Posts Tagged ‘animal welfare’

Why won’t the UK Government ban wild animals in circuses?

Monday, February 6th, 2012

By Nicola Gothard

In light of today’s news that the Greek government has banned the use of all animals in circuses, it would be timely to explore this situation in the UK. Greece joins a growing number of countries to prohibit or limit the use of animals in circuses. National measures have been adopted in Bolivia, Austria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Poland, Peru, Portugal, Sweden, Singapore, Costa Rica, India and Israel. So, why is the UK, a nation of animal lovers, lagging behind not only European countries but also third world countries not normally known for their animal welfare standards? Despite a unanimous vote in the House of Commons in favour of a ban on June 23rd 2011, the UK government has failed to implement a ban on wild animals in circuses.

The Tory led government appears adamant that there won’t be a ban but the reasons for their position remain unclear. There are very few circuses in UK that even have performing wild animals and unlike fox hunting – visiting the circus is not a favourite past time of Tory MPs and the general elite. Perhaps there is a connection between the Conservatives and powerful people in the circus industry or perhaps they view any measures to improve animal welfare to be another affront on their lifestyle and another step on the slippery slope to ruining all of their country pursuits?

Initially the government said that a ban might be an illegal act under European Union law as it could be seen to contravene the European Services Directive. The European Commission clarified their position to concerned MEPs, stating that in theory a ban could be against the Services Directive but it could also be justified by ‘overriding reasons of public interest’ and that public concern for animal welfare is a legally valid reason under this exemption. The British government said that there was already a legal challenge against Austria after they banned wild animals in Circuses and they would wait to see what the outcome of this challenge would be. In December 2011, the Austrian Constitutional Court in Vienna announced that it had thrown out an application by Circus Krone to overturn Austria’s ban on wild animals in circuses – therefore negating another of the governments arguments.

So what is public opinion in the UK on this matter? In 2011, an independent poll carried out by YouGov revealed that 72% of the public backed the ban with only 8% against. Furthermore, In 2010, Defra announced the results of their 2009 public consultation on animals in circuses, which resulted in a huge 94.5% public support for a ban.

All the arguments against a ban have been answered; by the European Commission, by the Austrian courts, by public opinion and by a unanimous vote in parliament.  If like me you think the government should get their act together and take in to account the opinions of democratically elected MPs and the general public they are supposed to represent, then please write to your MP and ask them to sign EDM 2563 directing the Government to use its powers under section 12 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to introduce a regulation banning the use of all wild animals in circuses to take effect by 1 July 2012.

You can see if your MP has already signed here

Find out how to contact your MP here

Read more about this campaign here

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Animals & Politics, Captive Wild Animals | 1 Comment »

Give Whales A Voice @ IWC

Saturday, June 5th, 2010

Contributed by, Nicola Gothard

The International Whaling Commission (IWC) will be meeting on 21st June to discuss a possible lifting of the commercial whaling ban. The IWC regulates the whaling industry and is responsible for the ban on commercial whaling which came in to force in 1986.  However the commission is largely focused on regulating the whaling industry so that it can be sustainable and the ban had little to do with animal welfare. Whale stocks were hunted to near extinction and a ban was necessary.  However three countries; Japan, Norway and Iceland have continued to hunt whales. Iceland and Norway have objected to the ban and set their own hunting quotas – ignoring international law. Japan operates it’s whaling industry under the guise of ’scientific’; research – the ban allows for limited whaling in the interest of scientific research. Australia have recently filed a suit claiming that Japanese whaling has nothing to do with science and is more commercially motivated.

At the upcoming meeting members will vote on a deal which will see the end to the ban and legitimize commercial whaling. The proposal would allow the three countries that have defied the ban to hunt legally provided they kill less whales than they have been doing illegally. This is a ridiculous proposal, it’s like telling a criminal that their activities are no longer illegal but as a trade-off they can no longer commit the crime so often. Firstly they probably won’t listen because they have already shown they have no respect for the law. Secondly, the international community should not bow to bully nations throwing their weight around. Thirdly, it completely disregards the fact that whaling is inherently inhumane and as such should not be inflicted on any number of whales.

How to Help

I have scouted around the net for various ways you can show governments and the IWC that you do not want to lift the ban on commercial whaling:

1. Everybody can sign this petition to the Norwegian Government  here

2. Everybody can join WSPA Australia’s campaign to give the whales a voice. They are asking everyone to record messages to the International Whaling Commission which they will take to the meeting on June 21st here

3.  In America you can write a letter to your senator asking them to support the International Whale Conservation Protection Act here. The USA is as ever a key decision maker and it id vital that they vote against lifting the ban.

4.  Email the International Whaling Commission to tell them what you think at secretariat@iwcoffice.org

5. In this international community it is important that we all show our national representatives how we feel.  You can find the name of the representative of your country in the IWC  here.  Please contact them and tell them how you would like your country to vote.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Animal Welfare in Action, Animals & Politics, Animals in the News, Wild Animals | 1 Comment »

Animal Testing: more animals and more support than ever before

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010

Contributed by, Nicola Gothard

According to an article in Telegraph today, there is more support for animal testing than ever before and we can thank animal rights extremists for it!

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills released new figures that reveal how public opposition to scientific and medical research involving animals has fallen by 10 per cent in the past 10 years.

A survey conducted by Ipsos MORI shows that just a third of British adults would like a ban on animal experimentation, while the number of people who now unconditionally accept the need for animal research has increased by 28 per cent since 1999.

It comes at a time when the use of animals in experiments has reached an all-time high. Nearly 3.7 million experiments were performed on animals last year, a rise of 454,000, or 14 per cent, on the previous year.

It’s not all bad news though, Over the past five years, the Government has invested £80 million in research aimed at finding alternatives to animal testing through the National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research.

So are they right? Is this unfortunate rise in support due to the very people that wanted to end animal testing? Well, in part, yes- I think they are right. The public don’t like extremism and violence. Some animal rights extremists have done terrible things including threats against researchers families, digging up graves and physical attacks.

I am strongly opposed to animal testing on moral grounds. I think all animals are equal in that they can all suffer and have an equal interest in not doing so. I also think  that it is not morally acceptable to take one life to save a million or any other number. I don’t think you can weigh something as sacred as a life. If you take the life of one animal, you take everything from it. I just don’t think lives can be additive. If one life is 100% important – you can’t get greater  than that and by adding the worth of lives together it doesn’t increase the worth – it’s 100% whether it be one, two or ten million.

So, even coming from such a perspective,  I totally disagree with animal rights extremism for two reasons. Firstly, I don’t think extreme actions are going to win the hearts and minds of the public. If these people genuinely care about ending animal testing, then they need to think strategically. Sometimes we all want to scream and shout and cry but we understand and have done since our parents refused to respond to such tantrums since the age of three, that such behaviour is counter-productive. You will not win the sympathy of the public by setting yourself apart from them and by scaring them in to submission. I am also opposed extremism because people matter to me as much as animals. It is not right to subject them to a life of living in fear. It is not right to bully people in to doing what you want and it is not right that such people should get to play the victim card – we should not give them that power.

Like it or not, people rule the world and they make the decisions about what is right and wrong – therefore it is vitally important to stop targeting the researchers and start to try and win over society. I don’t believe you will win over the public by appealing to their better natures either. People are inherently selfish creatures. They don’t want to die and they on the whole value human life above all else, especially when it comes to prolonging it. Therefore in my opinion, if we want to win the war on animal testing, we must show the public that it is no longer neccessary. Alternatives to animal testing have been under development for some time now. We must show people that they work  just as well and ending animal testing doesn’t have to be a choice between their lives and animal life but a simple matter of progress.

If you are interested in finding out more about the alternatives to animal testing please visit the Dr Hadwin Trust Website.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Animals in the News, Lab Animals, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

What is Animal Welfare Science?

Monday, March 22nd, 2010

An opinion, contributed by Cyril Roy and Selvi Roy

Animal welfare science is a branch of science which identifies and quantifies suffering in animals. Some of the important components of this science are welfare assessment, pain assessment and risk assessment to relieve the pain of the welfare problem identified.

The fundamental building block of animal welfare science is animal behaviour. As each species has its own species specific behaviour, welfare and pain assessment tools have to be developed for each species.

Animal welfare science is still in its infancy. While welfare of pet animals has been in practice for some time, developing this science is the only way we can bring justice to lab animals like mice, guinea pigs and rabbits. The same is true for some slaughter practices, farming practices and managed wild animals. The ‘trickledown’ effect will also benefit the human species in terms of quality of living.

One of the important aspects of animal welfare science is that it has to deal with issues of a subjective nature like pain and discomfort. In order to tackle this,  a multidisciplinary approach which includes components of Mathematics, Chemistry, Sociology, Physics and also other disciplines should be used. For example, tools like thermography should be used increasingly to detect stress and pain.

Man and animals share a relationship in the ecosystem. Understanding and giving importance to this relationship also enhances human welfare.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Animal Welfare Science | No Comments »