Author: Kristin Stone

São Paulo—O Grupo Ráscal, uma rede de restaurantes de alto padrão, que opera os restaurantes Ráscal, Cortés e Tuju, comprometeu-se a comprar exclusivamente ovos livres de gaiolas em toda a sua cadeia de abastecimento a partir de 2025. Essa política segue conversa com a Humane Society International (HSI) e outras organizações de proteção animal.

No Brasil, galinhas poedeiras são geralmente confinadas por toda a vida em gaiolas de arame – chamadas de gaiolas em bateria. Essas gaiolas são tão pequenas que os animais não podem sequer esticar suas asas completamente. Tanto o senso comum quanto a ciência concordam que imobilizar os animais por praticamente toda a vida causa angústia e dor física significativa.

O uso de gaiolas em bateria convencionais para galinhas poedeiras já foi proibido ou está em processo de eliminação em todos os estados membros da União Europeia, seis estados norte-americanos, Canadá, Nova Zelândia e Butão. A maioria dos estados da Índia, terceiro maior produtor mundial de ovos, declarou que o uso de gaiolas em bateria viola a legislação federal de bem-estar animal, e o país está discutindo uma proibição nacional.

O Grupo Ráscal se une a outras empresas do setor alimentício que já se comprometeram a comprar exclusivamente ovos livres de gaiolas no Brasil e em toda a América Latina, incluindo a Unilever, que se comprometeu com uma cadeia global de abastecimento de ovos livres de gaiolas a partir de 2020 e a Nestlé, a maior empresa de alimentos do mundo, a partir de 2025. Depois de trabalhar com a HSI, o Burger King e a Arcos Dorados – que opera o McDonald’s no Brasil e em outros 19 países da região -, comprometeram-se a comprar 100 por cento de ovos livres de gaiolas, assim como outros operadores de restaurantes, responsáveis por milhares de restaurantes no Brasil e na América Latina.

SANTIAGO—Santiago residents on their way to work this week were greeted by several hundred stand-up paper bunnies urging them to support a proposed law to ban animal testing for cosmetics in Chile as well as the trade in cosmetics product and ingredients newly tested on animals. The action was organized by the #BeCrueltyFree Chile campaign, led by NGO Te Protejo and Humane Society International, to engage citizens and demonstrate to government the level of public support for this legal reform.

Bill No 10514-11, introduced in 2016 by the bipartisan group PARDA (Parlamentarios por la dignidad animal en Chile), would modify the Health Code to prohibit the use of animals in toxicity testing of cosmetic products or their individual ingredients in Chile, as well as the sale of cosmetics that been tested on animals abroad after the law change takes effect.

#BeCrueltyFree Chile spokesperson Camila Cortínez, General Director of NGO Te Protejo, said: “Animal testing in the cosmetic industry is an obsolete and inefficient practice and we are confident that Chile can become the 38th country to say no to animal testing.”

Facts:

• Chilean law neither requires nor prohibits animal testing for cosmetics. In 2016, the Institute of Public Health sold a total of 235,510 animals for laboratory testing, of which an unknown number were used in tests for the cosmetic industry.
• Animal testing for cosmetics has been fully or partially banned in 37 countries, including the nations of the European Union, Norway, Switzerland, Israel, India, New Zealand, South Korea, Turkey, Taiwan, Guatemala and five states in Brazil.
• #BeCrueltyFree Chile is supported by leading cruelty-free beauty brands including LUSH Fresh Handmade Cosmetics, together with Chilean artists, musicians, actors and television presenters including Polo Ramiez, Pedro Engel, Paloma Jiménez and Elvira Cristi.

Media contact: Nicole Valdebenito, +56 9 8937 6741, nicole@teprotejo.cl

BRUSSELS—MEPs on the European Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries today failed to back proposals that would have significantly increased vital EU protections for European cetacean populations and helped prevent the horrific and needless deaths of porpoises, dolphins and whales accidentally entangled in fishing gear.

The rules covering incidental catches of cetaceans in fisheries (Council Regulation (EC) No 812/2004) are being repealed and incorporated into a new Regulation on the conservation of fishery resources and the protection of marine ecosystems through technical measures (2016/0074). These existing rules are clearly inadequate as large numbers of non-target animals have continued to die in some fisheries. However, proposals to improve the existing bycatch measures, such as expanding measures to include seals and other protected species, were rejected. Similarly, efforts to consider the welfare implications of bycatch were also defeated.

Become a Wildlife Defender

Joanna Swabe, senior director of public affairs for Humane Society International/Europe, issued the following statement after the committee vote:

“We are deeply disappointed by the Fisheries Committee’s lack of ambition with regard to better safeguarding cetacean populations in EU waters. Accidental entanglement in fishing gear often proves fatal to porpoises, dolphins and whales. High numbers of these cetaceans continue to die unnecessarily each year. Animals unable to free themselves endure horrific deaths, suffering serious injuries while struggling to escape and eventually suffocating underwater.

“On the plus side, cynical moves in the PECH committee to weaken the Commission’s proposal, such as amendments that sought to do away with the ban on driftnets in the Baltic Sea, were thwarted. The lifting of this prohibition could have proved be the last nail in the coffin for the harbour porpoise population in the region where fewer than 250 adults are thought to still survive. Likewise, a majority of MEPs voted against proposals to remove bycatch measures from South Western waters and to remove all requirements for monitoring and mitigating cetacean bycatch in the Mediterranean.

However, the Committee rejected all references to improving animal welfare protections and effectively opted to maintain the current status quo with respect to monitoring and mitigation requirements for the bycatch of cetaceans and other sensitive marine species, such as sea turtles, seals and seabirds. These urgently need to be improved to protect populations and prevent needless deaths and animal suffering.”

The new regulation still needs to pass one more stage as the Committee decided that its report should be voted on in plenary rather than immediately entering into interinstitutional negotiations on the file. HSI/Europe will continue to push for stronger measures and the reintroduction of key amendments to strengthen the legislative proposal when the file goes to the Plenary vote.

Facts

• Technical measures are the rules for where, when and how fishing may take place. These measures are fundamental to regulating the impact of fishing on targeted stocks, other animals and the wider marine ecosystems, and will play a key role in achieving some of the main objectives of the EU Common Fisheries Policy, such as implementing an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management, minimising the impacts of fisheries on the wider environment and avoiding unwanted catches and gradual elimination of discards.
• The Baltic Sea subpopulation of harbour porpoises are critically endangered, due largely to historical removals but with the current major threat being bycatch in fishing gear. The existing driftnet ban was introduced to protect the local harbour porpoise population.

MEXICO CITY—Artist, actor and animal lover Joaquín Ferreira, star of the hit Netflix series “Club de Cuervos,” has joined Humane Society International in calling on the Mexican government to outlaw animal testing for cosmetics. HSI’s global campaign, #BeCrueltyFree, has already helped to secure similar laws in 37 countries, including the world’s largest beauty market in the European Union. A ban in Mexico would align with similar laws currently under discussion in the United States, Canada, Brazil and other major economies.

Ferreira said, “I am proud to stand with Humane Society International to put an end to cosmetic animal testing. Every time we buy from a company, we’re funding their business, and encouraging them to keep doing what they’re doing. That’s why it’s so important for everyone who cares about animals to choose products that are cruelty-free. Together we can build a more compassionate world for people and animals alike.”

A recent survey revealed that seven out of every 10 Mexicans are against laboratory testing on animals, while surveys in other countries have produced similar findings. For example, 81 percent of Canadians, 73 percent of Americans and 66 percent of Brazilians consider cosmetics testing on animals to be a cruel practice and are in favor of it being banned.

HSI Mexico Director Anton Aguilar said: “Humane Society International would like to thank Joaquín Ferreira for supporting the #BeCrueltyFree campaign against cosmetics testing on animals in Mexico. Joaquín shares our opinion that causing pain to animals for testing cosmetics is a cruel practice.”

This is the second time Ferreira has supported an HSI Mexico campaign. He also supports HSI/Mexico’s No More Dogfighting campaign.

Media contact: Raul Arce-Contreras, rcontreras@humanesociety.org, +1 301-721-6440

Humane Society International/India has launched a tip-line for people to report cases of illegal activities in the existing West Bengal elephant corridors as a pilot project in the districts of Bankura and Jhargram. The disturbing image of mobs hurling tar bombs at an Asian elephant and her calf was taken at the border of these districts. HSI/India hopes the tip line will help reduce the rising human-wild elephant conflict situation in the state of West Bengal and the risk it poses to these animals.

The organization is also offering a reward of up to 10,000 INR for information leading to the identification, arrest and conviction of the persons responsible for such illegal activities, such as mining, installation of high-voltage wires and human encroachment. HSI/India urges people to report such activities at +918899117773.

Instances of human-elephant conflict can escalate quickly to critical levels, where it threatens the safety of both the animals and humans. Another consequence of the repeated occurrences of conflict is the growing animosity between humans and animals that is leading to a further lowering of levels of tolerance in humans.

N.G. Jayasimha, managing director of HSI/India, said, “Elephants are an integral part of our ecosystem and finding effective ways to live alongside them is the key to conflict reduction and management in the near future. Illegal encroachment and other non-forestry activities seriously threaten the population of elephants and increase the potential for conflict several fold. We hope the tip line and reward will encourage people to report illegal activities in the region.”

Become a Wildlife Defender.

The Asian elephant is a protected species listed under Schedule I of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. While erection of solar powered fencing to ward off wild animals from agricultural estates with a mild jolt is permitted, protection of estates and farms with 220V of electricity is prohibited as it has the potential to kill any animal or human who comes in contact with the live wire.

HSI/India supports the limited use of electric fencing in certain human-animal conflict situations, but only as long as the fence is professionally installed, maintained and monitored, and the voltage is low enough to prevent harm to wildlife. HSI/India has also urged the West Bengal government to develop and implement a crowd control protocol in human – wildlife conflict situations and offered its services for the same.

Media Contact: Vidhi Malla, vmalla@hsi.org, 9560103078

Vilifying wild animals in episodes of human-wildlife conflict in India can lead to widespread outrage against the entire species in form of retaliatory killings. Humane Society International/India has written to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting asking them to develop a protocol for news reporting of human-wildlife conflict across the county.

Many recent news reports on human-wildlife conflict misinform the public about the underlying causes of those conflicts. These reports typically position humans as victims while ignoring the plight of the animals involved. They don’t tell the complete story of the complexity of the issue. For instance, that loss of habitat and competition for waning resources has led to increased incidences of encounters between wild animals and human populations. Or that human-wildlife conflict mitigation tools exist, in the form of special fencing, trained wildlife officers and public education on what to do when encountering a wild animal. At worst, news reports can incite violence against wild animals, including stoning and burning.

On electronic media, videos of animals in conflict often have jarring, violent music in the background with visual effects to portray the animal as a villain when in reality the animal is reacting in panic to being surrounded by an unruly mob. A survey conducted by Wildlife Conservation Society-India found that people associated elephants with “menace”, leopards and tigers with “attack” and bears with “mauling.” Such perception, especially combined with lack of effective wildlife management strategies at a state and central level, can prove detrimental to the cause of wildlife conservation and peaceful co-existence between humans and wildlife.

N.G Jayasimha, managing director, HSI/India, said: “It is incredible how the media plays up every incident of conflict, without paying heed to the bigger impact it is making on the wildlife and the people who are living in those areas. Indian news media typically present animals as a threat and use provocative headlines to increase eyeballs and ratings. It is unfortunate that the channels do not understand the repercussions of their stories and how they harm wildlife. The ministry needs to develop guidelines for the news media to follow so that there is ethical reporting before more damage is done.”

Become a Wildlife Defender.

Additionally, HSI/India has reached out to the West Bengal government to create a protocol on crowd-control in areas affected with human-wildlife conflict. The letter shares both ideas on how to seamlessly work to mitigate conflict situations, along with an offer to conduct training programs for district level officers.

Media Contact: Vidhi Malla, vmalla@hsi.org, 9560103078 

Lucy and Tiffany Watson have teamed up with Humane Society International UK to help consumers avoid being conned into buying cruel animal fur mislabelled as faux fur. Filmed in support of the charity’s #FurFreeBritian campaign, the sisters — and Lucy’s dog Digby — share their top tips for telling apart real and fake fur. The video comes out amidst a growing problem with fur from animals such as raccoon dogs, rabbit and fox being sold as synthetic fur online, at independent stores and even on the high-street.

House of Fraser, Debenhams, Amazon, ASOS and Lily Lulu are among the retailers that HSI UK has exposed previously selling real fur as fake with either labels or online descriptions wrongly claiming items to be ‘faux fur’ or ‘100% acrylic’. As labels can lie, HSI UK produced the video with Lucy and Tiffany to help shoppers spot fake faux fur.

In the video, Lucy and Tiffany point out three tests to help shoppers be their own fur detectives:

Test 1: The Tips Test – Real fur tapers to a point at the end (unless sheared). Faux fur tips are blunt where the material has been cut in manufacturing.

Test 2: The Roots Test – Faux fur is attached to woven fabric. The base of real fur is an animal’s skin (leather).

Test 3: The Burn Test – Only to be conducted on an owned item (not in store!), cut and burn a few hairs. Real animal fur singes and smells like burnt human hair. Faux fur melts and smells like burnt plastic.

Lucy and Tiffany also point viewers to a free, downloadable wallet-sized guide to help tell the difference between real and faux fur.

Lucy said “The fur trade really disgusts me, it’s hideously cruel and it really upsets me to see so much fur being worn. But I suspect that many people may be wearing real fur without realising it because so much of it is mislabelled. Creating this video lets us alert shoppers to how easy it is to be misled into buying real fur. Many people I’ve worked with wear real fur, knowingly or unknowingly, so it’s an issue I feel particularly strongly about. There really is no excuse for wearing cruel fur anymore and I hope this video helps people make more informed and ethical decisions about what they are buying.”

Tiffany said “Some of the fake faux fur items found by Humane Society International UK in the past have really shocked me because in some cases they were sold by brands that Lucy and I have bought from. It shows that even trusted retailers can slip up and it really is for consumers to take matters into their own hands and be vigilant. Cheap price, reassuring labels and trusted retailers can no longer be relied on to tell you if fur is real or not. Lucy and I hate fur so much, we fully support Humane Society International’s call for real fur being banned from Britain for good.”

To highlight the issue further, HSI UK has launched a nationwide campaign with cruelty-free cosmetics retailer Lush with an eye-catching lenticular currently in all 103 Lush store windows across the UK. The lenticular shows a woman wearing a fur bobble hat cleverly morphing into a fox on a fur farm.

HSI UK is calling on the government to introduce mandatory fur labelling so that consumers can avoid the real fur products to which they ethically object. HSI believes that ultimately it is not enough simply to label cruel fur products, and a UK ban on the import and sale of fur is needed to bring the marketplace in line with public opinion.

Claire Bass, executive director of Humane Society International UK, said: “British consumers watching Lucy and Tiffany’s video will be shocked to learn that they are being duped into buying real animal fur. Real fur is the product of animal cruelty, with animals living tragic and utterly deprived lives in small, wire cages, until electrocuted or gassed for their fur. It is totally unacceptable for trusted brands and independent retailers to sell real animal fur at deceptively cheap prices, described as “faux” or “100% acrylic”. To fix the fake faux fur scandal, we’re calling on the government to introduce mandatory, clear labelling of all animal fur as an urgent first step, but ultimately we want to see the UK close its borders to the cruel, outdated and unnecessary fur trade.”

A guide to telling the difference between real and faux fur can be downloaded here.

Fur facts:

• The top five fur-producing countries/regions in the world are China, North America (Canada & the United States), Denmark, France and Poland.
• Animals on fur farms are subjected to terrible conditions. Fur farms keep animals in small, barren cages, physically and mentally deprived for their entire lives, before being killed and skinned for their fur. Wild animals such as coyotes fair no better, caught in agonising traps for hours or even days before being shot.
• Although the UK outlawed fur farming on moral grounds in 2000, and EU regulations ban fur from domestic cats, dogs or commercial seal hunts, the UK still imports and sells fur from a range of other species such as fox, rabbit, mink, coyote, racoon dog and chinchilla.
• HM Revenue and Customs statistics show that in 2016 the UK imported £39,867,668 of animal fur from EU countries, and £15,746,833 from the rest of the world, totalling £55,614,501 in imports. £30,068,653 of fur is reported as having been re-exported/dispatched, leaving a domestic market of £25,545,848.
• A 2016 YouGov poll commissioned by HSI UK shows that the vast majority of the British public oppose fur, with nine out of 10 Brits believing it unacceptable to buy and sell real fur, averaged across nine species.

Media contact: Harriet Barclay, HBarclay@hsi.org, 07794354596.