was the largest importer of lion bodies and the second largest importer of skeletons. Laos was the largest importer of lion bones and skeletons. The U.S. was the largest import of lion trophies. The report suggested that some lion poaching and trafficking involves organized criminal groups, and seizures alongside other commodities such as rhino horn indicate that these groups are dealing in multiple species.
• There are between 6,000 to 8,000 captive lions in more than 260 facilities across South Africa.

Media Contact: Rodi Rosensweig, 203-270-8929, RRosensweig@humanesociety.org