INSIDE

Japanese whalers calledto account page 4

Lifting the curtainsof death page 6

Wildlife Crime andPunishment page 8

Behind the scenesat the Baylor CancerLaboratory page 10

Barbarism in thefood market page 11

THEANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE

QUARTERLYP.O. BOX 3650 WASHINGTON, DC 20007

WINTER 1988

VOL. 36, NO. 4

to

To Jane Goodall from John Melcher:The Albert Schweitzer MedalThe world's most distinguished and ardent friend of chimpan-zees, Jane Goodall, was awarded the 1987 Schweitzer Medal of

e Animal Welfare Institute at the annual meeting 2 December987. Senator John Melcher (D, MT), who presented the medal,Made a moving and powerful speech. He said Dr. Goodall wasonly matched by its first recipient, Albert Schweitzer."The Senator's personal commitment to the welfare of chim-

panzees and other animals shone through all his remarks.`The Creator expects us, as the dominant species with thegreatest intelligence, to respect all other species," he said. Theonly veterinarian ever to serve in the US Senate, SenatorMelcher is the author of the provision for "a physical environ-ment adequate to promote the psychological well-being of pri-mates" in the Improved Standards for Laboratory AnimalsAmendments. He adjured the Department of Agriculture topromulgate regulations faithful to the legislation enacted by theCongress.

Dr. Goodall was introduced to the way animals are treated byvisits to two commercial laboratories: SEMA, in Maryland,which operates under a contract with the National Institutes ofHealth, and, in Vienna, Austria, IMMUNO. Emphasizing theimpact of "actually seeing with your own eyes," she describedthe SEMA cages, 22 inches by 22 inches by 24 inches, in whichpairs of infant chimpanzees are confined. "Those particularyoungsters weren't under experimentation. They were waiting,

continued on page 2Senator John Melcher and Dr. Jane Goodall hold the Albert SchweitzerMedal.

Lacey Act regulations under fire by pet industryThe foundation stone for effective wild-life protection by the United States isthe Lacey Act passed in 1900. Under itsprovisions, any state law or foreign lawbenefitting wild species must be honoredthroughout the United States. The heavyfines levied under its aegis have servedas a deterrent to wildlife criminals.

But an essential part of the Lacey Actis now under attack by the big animaldealers because of regulations promul-gated by the US Fish and Wildlife Serv-ice (FWS) under the 1981 amendments.Entitled "Humane and Healthful Trans-port of Wild Mammals and Birds to theUnited States',', the regulations wouldrequire food and water to be provided,prohibit shipment of pregnant, nursing

or unweaned mammals, dropping andmishandling of crates, crating togetherof incompatible animals, exposure toharmful temperatures, air pressures orinadequate ventilation and requireperches for birds so droppings do notfall into food or water containers oronto other birds.

These regulations, designated as fi-mil were published in The Federal Regi-ster 10 November 1987 with an effec-tive date of 8 February 1988. But, un-der intense last-minute pressure fromthe pet industry and airlines, FWS sud-denly reneged in a 10 February 1988announcement citing possible "confu-sion or misinterpretation" and post-

continued on page 9

a39

Chimpanzees caged at SEMA laboratory

2

Goodall receives SchweitzerMedal, continued from page 1

just waiting. They could barely turnaround in those tiny, cramped prisons."

For 27 years Jane Goodall has ob-served chimpanzees under natural con-ditions. "If we can learn to understandthe chimpanzee," she said, "it will helpus to understand ourselves." She spokeof the feelings they express: joy, sorrow,rage, pain and fear, of their cognitiveabilities, of their capability for directedcommunication as shown by languageacquisition studies such as RogerFouts', and finally of altruism.

She chose a few poignant anecdotesfrom her own experience to help herintently listening audience grasp chim-panzee nature. Lucy, one of the firstchimpanzees to learn American SignLanguage, had been raised like ahuman child up to the age of ten. Attheir first meeting, Dr. Goodall satdown on the sofa, and "Lucy sat closeto me and looked into my eyes." ThenLucy went to get a key, with which sheunlocked a cupboard, took out a bottle,poured herself "a very reasonable serv-ing of gin and filled it up with tonic."Next she got a magazine and leafedthrough it, signing to herself as shelooked at the pictures.

Unfortunately, when she was ten, shesuddenly lost her comfortable home.As Dr. Goodall put it, "Her 'parents'no longer wanted her living with them.They decided 'We'll give Lucy her free-dom,"' and sent her back to Africa tolive with other chimpanzees. "This isabout the same as sending a ten yearold urban girl to live with a tribe ofAustralian aborigines or Amazonian in-

dians." Lucy was putinto a large outdoorenclosure in theGambia with twoboisterous wild-bornchimps. She wentinto a depressionwhich lasted formany months.

During the earlydays of her new lifeshe would sign,"Please help. Lucywants out. Pleasehelp." Later shewas found dead,with her hands andfeet cut off.

Example after ex-ample of coura-geous, altruistic be-

havior described by Dr. Goodall showedhow chimpanzees come to the aid offriends in distress. The first was fromthe Gombe Stream group she hasobserved over generations. "Recentlyin Gombe, nine chimps were lost in an

epidemic, leavingtwo three and a halfyear old orphans,"she said. Dr.Goodall feared theywould die, "butthese two, one fe-male, one male,have been adopted,not by older sib-lings, but by non-related adolescentmales. One wasBeethoven. Now 17years old, he toohad lost hismother—when hewas four and a half.Little Mel wasadopted by 12 yearold Spindle. Both

Albert Schweitzer holds gold replica ofthe medal created in his honor.

young males share food with the or-phans they have adopted, wait forthem, carry them and do their best toprotect them. There is no question butthat these adoptions saved the lives ofthese two orphans," she said.

She told how the large female, Gigi,saved the life of a young male, Freud,from an attack by the enraged wild sowwhose piglet Freud had caught.

Dr. Goodall told how logging com-panies are destroying the forests for tcommercial gain, and chimpanzee ba-

"If a chimpanzee—one who hasbeen abused by humans—canreach across the species barrierto help a human friend, thensurely we, with our greater

capacity for compassion, canreach out to help chimpanzees,

to help all the non-humancreatures with whom we share

this planet, can't we?

bies are captured for entertainmentand medical research around theworld. The horrors involved in thistrade are exemplified by her account oftwo native hunters she met in a hospi-tal. They had tried to catch a babychimp to sell it. They shot the mother,

continued on next page

1

More than 300 members and friends of the Animal Welfare Instituteattended the annual meeting.

A dog dealer, his clients and a judgeEighteen months ago the Summer 1986 Quarterly had an article detailing thetruly appalling manner in which animal dealer Ervine Stebane of Kaukauna,Wisconsin, was conducting his business. Those with strong stomachs may wishto refer back to that article but for present purposes it is sufficient to say thatStebane violated, in extreme form, almost every article of the Animal WelfareAct, that some of his animals come from unidentified sources and that dis-traught owners entering his "ranch" in search of their pets were likely to beviciously assaulted.

It is shocking that a man who as long ago as 1960 demonstrated his totalunfitness to have charge of animals (see again Summer 1986 Quarterly) was ableto retain his dealer's license. It is even more shocking that 28 years later, fol-lowing his conviction on 16 fresh offences against the Animal Welfare Act anda blood-curdling expose of his misdeeds in the local media, Ervine Stebane isstill in business.

Two very respectable, or at any rate respected, bodies, the University of Wis-consin and the Madison Area Technical College, are long-time customers ofStebane (the University uses around 1800 dogs and cats a year, 80-85% ofwhich come from Stebane, they still say, despite all the sickening revelations,that they see no reason for leaving an "USDA-approved vendor". )

As a further shocker the judge who sentenced Stebane decided that the 16offences (which included the vicious intimidation of an USDA inspector) mer-ited nothing more severe than a $1500 fine, a cease-and-desist order and thesuspension of his license for just 20 days so long as his facility was by then incompliance with the Act—none of which of course has any bearing on how hehandles the animals in his care or, for that matter, how he acquires them in thefirst place.

USDA has appealed the penalities as being insufficiently severe. The appealis still pending, meanwhile Stebane is still operating.

Goodall receives Schweitzer medal, continued from page 2

who fell to theground, dying. Thehunters approachedher to take theterrified, screamingbaby. There was asudden explosion inthe bushes, and alarge male chim-panzee burst out.He seized one manby his hair, practi-cally scalping him,flung the otherman against therocks, breaking sev-eral ribs, and then took the baby in hisarms and ran off into the forest.

She told, too, of a captive chimpanzeenamed Old Man who had suffered longin a circus and hated people. Marc, theyoung man who took food to Old Manand the three adult females living withhim on safari park island, eventuallydeveloped a close, friendly relationshipwith them. One day, however, heslipped and fell, accidentally frighten-ing a baby, who screamed. Immediatelythe mother leapt at Marc and bit intohis neck. The other two females rushed

Alternatives meetingin StockholmAn international meeting on In Vitromethods in toxicity testing and biomedicalresearch will be held at the University ofStockholm, Sweden, 9-11 May. Themeeting, sponsored by the SwedishCouncil for Laboratory Animals, willfocus on developments in the field of invitro assay systems and will assess therelevance of in vitro techniques for invivo situations. The all-inclusive meet-ing fee is $150.

For further information and hotelbookings, write: Mr. Sten Schager,Division of External Relations, Univer-sity of Stockholm, S-106 91 Stockholm,Sweden.

Frame receives awardDr. Michael Balls, chairman of theFund for the Replacement of Animalsin Medical Experiments (FRAME) trus-tees, was awarded the 1986 MarchigAnimal Welfare Award for develop-ment of in vitro cytotoxicology forassessing acute toxicities of chemicalsat an early stage in new product devel-opment of pharmaceuticals, house-hold products arid pesticides. Entriesare judged by a distinguished panel,and the award is administered by theWorld Society for the Protection ofAnimals.

Schweitzer MedalistsDole and Foley mostrespected legislatorsIn a recent poll of 317 senior CapitolHill aids on the most effective and re-spected leaders in Congress, top ratingswent to House Majority Leader TomFoley (D, WA) and Senate MinorityLeader Bob Dole (R, KS), according toThe New York Times, February 1988.

The Albert Schweitzer Medal for out-standing contributions to animal wel-fare was presented to Senator Dole in1986 for his leadership in obtaining en-4ctment of the Improved Standards forLaboratory Animals amendments tothe federal Animal Welfare Act in 1985and federal humane slaughter legisla-tion in 1978. Representative Foley wasawarded the Schweitzer Medal in 1971after he won enactment of the 1970 An-imal Welfare Act amendments.

3

to support their friend and they too bitMarc. But Old Man came charging upand pulled them away so Marc was ableto drag himself into the boat andescape. "Old Man saved my life," Marctold Jane Goodall. The story is sym-bolic, she said. "If a chimpanzee—onewho has been abused by humans—canreach across the species barrier to helpa human friend, then surely we, withour greater capacity for compassion,can reach out to help chimpanzees, tohelp all the non-human creatures withwhom we share this planet, can't we?"

The Dispute Over Japanese WhalingThe U.S. accused Japan of violating an international pact. Japan saysthe hunt for 300 whales is part of a scientific expedition.

Where Japan Is HuntingFor Minke Whales

Two Amendments:Recourse for U.S.Petty Gives the Presidentdiscretion to impose anembargo on imports offisheries products from theoffending countries.President Reagan has 60days to tell Congress whataction, if any, he will takeagainst Japan. Previousviolators: Japan, SovietUnion (1974); Chile, Peru,South Korea (1978): SovietUnion (1985). Norway (1986).Although countries haveresponded to the threat ofsanctions, they have neverbeen imposed.Packwood-MagnusonCalls for automatic reductionof at least 50 percent inamount of fish permitted tobe taken from U.S. waters bya violating nation. Previousviolator: Soviet Union (1985).

A Minke Whale

Drawing from "A Field Guide to the Whales, Porpoises and Seals," be Kim•na. Rough and Richardson,Illustrations copyright 1983 Sarah Landry, D.D. Tyler, and John R. Quinn

Indian Ocean

AUSTRALIA fAltae

By PHILIP SHABECOFFSpecial to The New York Times

U.S. Declares Japan in Violation on Whaling and May Curb Trade

WASHINGTON, Feb. 10 — Com-merce Secretary C. William Verity Jr.today declared Japan in violation of amoratorium on commercial whaling. Aspokesman for Mr. Verity said the Sec-retary might recommend an embargoon imports of fish from Japan.

With Mr. Verity's declaration, Presi-dent Reagan has 60 days to inform Con-gress of what action he is taking. If hedoes not impose an embargo, he mustexplain his decision to Congress.

A Hint of RetaliationCommerce Department officials said

Mr. Verity was delaying his recom-mendation to provide time for bargain-ing with the Japanese.

Because the United States sells twiceas much fish to Japan as the Japanesesell in this country, an embargo couldinvite retaliation by Japan, a spokes-man for the Japan Whaling Associa-

tion, a trade group, suggested. "Japanis America's best customer for fish,"the spokesman, Alan Macnow, said.

Conservation groups and some memhers of Congress applauded today'sdecision and said they would press foran embargo.

Mr. Verity made the declarationafter Japanese representatives in-formed him earlier this week that athree-ship whaling fleet was in Antarc-tic waters and would kill 300 whales.

The Japanese contend that the expe-dition is for scientific purposes and,therefore, that the - killings of the minkewhales do pot violate the moratoriumcalled by the International WhalingCommission. The minkes are not an en-dangered species.

Mr. Verity rejected the Japanese ex-planation and invoked two laws thatcall for sanctions against any nationthat "diminishes the effectiveness" of

an international fisheries agreement —in this case the whaling commission'smoratorium.

[In Tokyo the head of Japan'sfisheries agency, Hironao Tanaka,called the American action "ex-tremely regrettable." His remarks,appearing in Japanese newspaperson Thursday, were strong languagefor a Tokyo bureaucrat. Mr.Tanaka reiterated the Japaneseposition that "research whaling isthe right" of member nations of theInternational Whaling Commis-sion.]In the past, Japanese officials have

said the killing of non-endangeredwhales should not he viewed as anydifferent from the killing of cattle.Some officials have accused theUnited States of racial prejudice andOf trying to thwart Japan's culturalprerogatives.

Whale meat accounts for a smallportion of the protein consumed inJapan. About a thousand Japanesemake a living directly from whaling,while 50,000 others are active in re-lated processing and retail ventures.

One American law, the Packwood-Magnuson Amendment, calls for anautomatic reduction of at least 50 per-cent in the amount of fish that a na-tion in violation of an internationalagreement is permitted to take fromUnited States territorial waters.

Such a sanction would be largelysymbolic since Japan was not allo-cated any quota in American watersthis year because of low stocks. ButBrian Gorman, a Commerce Depart-ment spokesman, said the sanctioncould take on practical importance iffish stocks rose and an allocationwere available for Japan.

The second law is the Pelly Amend-ment, which gives the President thediscretion to impose a total or partialembargo on shipments of fisheriesproducts from offending countries.

Last year Japan sold about $500million of fisheries products, includ-ing $100 million of pearls, to this coun-try. But the United States sold morethan $1 billion of fish products, muchof it salmon, to Japan.

Although the Pelly Amendment hasbeen invoked in the past, it has neverled to an embargo because the threatalone led to concessions by the coun-try found in violation of the law.

Mr. Macnow of the Japanese Whal-ing Association said the Antarctic ex-pedition did not violate the mora-torium on commercial whaling. It isintended, he said, to determine thenumber of "surplus!' minke (pro-nounced MINK-ee) whales — thenumber by which births exceeddeaths. Japan is seeking this informa-tion to determine whether "the re-source can be utilized," he said.

After the research is completed,the killed whales, which are 15 to 30feet long at maturity, are brought tomarket. The Japanese say the sale of

4-1?

whale meat subsidizes the research.Minke whale meat usually sells in

Tokyo for about $9.80 a pound. Thetail meat is considered a delicacy andis available only in small quantities,selling for about $140 a pound.

The International Whaling Com-mission is conducting a mail ballotamong its member nations on a Brit-ish resolution declaring that theJapanese expedition has no scientificvalidity. A close vote is expected, andthe results are due Sunday.

"The Secretary didn't even wait forthe results of the ballot and roderoughshod over the rights of theJapanese," Mr. Macnow said. Mr.Verity's finding that the Japanesewere diminishing the effectiveness ofthe whaling treaty was "an outra-geous announcement," he said.

William K. Reilly, president of theWorld Wildlife Fund, an internationalconservation group, said in a state-ment: "It is outrageous that Japan isnow slaughtering hundreds of whalesin open defiance of its 1984 agreementwith the United States and the !Met-

national Whaling Commission'smoratorium on commercial whaling.It is doubly outrageous that Japan isattempting to justify these actions inthe name of science."

Dean Wilkenson, wildlife legislativedirector for Greenpeace, another con-servation group, hailed Mr. Verity'saction, saying: "The message hasnow gone out : Whaling must cease. Itis encouraging that the CommerceDepartment is following through onthe long-standing U.S. policy to endcommercial whaling."

The International Whaling Com-mission imposed the moratorium in1986 because of evidence that thecommercial hunt was severely de-pleting the global population of thegreat whales. A number of whale spe-cies, including the blue whale (theearth's biggest animal) and thesperm whale, have been reduced untiltheir continued existence is in doubt,some whale experts say.

A lawsuit filed by conservationgroups almost certainly played a rolein Mr. Verity's decision, said Craig

Van Note, executive director of Moni-tor, a consortium of conservation andanimal welfare organizations.

Also there has been considerablesentiment among members of Con-gress for taking action. Representa-tive Don Honker, Democrat fromWashington, issued a statement thatsaid in part, "Our Government mustsend a clear and unmistakable mes-sage to the Government of Japan tostop this slaughter."

In 1989 the United States agreed notto take legal steps against Japan eventhough it continued to take whalesafter a moratorium on sperm whaleswas in effect. In return Japan prom-ised to end its whaling by 1988. In anearlier suit, conservationists tried tovoid that agreement, but it was up-held by the Supreme Court.

Copyright © 1988 New York TimesCo. Reprinted by permission.

Beluga whale permit deniedThe Minnesota Zoo is no place forwhales. That's the decision of theNational Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS), which last November deniedan extension of the zoo's permit tocapture and display beluga whalesbecause of its past mistreatment ofbelugas under their care. The actioncame after the environmental commu-nity submitted extensive documenta-tion of this abuse to NMFS and isunique in the history of federal regula-tion of this kind. The Minnesota lawfirm of Faegre & Benson generouslyprovided its services pro bono to the con-servation community on this issue.

In the summer of 1977, the Minne-sota Zoo was given a permit to captureup to four' beluga whales for displayand shortly thereafter captured twowhales, "Big Mouth" and "Little Girl",who were transported to the zoo.NM FS routinely renewed the zoo's cap-ture permit at two year intervals.

In July of 1984, Big Mouth, suffe'reda minor injury to his lower lip. Till Mayof 1986, a variety of treatments, prima-rily pharmacological, were used to aidthe wound's healing. But the woundsteadily worsened and became so badlyinfected that the zoo asked three marinemammal experts their advice on treat-ment, including the possibility of sur-gery, an option all three advised against.They suggested that moving the whaleto natural sea water would be safer and

more efficacious.But the zoo ignored their advice and

performed a radical surgical procedurethat had never been done before. Thesurgical team consisted of the zoo'sveterinarian, a veterinary assistant withno marine mammal experience andthree surgeons specializing in humanpatients. The team succeeded in re-moving a large portion of Big Mouth'slower jaw but the surgical site did notheal properly so a second procedurewas performed on the (now partiallyremoved) lower jaw and on other skinlesions which had developed.

During this surgery, Big Mouth wasnot properly anesthetized. He beganthrashing about as one of the surgeonschipped into a bone on his pectoral finin an attempt to remove a lesion with acauterizing knife. But this surgery stilldid not alleviate the problem. The sur-gery site on his jaw did not heal andthe lesions became worse.

Laboratory tests revealed ulcerativegastritis, liver and kidney damage.

A stressed whale with a minor skinproblem which is correcting itselfnow—as marine mammal experts hadearlier advised—in natural sea water,was nearly killed by a series ofunnecessary surgical operations.

Fortunately, NMFS has denied thezoo's permit request for two morewhales.

—Richard Duncan

Membersplease note:In the coming year, we will beasking all AWI members to renewtheir membership at the sametime, rather than sending outrenewals each month as we havedone in the past. This will enableAWI staff to devote more hours toessential animal protective pro-grams, and we will deeply appre-ciate your help in making thenew system work for the benefitof animals.

The lone eagleWhen we named the Bald Eagle as ournational bird, we really knew what wewere doing. A notable example of thismarvelous creature's strength, pluck,determination, spirit and luck (all goodqualities for a nation) is the story ofIolar (Gaelic for eagle) who has justbeen released in excellent conditionfrom Tufts University School of Veteri-nary Medicine. The check-up followeda flight from somewhere in NorthAmerica to Ireland where he was spot-ted resting. He may have been helped alittle by a storm blowing eastward, butit is still a remarkable feat, as well asbeing cheaper than any excursion rateyet.

5

A far seal is entangled in the webbing of a trawl net.

LIFTING THE CURTAINS OF DEATHTwo bills that will provide needed pro-tection to marine mammals and seabirds were included, without opposi-tion, in the US Japan Fishery Agree-ment Approval Act of 1987.

Driftnets in the North Pacific causethe deaths of tens of thousands ofmarine mammals and hundreds ofthousands of seabirds each year. Theuse of these "curtains of death" is noteven an efficient method of catchingfish. It has been estimated that one-half

of the fish ensnared in the nets die andare never landed. Yet each year salmonand squid fleets from Japan, theRepublic of Korea, and Taiwan deployover a million miles of driftnets thatnonselectiyely kill every creature whichencounters them.

The provisions of the final law arenot as strong as those in the originalbills introduced by CongressmanCharles Bennett (D-FL) and SenatorTed Stevens (R-AK). The statute, how-ever, represents significant progress.

For the first time, the law will takesteps toward regulating the squiddriftnet fisheries outside of the US 200mile zone. Although the data are solimited that it is impossible to make sta-tistical projections, observer reportsindicate that these fisheries may bewreaking havoc in the marine ecosys-tem. An average of two marine mam-mals were taken per observed set.There are an estimated 53,000 sets eachyear. In addition, the fleets may be har-vesting salmon which otherwise wouldreturn to spawn in US waters. Withinthe last 18 months, federal agents havetwice confiscated huge shipments ofsalmon which were being laundered

6

through American ports. Japaneseships routinely violate geographic lim-its and fish in colder waters wheresalmon are present. Last year 96 vesselswere sighted outside authorized areas.Many of the vessels had covered theiridentification numbers indicating thatthey were deliberately violating theboundaries.

To deal with this problem, the lawprovides that the Secretary of Com-merce will enter into negotiations with

those countries for the monitoring andassessment of the impact of these fleetsand for effective enforcement of regula-tions dealing with locations and sea-sons. A failure to enter into or imple-ment such an agreement would be sub-ject to certification under the Pellyamendment. The Pelly amendment pro-vides that the President may limit or en-tirely embargo all fish imports from anoffending country.

The law also requires the Secretary ofCommerce to prepare an extensivereport on the impact of driftnets withinone year. The Secretary is also to look ata series of steps to alleviate the prob-lem. Among the things to be evaluatedare a net marking and identificationsystem, the use of degradable net mate-rials to reduce the impact of ghost nets,and a bounty system offering paymentfor the recovery of derelict nets. Theserecommendations are due within 18months.

The law does not contain two impor-tant provisions, however. The originalbills had a 60-mile driftnet free zonearound the Aleutian Islands. Such azone would markedly reduce seabirdmortality and benefit marine mam-

mals. Further, observer coverage forthis fleet has been less than ten percent,and there is evidence that attempts havebeen made to manipulate that cover-age. Environmentalists urged that ob-server coverage be raised to a mini-mum of 24 percent in order to providestatistical reliability and to make chi-canery more difficult. Every other fleetfishing in US waters has 100 percentobserver coverage.

The lack of provisions dealing withthis driftnet fishery may become moot,however, if a preliminary injunctionprohibiting its operation is upheld. InJune, a coalition of environmentalgroups filed suit challenging the issu-ance of a marine mammal permit forthe Japanese salmon driftnet fishery. Apreliminary injunction was issued, andoral arguments are scheduled. If thecoalition prevails, the salmon driftnetfishery would be illegal because it can-not operate without killing marine mam-mals, and it would not have a permit totake them.

— Dean Wilkinson

Dean Wilkinson is the Wildlife Legislation Directorfor Greenhcace, USA.

MARPOL Annex Vratified by US SenateMARPOL Annex V, a part of theInternational Convention for thePrevention of Pollution fromShips (ICPPS) will, once it entersinto force, prohibit ships fromdumping their plastic refuse over-board and will provide morestringent controls on dischargesof other kinds of garbage andtrash. Recent ratification by theUS Senate is expected to bringthese requirements into forceinternationally.

But ittitil nations carrying 50%or more of the world's shippingby tonnage have ratified, plasticand garbage continue to bethrown overboard because thetreaty's criterion has not been of-ficially met. The InternationalMaritime Organization is cur-rently engaged in recalculatingthe tonnage and is expected to an-nounce its findings shortly.

Dolphin killworsensAmendments to the Marine MammalProtection Act in 1984 should have putan end to the import of tuna fromnations killing dolphins at rates dra-matically higher than the US tunaindustry. Instead, though it has beendocumented that the Mexican tunafleet is killing dolphins at a rate fourtimes higher than the US fleet, no sanc-tions are in sight. The US CommerceDepartment has failed thus far to evendefine under what circumstances anembargo would be considered.

The result of the US government'srefusal to confront the growing interna-tional tuna fleet operating in the East-ern Tropical Pacific is tragic news fordolphins. In addition to the 20,500 dol-phins killed by the US fleet in 1986 it isestimated that foreign tuna seinerskilled more than 100,000. Scientificpapers presented at the 1987 meetingsof the International Whaling Commis-sion put the total annual estimated' incidental kill' of dolphins at 150,000and warned of severe depletion of sev-eral dolphin species. Dolphin mortalityfigures for 1987 are not vet complete,but even at levels considerably less thanlast year it is still by far the largestlegally sanctioned killing of marinemammals in the world.

Dr. William Perrin, a scientist withthe National Marine Fisheries Serviceand Chairman of the Cetacean Special-ist Group of the International Unionfor the Conservation of Nature andNatural Resources, has indicated that"There is good reason for concernabout this deteriorating situation." TheInternational Whaling Commission has

Dead spinner dolphins lie on deck of tuna vessels.

repeatedly declined to regulate the killof these small cetaceans, and the InterAmerican Tropical Tuna Commission(IATTC) does not set any internationaldolphin kill quotas. Perrin furthernotes that the eastern spinner dolphinpopulation is estimated to have de-clined by 80% since purse seiningbegan in the 1960s. This year another2,700 eastern spinners were drownedby the US fleet alone.

Preparations are currently underwayto challenge the US Commerce Depart-ment's negligence in this matter. TheSan Francisco law firm of Heller,Ehrman, White and McAuliffe hasagreed to take the case on a pro bonobasis. The goal is to force a US embargoon tuna imports from nations failing tobring their kill rates down, as requiredby the marine Mammal Protection Act.Earth Island Institute, The Whale Cen-ter, and the Marine Mammal Fund arecoordinating the effort and all groups

and individuals are encouraged to par-ticipate.

On the domestic front, a campaign toboycott the products of Ralston-Purinawill be announced at Ralston's annualshareholders meeting in St. Louis thismonth. Ralston-Purina, the parent com-pany of Chicken of the Sea tuna, is thelargest investor in the US tuna fleet andbuys tuna from foreign vessels that arekilling dolphins at horrendous rates.Ralston-Purina and H.J. Heinz are thetwo largest buyers and sellers of tuna inthe world. Both companies have re-fused to restrict their purchases to tunathat is caught without killing dolphins.

—David Phillips

David Phillips is Co-Director of Earth Island Insti-tute, headquartered in San Francisco, California.For more information about the campaign to stopthe dolphin slaughter, write Save the Dolphins,Earth Island Institute, 300 Broadway, Suite 28,San Francisco, CA 94133.

Fuller explanation of the IWCWe report below portions of a letter fromSidney Holt, longtime, distinguished memberof the Scientific Committee of the Interna-tional Whaling Commission, clarifying twoerrors in the Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 3

There are a couple of points the Quar-terly made about whales and theIWC which are not quite correct. Oneis in the box on page 3 where it says"If a majority finds against it, then theprogram must be dropped." If onlythat were true! In fact of course, the

proposing state has no compulsion totake any notice of the Commission'sview, just as it has no compulsion totake notice of the Scientific Commit-tee's view.

The second misleading statement(page 5) refers to "international ob-servers appointed by the IWC". Un-fortunately, the IWC does not appointobservers. Big efforts were made inthe 1960s and again in the 1970s toget through the idea of proper inter-national observers, and they failed

totally. All we have is a deal—negoti-ated under the IWC it is true—bywhich operators of "land stations"and pelagic operators are encouragedto negotiate with other member stateswith a view to appointment or ex-change of observers.

—Sidney Holt

7

Rare birds killedto make headdresses

for sale to tourists

protected birds. Seven of those arrestedhave entered into plea agreements andawait sentencing. The maximum pen-alty carries a two year jail sentence anda $2 .50,000 fine.

The birds were stuffed for mountingand some of their feathers used for

Pretty Polly's ugly smugglers

• WILDLIFE CRIME 8c PUNISHMENT • WILDLIFE CRIME 8c PUNISHMENT •

Bird ring netted in undercover operationAn 18-month Fish and Wildlife 'sting'broke cover last October when acrossnine western and southern states 17people (including a police officer) werearrested and 24 others charged with thesale of eagles, hawks, owls and other

An estimated 25,000 parrots are smug-gled into Texas from Mexico everyyear. Seizures and arrests, though quitecommon, are negligible when setagainst the volume of traffic. Borderpatrols are too busy trying to stop theinflux of drugs to pay much attentionto 'mere' bird smugglers.

Parrot smuggling, though, is a majorbusiness. According to Fish and Wild-life agent, Joe Ramos, it "even involvesorganized crime". Mexican yellow-headed parrots, which are nearly im-possible to breed in captivity may costjust $75 each in Mexico but the pricecan soar to $450 in the US bordertowns (comparable prices for red-headed parrots are $50 and $150) andstill more, a lot more, further north.

The parrots are snatched from theirnests as very young fledglings and mustbe hand-fed to have any chance of sur-

8

Indian-style headdresses. Gallup, NewMexico, was the chief center for sales todealers and collectors from Europe andthe eastern US.

The charges stemmed from the kill-ing of 600 birds but according to Fish

viving. Inevitably a great many die.Plainly the annual depredation on par-rot populations runs way in excess ofthe 25,000 quoted earlied, for that issimply the estimated number survivingthe long and traumatic journey fromthe sanctuary of the nest to the alienworld on the northern side of the RioGrande.

Smugglers do not exist in a vacuum.They require dealers to market theirillegal exports.

Ramos says that US visitors to Mex-ico often become involved in parrotsmuggling. They make contact with aparrot seller, establishing a distributionpoint in their home town and then`innocently' advertise the stolen birdsin the local press. That seeminglyharmless hometown newspaper ad maybe featuring smuggled, traumatizedand, perhaps, diseased birds.

and Wildlife's chief enforcement offi-cer, Clark Bavin, this number repre-sents only a tiny fraction of the "tens ofthousands" of protected animals takenannually by poachers. While there is noestimate of the total traffic in poachedwildlife, some Administration officialsbelieve it runs second only in value tothe traffic in drugs.

Smuggler gets twoyears in jail

After denying countless endangeredbirds their freedom, Gregory Jones hasfinally lost his. At least for a while.Jones, the owner of Bird World in Loui-siana, has been sentenced to two yearsin prison for smuggling over 300 Yel-low-napcd Amazon parrots (including90 babies). In addition, he must pay atine of $140,000. Also convicted werefive others, including Jones' son, whofaces a ninety day . jail term.

Many of the parrots, which are pro-tected by CITES, were stuffed in theside panels of a car while being smug-gled into the US from Mexico. Theywere then sold for up to $1,000 each.

Though the charges stemmed froman investigation started in January oflast year, Jones had been suspected ofsuch activity for quite a while. In addi-tion to Bird World, which importedtropical birds, Jones operated severalUSDA quarantine stations in Miami.To guard against the spread of Newcas-tle Disease (which can wipe out poultrypopulations) birds are supposed to bequarantined before being allowed entryinto the US.

Of course, birds smuggled by Jonesnever made it to one of his quarantinestations. Arid many were carrying New-castle's so they, along with the birdsthey infected, had to be destroyed.

According to the Los Angeles Times:Jones is one of the largest pet-bird distributors and one of the

!principal importers of yellow-naped Amazon parrots, the spe-cies involved in this case, saidAssistant US Attorney, CharlesCrandall, who prosecuted thecase.

In November, both men hadcontinued on next page

• WILDLIFE CRIME & PUNISHMENT • WILDLIFE CRIME & PUNISHMENT •

Stolen, trailed andrecovered

Spix's macaw clings to existence by thetips of its claws. Just four wild speci-mens are known to survive in its oneand only habitat in northeastern Brazil.In 1985 just two young were born. Bothwere stolen.

The CITES Secretariat and theTRAFFIC Directors in the US andSouth America were alerted and thesearch for the missing fledglings wason. The trail led to a large house inAsuncion, the capitol of Paraguay.

The Paraguayan authorities wereinformed and proved most coopera-tive. At noon on 25 March last, withpolice support, Paraguay's Director ofNational Parks and Wildlife, HilarioMoreno, and the Director of TRAFFIC(South America), Juan Villalba-Macias,began their search of the suspect house.

While this was happening Villalba-Macias noticed the rapid closing of adoor on the second floor. He ran to theroom, broke in and found a servantholding a traveling bag. Inside the bagwere the birds, alive and well—discov-ered in the nick of time as they wereabout to be spirited away.

Less than 24 hours later the two tinybirds with the giant illicit trade value of$20,000 each were on a plane to Brazilen route to Sao Paulo Zoo. Spix'smacaw had taken a small but desper-ately needed step back from the brinkof extinction.

Smuggler, continued from page 8

entered guilty pleas in connec-tion with the case. Gregory Jonespleaded guilty to two felonycounts of receiving protectedwildlife and making false state-ments to a federal officer; his sonpleaded guilty to a single mis-demeanor arising from thescheme.

The guilty pleas are the latestdevelopments in a criminal pros-ecution arising from an extensiveinvestigation of an exotic bird-smuggling ring that operatedalong the US-Mexico border. Thering is suspected of havingbrought thousands of birds intothe United States from Mexico inrecent years, prosecutors say.

Jaguar's revengeArthur William Smith was sentenced tothree years imprisonment and orderedto pay $10,000 in fines for violations ofthe Endangered Species Act, the LaceyAct, and firearms violations. Smith, anorganizer of hunting parties, wascharged with possession of a bald eagleand aiding and abetting the killing andtransportation of an Alaskan brownbear, among other endangered ani-mals.

Under a plea agreement Smith hasadmitted to some of the charges, in-cluding that of importing a jaguar peltfrom the Central American country ofBelize. He claims to have slain the jag-uar himself with a machete because itwas menacing him or some cattle. Butthe truth or otherwise of this claim hasno bearing on the charges of importingthe pelt and then transporting it acrossstate boundaries. This isn't Smith's firstbrush with the law. In 1975 he was con-victed of Grand Larceny and in 1980, offirearms violations.

A waterfowl symposium in Memphiswas treated to some disturbing revela-tions by two reformed poachers."Poaching's a way of life," said one."You grow up killing as many birds asyou can. You laugh at regulations. Youthink they are silly when you see somany birds."

"Poachers just don't believe thatwhat they are doing can be wrong,"said the other. "Why, I used to take halfa case of shells and stay in there all dayand kill 'em."

A wildfowl conservationist spoke ofbaiting and poaching being far morecommon than most people imagine.

Lacey Act RegulationsUnder Firecontinued from page 1

poning the effective date for six moremonths. The Animal Welfare Instituteand eleven other animal protective or-ganizations have gone to court to en-join the Interior Department from thisabrupt reversal.

The law suit, filed 1 March 1988 byRay Bolze and Margaret Fitzsimmonsof the law firm of Howrev and Simonacting pro bono for the plaintiffs, also"seeks a declatory judgment that post-ponement of the final rule on 10 Febru-ary was ineffective and contrary to law,and that the 10 November 1987 finalrule is in effect." It states, "The animalscontinue to die or sustain horribleinjuries from overcrowded shippingcrates, from lack of water and food, andfrom changes in temperature and pres-sure in airplane cargo holds. With theapproach of the 8 February 1988 effec-tive date of the rule on humane trans-port, traders dramatically stepped uptheir import activities so as to clearbirds before that date. At Miami Air-port, authorities report that in Januaryand early February, 1988, birds arrivedin greatly increased numbers, crammedinto small, overcrowded crates, to avoidthe impact of the new Rule. These in-humane practices will continue una-bated until the Rule on Humane andHealthful Transport of Wild Mammalsand Birds is made effective."

The judicial decision is eagerly antici-pated by all concerned.

"I can go up in a plane and find a hun-dred baited spots in a single day," hesaid. He believes that more waterfowlare being slaughtered illegally thanlegally. He also believes that even ifthe major cause of declining duckpopulations is the loss of nestinggrounds in Canada and the northernliJS, poaching is a significant contribu-tor.

In the view of the two ex-poachersthe changing of attitudes will prove anuphill task. "Now that I've cleaned upmy act, my buddies won't hunt withme any more," bemoaned one ofthem. The other nodded sadly.

Ducks limited—more and more so

<Y- -7 9

flowing with dead mice under refrigeration, an open trash can for carcinogenicmaterials, plastic cages encrusted with dirt so thick that the animals inside werebarely visible, most weirdly, a mummified mouse, overlooked in one of the sandboxes used to steady the weighing table, huge unrepaired holes in the ceilings, andwith the pictures, descriptions of procedures completely at variance with require-ments set by NIH for grantees. In 1986 Baylor's College of Medicine received morethan $37 million in NIH grants.

OPRR sent our report to Baylor, and the long-sought changes immediatelystarted to occur. We understand that nearly all the animals have now been movedout of the hopelessly dilapidated building and put under proper care. We aredelighted that this reform has finally taken place.

According to the Holden article, Dr. Neal Miller claims that "even previouslymoderate animal organizations are getting more radical."

Because the organizations I represent have consistently held the same moderatepolicies for more than thirty years, maintaining strict standards of discretion, andoffering scientists and administrators practical advice on animal welfare through ourbooks and other presentations, it is ironic that I should have been singled out forattack by the Chancellor of Baylor's College of Medicine and doubly ironic that thisvery attack should have directly led to our receiving the overwhelming documenta-tion of these disgusting conditions at a laboratory in his college.

In the paragraph immediately following Dr. McCarthy's version of these events,Dr. Frederick King of Yerkes Primate Center is quoted on "infiltration of activists,""illegal activities" and "offers to purchase information." This is an unfortunate jux-taposition. Any implication that we engage in such actions is completely false. Wewere appealed to as a last resort by a distressed staff member.

The statement that "inspectors are only required to list negative criticisms" alsoneeds correction. As one who has read large numbers of Veterinary Service's inspec-tion reports under the Freedom of Information Act, I know that it is routine for theinspectors to write "deficiencies corrected" with the date of inspection when this isthe case.

The Holden article is heavily slanted against the US Department of Agriculture,Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) throughout, which is not sur-prising given the sources consulted. APHIS Veterinary Services is, of course, criti-cized by those who resent having to adhere to the minimum standards of the federalAnimal Welfare Act, but it deserves great credit for having done an immenseamount of good, in its moderate and careful way, to rid scientific institutions of theabuses that still severely mar the practice of animal experimentation. If mice andrats were included in the coverage of the APHIS regulations, it is unlikely that Ishould have had to write this letter concerning the Baylor facility, for the USDAinspectors would have written up the failure to adhere to standards and persisteduntil they were able to write "deficiencies corrected."

Sincerely,

Weighing table set in sand boxes where long dead desic-cated mouse lay unobserved. Close-up appears below.

Open pail of dead mice under refrigeration:

Plastic cages encrusted with dirt. "Animals are in deep feces."

Open trash can for carcinogenic materials."The conditions are bad not only for therodents, but for the people who have to workthere, too."

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT

P.O. Box 3650 Washington, D.C. 20007

November 29, 1987

The Editor

Science1333 H Street, N W. •.

Washington, D.C. 20005

p

"'Animal Regulations: So Far So Good", by Constance Holden (13 November, p.880-882) states that Nat's Charles McCarthy "relates that after one prominent scien-

To the Editor:

ti published some editorials criticizing animal rig his

his office received a batch

of materials containi

lng photographs and allegations of noncompliance at the scien-

ti institution."

though the Animal Welfare Institute and the Society for Animal

PrOteCtWe

Legislation which I represent as a full-time volunteer a

l rights

organizations it is painfully apparent that this anecdote refers to us.

The "batch of materiarepared 23age sl" is our carefully p ummar

re not anima

y illustrated with

33 color photographs showing filthy, hazardous conditions with carcinogenic materials

at a laboratory using thousands of mice and rats at BaylOr

College of Medicine.

Until we read Constance Holden's article, we thought we had been helpful toNIH by providing documented information enabling the agency to carry out itsduties in enforcing the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 and in ensuring thatgovernment funds spent on research are dispensed in a ted,

manner that can be

expected to result in accurate scientific information. If asireported , repor hoods over cages

containing carcinogens are not washed befWeen experiments, the animals were

exposed to unintended carcinog

denic cocktails. This is just one example of the infor-

oration we provided to NIll's Office of Protection

from Research Risks staff and(OPRR)

When we delivered our report to the OPRR we were praised by NII-1which Dr. McCarthy heads.

encouraged for irhavingts directly to NIHrather than going to the press with it. But

now that Dr. McCarthy has seen fit to do just that it is necessary to resent the facts.The "prominent scientist" (Dr. Michael DeBakey, Chancellor of Baylor College of

Medicine) made personal allegations about me, as inaccurate as they were insulting,

in a Wall Street

Journal editorial (16 June 1987) to which I replied (13 July 1987) and

The Scientist

reported on this (21 September 1987). A Baylor staff member, who hadbeen trying in vain for years to get the cancer research laboratory, referred to above,cleaned up, repaired, and decently managed for the sake of both the laboratory

workers and the mice and rats, happened to read The Scientist

article and phoned me,

asking for help and color slides showing such things as uncovere p

This was no casual complaint; it was documented by more than one

hundred photograpd ails over

-

*The photographs were taken over anine-year period by a number of different

people concerned about the bad conditions. Mostare recent, taken within the past four months.

Unrepaired roof "The roof has been a problem for a longtime. There is water dripping through the roof. This has beenmended numerous times, but not well enough, and the prob-lems returned."

The journal, Science, declined to publish a letter to the editor correcting some of the errors in a two-pageillustrated article. Science indicated lack of space as the reason for rejecting the letter. So thatthe misinformation does not stand unchallenged, the letter and a group of photographsfrom the report in question are printed below.

These photographs were submit-ted to the National Institutes ofHealth 14 October 1987 with areport, prepared by Cathy Liss andLouise Wright, documenting long-standing conditions at a cancer lab-oratory in Baylor College of Medi-cine. Captions include quotationsfrom the Baylor staff member whosubmitted the photographs.*

ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE

10

11

3V 9

Long-tailed Macaque in Quingping Market, Canton, February 1987. Range: Southeast Asia.World status: vulnerable. Protected. Subsequently killed and eaten.— (Asiaweek)

BARBARISM IN THE FOOD MARKETIn many of the marketplaces of Hong Kong, en-dangered species such asleopards and tigers can beyours for the asking. LastMarch, Asiaweek devotedmost of its issue to thestory of these animals asthey make their way to theplates of those with exoticpalates.

According to Asiaweek,"the pipeline in wildlifetrade stretches all the wayto China's borders withBurma and Vietnam. Adealer in Canton told of atiger that was secretlytransported from Burmato Guangxi, where it waskept caged in a farmer'shouse. The selling price:about $1,280."

Even taxis are used totransport the animals. Re-porter Michael Wong rodein one with a wildlifedealer who said that he"can arrange to send livetigers or leopards up toSheung Shui [in HongKong's New Territories]and you can pick up yourgoods there. It's hard tosend bears across the bor-der, but as for tigers orleopards, it's easy."

Weak enforcement mocks strong lawsWhat has Hong Kong done to pro-tect its endangered species? As amember of CITES (Convention onInternational Trade in EndangeredSpecies), Hong Kong has strict lawson the books prohibiting the impor-tation and sale of endangered ani-mals. Nevertheless, demand for ex-otic food continues to be met be-cause enforcement is weak.

Five inspectors are employed to

see that local markets and restau-rants do not offer endangered spe-cies but in 1987, only 80 inspectionswere made resulting in 14 seizures.Among the items seized: 12 bearpaws—smuggled, in all likelihood,from the US.

Hong Kong is considering strength-ening their laws and just recentlybanned the sale of rhino horn (seestory at right).

Some cause for cheerIn the British House of Com-mons on 25 January the PrimeMinister was asked what the gov-ernment was doing to "clampdown on the internal and externaltrade in black rhino horn prod-ucts in Hong Kong." Mrs.Thatcher replied that Hong Konghad banned the export of all suchproducts since April 1986 andthat a "total ban on the sale ofrhino horn products within HongKong will take effect from July."

12

Men, monkeys and agonyThe practice of eating monkey brains is still going on. Feastingon this delicacy requires special implements. A specially de-signed table with a wooden box at the bottom is used. Half ofthis table top is pivoted to allow movement. The monkeywould be forced into the wooden box which is small to restrictmovement. The head is allowed to protrude through the holeat the center of the table.

The lid to the box is then latched. After this, the pivoted ta-ble top is drawn shut. A metal bowl at one end of the pivotedarm fixed to the table is fitted directly onto the monkey's headand latched into place leaving the portion above the ears ex-posed.

A sharp scaler is used to cut round the skull vault. By thenthe palpitating brain is exposed and brandy is poured into theexposed area of the brain. A spoon is used to scoop up thebrain matter, or a straw is used. Monkey's brain is taken as anaphrodisiac.

Table for scalping the monke to expose its brains. —Excerpted from an article in Suara Sam, published by Friends of the Earth, Malaysia

Puppies for sale in food market Kuala Lumpoi; Malaysia.

Domesticated pets like dogs and cats arc not spared from the cooking pots. Dogs, usuallypuppies of about six months old, arc killed by tying the animal which is then hung by itshind legs. Boiling water is then poured over it until it dies. This method is believed tocause the blood to rush upward to the head leaving the flesh tender. Cats arc placed intogunny sacks and drowned in tubs of water, or killed by scalding.

—From Suara Sam

China Imprisons 26for Killing Pandas

From Reuters

HONG KONG—Twenty-six menhave been sent to prison for killingand skinning giant pandas in Chi-na's southwestern Sichuan prov-ince, the China News Service said.

The sentences ranged from threeyears to life. The agency said onWednesday that the men killed sixpandas, a protected species in Chi-na, and tried to smuggle their skinsabroad for sale. They also skinned16 pandas that had starved to deathbecause of a shortage of the pandas'staple food, arrow bamboo.

About 1,000 pandas are believedto exist in the wild, but theirnumbers are dwindling. China thisyear warned that poachers andsmugglers could face execution.

Reprinted with permission of Reuters

Rhino killings continue across two continentsLast November a large gang of poach-ers from Zambia entered Zimbabwe'sMona Pool national park and killed atleast 13 black rhinos. The killingsbrought the 1987 toll to 105, reducingthe park's population of this highlyendangered species to under 600.

In Assam, northern India, theKaziranga national park, main home ofthe one-horned rhino, has also been

invaded time and again by poachinggangs. During the past six years about180 rhinos have been butchered.

The poachers there know that rhinohorn commands exorbitant prices inillegal channels. They also know thatthe Kaziranga national park containsabout 85% of the world's dwindlingpopulation of one-horned rhino, nowdown to approximately 1500.

13

NUMBER OFANIMALS

IMPOUNDED_ (000)

40

30

1950 1960 1970 1980

110

100

DALLASANIMAL

CONTROLBUDGET($10K)

60

50

20

10

90

80

70

"A TALE OF TWO CITIES"When the City of Los Angeles opened the first municipal low-cost spay and neuter clinic in 1971, it

seemed a most unlikely place to attempt a turn-around in animal control. With a human popu-lation of some three million and an estimated animal population of a million dogs and cats, it covers thelargest area of any city in the world. The results in the following sixteen years have attracted interest fromevery major municipality in the United States as well as Canada and many foreign countries.

Unfortunately most efforts to dupli-cate the successes of Los Angeles havebeen hampered by the badgering ofveterinarians. Yet a notable exceptionis the Vancouver British ColumbiaS.P.C.A. clinic opened in 1976 andspearheaded by director C. JamesHomes and a retired (and enlightened)veterinarian, Dr. Colin Collin. Thetwo, each dedicated to eliminating theconstant destruction of surplus ani-mals, set about to establish new rec-ords in performance. Ten thousandsurgeries were performed in the firstten months, and to date, more than125,000 spays and neuters have beenaccomplished. Even more remarkableis the fact that pregnant animals arenot excluded with several hundredfetuses aborted monthly. This seldomused procedure accounts for a largenumber of additional animals. SaidMichael H. Weeks, executive directorfollowing the recent retirement of C.Jack Homes, "We may be approachingthe point in most areas where the onlydogs we are putting down are trulyunadoptable. Cats remain anothermatter."

Both Los Angeles and Vancouverdirectors credit much of their successto the support of municipal officials,dedicated volunteers, and an enthusi-astic public. Robert Rush, GeneralManager of Los Angeles Departmentof Animal Regulation, said in anaddress to the Dallas City Council in1976 that he could count on the fingersof one hand the criticisms he hadreceived on the clinics. Today, it mighttake ten fingers, but complaints remainexceedingly rare.

Despite spiraling inflation, the LosAngeles City Council voted to hold theline on $17.50 spays and $11.50 neu-ters until 1984 when fees rose to $20and $17. Still included are basic canineand feline shots, overnight and emer-gency care, no restrictions on size, anda mortality rate of less than one in athousand.

Los Angeles would be overwhelmedtoday with animals and related prob-

14

lems had the estimated increases goneunchecked. Mayor Tom Bradley, oneof California's most admired and re-spected politicos, got where he is bypledging allegiance to the balancedbudget and winning the support of thebusiness community. In short, he hasno patience with fly-by-night projects.The mayor has steadfastly supportedthe clinics and their role in a city besetby problems of growth, smog, home-less people, crime, and more passen-ger autos on the streets (about five mil-lion) than any other metropolitan areaon Earth. No doubt he finds the suc-cess of the clinics, both in popularityand reduction of animal problems, anadministrative joy.

An important by-product of the LosAngeles and Vancouver clinics is thewealth of information resulting fromwell-maintained records. In a fieldwhere long range planning is "tomor-row" and statistics are haphazardlykept, if at all, the figures of their effortsare invaluable in planning effectiveanimal control. The charts shown hereare examples of the information availa-ble for analysis.

90ANIMALS DESTROYED

VANCOUVER, B.C.(000)

70

60

50

40

30

20

1 0

01975

1980

1985

With such role models why haven'tclinics opened throughout the coun-try? The public is ready and willing,but efforts have been impeded byvested interests. "Government intru-sion, free enterprise, socialization ofanimal medicine, and federal funding"are pious phrases in the anti-clinicarguments.

It is argued: "Not everyone ownspets; why should their tax money go toneutering other people's pets?" Yet,the Los Angeles City Clinic had beenopen only two years when Modern Vet-erinary Medicine, March 1973, reported:"It is clearly evident from the financialrecords of the spay clinic that a city-runsplay program need not be a burden onthe taxpayers, and this makes it veryattractive to other cities with animalover-population problems."

Economically, veterinarians have pros-pered in private practice with theadvent of the municipal Los Angelesclinics. Some 20,000 animals were

80

MUNICIPALCLINICOPENS

I I I

SURVEYBRANCHINCLUDED

Ten-Year Savings from Low-Cost Clinicsto Los Angeles Taxpayers

Animal impoundments before 1971 increased at a rate of 15%. Thisgrowth increase is shown in Table 1. Table II gives the actual decline fol-lowing establishment of the clinics. With impoundments costing $24 eachto the taxpayers, the savings for these ten years were: $28,158,240

Table I(15% increase)

Table II(actual decline) 2,303,435

1971 144,530 144,530 -1,130,1751972 158,983 132,254 1,173,2601973 174,881 127,554 x $241974 192,369 118,964 $28,158,2401975 211,606 117,2801976 232,767 114,3631977 256,044 104,6741978 281,648 99,7531979 309,813 88,2841980 340,794 82,519

TOTAL 2,303,435 1,130,175

Eighty thousand animals were destroyed in Vancouver in 1976, and thepet population was increasing at a rate of 10% per year. Had this increasebeen permitted to continue for just six years, the numbers of animalsdestroyed would have approximated 750,973.

altered yearly in private practice beforethe clinics opened. Three years later.the number had risen to 50,000!

Dyer Huston of the Los AngelesDepartment of Animal Regulation,says veterinarian opposition has less-ened, and some veterinarians voiceappreciation for the clinics' work. Asimpoundments have decreased, thecity department has emphasized adop-tions and cruelty investigations: 72% ofthe 104,674 animals impounded in1976-77 were destroyed. Ten yearslater, only 58.01% of the 104,357impounded animals were cuthanized.

Vancouver reports similar results.Veterinarians there have opened clinicswith comparable fees. As the SPCAclinic's load is lightened greater con-centration is available for adoption and

1 60

140

120

1 00

80

60

40

20

1970

1975 1980 1985

ANIMALS IMPOUNDEDLOS ANGELES

(000)

FIRSTMUNICIPALCLINIC

POUNDSEIZUREBANNED

11 i I i i l i i i I

humane education and to treat owner-less, injured animals. "Not to kill anyanimal suitable for adoption" waslisted as the number one goal in theVancouver 1984 annual report. From80,000 destroyed animals to 9,000 in11 years makes that goal a distinct pos-sibility.

Stronger leash laws, reduced licensefees for spayed females, and moreresponsible pet ownership are impor-ant, but the basic key to solving theproblem lies in reducing surplus num-bers. This is best accomplished by themass production of sterilizations inclinics devoted solely to that purpose.Spaying and neutering the owned petturns off the faucet. Otherwise, de-

stroving continuous litters is compara-ble to bailing out the sink with thewater running.

Virginia Prejean

Pioneering in a field long neglected bywildlife managers, two professors,Priscilla Cohn, a philosopher, andUlysses Seal, Chairman of the CaptiveBreeding Specialist Group, SurvivalService Commission, InternationalUnion for the Conservation of Nature,brought together twenty birth controlexperts for a two-day symposium inPhiladelphia this November. Attend-ance was such that the first session hadstanding room only as participantsviewed films showing prides of lions inEtosha where implants of fertility inhib-itors in lionesses has kept the popula-tion stable and reduced deaths of cubsin the Southwest African park. At theother end of the scale, birth controlmethods effective on mice were dis-cussed by scientists primarily con-cerned with providing the best contra-ception for human patients.

The first speaker was Dr. Jay Kirkpat-rick, who reviewed the history of ani-mal birth control and made clear itsimportance. Dr. Kirkpatrick said:"Chemical fertility control can bring

Virginia Prejean is founder of Apimal Advo-cates and has long worked to promote spay/neuter programs.

long-term economic benefits, sincewell-planned wildlife management pro-grams will prevent unnecessarily largepopulation increases by attacking theheart of the problem—reproduction.Hunting, capture and sale, trappingand poisoning really only address thesymptoms of overpopulation, not thecauses. It is the difference between pre-vention and cure."

The data supplied by the scientistsshows that the technology is now athand for developing non-lethal meth-ods of controlling wildlife populations.Since these methods are applicable toall mammals, they could also providean inexpensive, less invasive means ofcontrolling the burgeoning pet popula-ti9n, controlling predatory species (coy-oies), as well as skunks and raccoons toprevent the spread of communicableand contagious disease.

The papers are currently beingedited for publication. For further in-formation, write to Professor PriscillaCohn, PNC, 1518 Willowbrook Lane,Villanova, Pennsylvania 19085.

From lions to mice: fertility control

15

Please help stop the trade in frogs' legs

What lies ahead forthe kangarooLast September the European Parlia-ment voted by a hefty majority for aResolution requiring the EuropeanCommission to look into Australia's killof kangaroos with a view to determin-ing whether its size and methods war-ranted a ban on European imports ofkangaroo products.

Such a ban would virtually kill off thekangaroo trade. Europe is the marketfor 90% of Australia's export of rawkangaroo skin. However, it will not beeasily achieved because certaincountries within the European Com-munity, notably Italy which is the chiefimporter of kangaroo skin, are believedto be opposed.

Meanwhile the Australian govern-ment, in its attempts to give a scientificgloss to what is in reality a commercialenterprise has been embarrassed againby the state of Queensland. The statehas requested a 1988 quota of 2.24 mil-lion kangaroos, well in excess of its1987 quota. The request comes quiteunsupported, by any scientific back-upor even the outlines of a managementprogram.

Conscious of the appalling publicityaroused by Queensland's cavalier disre-gard in recent times of the constraintsthat normally govern this kind of exer-cise, the Australian government hasremained mute. Traditionally the nextyear's quotas are announced wellbefore the end of the previous years. Atthe time of this writing, mid-March,the 1988 quotas have still to beannounced.

A bill to ban all imports of kangarooproducts into the US has 119 co-sponsors in the House of Representa-tives. Hearings are expected later thisyear.

Belatedly realizing that frogs, thosehungry devourers of insect pests, ren-der an invaluable ecological service—and one, furthermore, that comes freeof charge unlike those pestilential pest-icides which are needed to replacethem—the Indian government bannedthe export of frogs' legs. This hap-pened last spring and was reported inthe 1987 spring/summer issue of theQuarterly.

But with India, formerly the world'sbiggest exporter of frogs' legs, now outof the market, other countries, notablyBangladesh and Indonesia are strivingto fill the gap. The issue is not just anecological one. The method by whichthe frogs are killed—slicing their torsosin two and then tossing them into aheap to die slowly—would seem calcu-lated to cause maximum suffering tothe animals.

We are therefore listing some of theprincipal importers of frogs' legs intothis country and we urge you to writeto as many of them as you can, urgingthem to end these imports.

Importers of Frogs Legs (US)Amendif & Schultz Inc1017 Fremont, Box 788South Pasadena, CA 91030

Arne Paterson International Inc.P.O. Box 820, Roger StreetGloucester, MA 01930

Timber traders willfund conservationContrary to the more pessimistic pre-dictions, the rainforests of the worlddid gain something from the meetingin Japan last November of the Parties tothe International Timber Trade Organ-ization. This fledgling organization,which consists of most of the primeproducers and consumers of timber,committed itself to funding 16 projects,12 of them conservation projects.

Perhaps the most significant of thesewas the decision to place under "sus-tainable management" 100,000 hectaresof rainforest in the state of Acre, west-ern Brazil. If carried through as in-tended and agreed, this project will en-sure not only that logging abides by thetenets of conservation but also that thelifestyle of the Amerindian tribespeoplethere is not seriously disrupted. It is aproject that will need close watching.

B.A. Bosshart Food Brokerage Co.5912 West 35th Street, Suite BMinneapolis, MN 55416

Th. B. Sessier Co., Inc.70 Pine StreetNew York, NY 10270

Badger Produce Co., Inc.2321 Mustang WayMadison, WI 53704

Baker Sales Company2312 Parklands RoadMinneapolis, MN 55416

Donlan Fish Corporation3116 Corunna RoadP.O. Box 304Flint, MI 48501

E.C. Sweeney & Co.1098 S. Milwaukee AvenueWheeling, IL 60015

Edward Feign EnterprisesP.O. Box 686Aptos, CA 95003

Empress International Ltd.3000 Marcus AvenueLake Success, NY 11042

Fisher Bros. Fisheries, Inc.P.O. Box 965Green Bay, WI 54306

Kent Trading CorporationP.O. Box 69-3309Miami, FL 33169

RAINFORESTVICTORY-BURGER KINGBOWS OUTRainforest Action Networknotched up a significant tri-umph when Burger King, thehamburger chain, bowed topressure and promised to stopimporting beef from CentralAmerica. The consumer boycottorganized by the Network hadpaid off, demonstrating thevalue of concerted grassrootsaction.

The importance of this victorycan be gauged from the fact thathitherto Burger King has beenpurchasing 70% of Costa Rica'sbeef exports, amounting tosome 16,000 tons annually.

16 35-4

Black-footed ferretbirths in captivityThere is cause for celebration in Mee-teetse, Wyoming. For the first timeever, black-footed ferrets are breedingsuccessfully in captivity. Seven babiesare now eight months old and TomThorne, their veterinarian "couldn't bemore delighted. We continue to benervous but I would say I'm guardedlyoptimistic."

Two years ago, optimism was inshort supply. Few ferrets remainedwhen an outbreak of the sylvatic plaguenearly wiped out their prey, the prairiedog. And many who survived that disas-ter succumbed later to distemper. BVthe end of 1985 only six black-footedferrets were known to survive in thewild (see AWI Quarterly, winter 85). Lit-tle hope remained for the species whenthese six were taken to start a captivebreeding program.

A previous attempt in the late 70's tobreed these rare animals produced a lit-ter but none survived. Inbreeding mayhave been the cause. "We have theadvantage of their experience but weare still treading on new ground," saysThorne. "If we get through next yearwith a pretty good birth rate and get the

Two month old captive born ferrets

colony split, then we have a goodchance of succeeding."

Still, there is concern the ferrets arenot being split into separate coloniesfast enough. Tim Clark is a biologistwho works with Wyoming Game andFish to find suitable areas for the ferretsonce they are reintroduced to the wild.

He worries that the world's populationof black-footed ferrets are housed inone facility. "If there's lots of reproduc-tion it won't be an issue; they'll have tosubdivide." But until then, fingers arestill crossed for this endangeredmammal.

—Jessie Despard

LETTERS: Private wildlife haven befouled by cruel trappingDear Sirs:

My husband found a beautiful pinemartin on our property, dragging itselfaway from a leg hold trap, leaving aportion of its limb in the trap and abloody trail in the snow. One of its legswas missing a paw, the back leg missingat the hip joint, the third leg a mangledmess of torn skin and crushed bone.My husband had pity on the poor ani-mal and ended its misery by shooting it.

We worked hard to buy this 100acres, because we like living in thewoods and wanted to keep our prop-erty as a small game reserve. Our prop-erty has been posted time and again;just two weeks before this incident, weput up new signs. These were promptlytorn down, as usual. A storage buildingthat was on our property has beenvandalized so many times, duringtrapping season, that we are no longerrepairing it, and in fact we are going toburn it down.

Both my husband and I work so thatwe can pay our taxes. We don't havetime to constantly police our property.

What are we supposed to do? We spendmoney on signs that are torn down. Wegive verbal warnings and receive verbalabuse and threats in return. My hus-band talked to the local game wardenwho says that our taxes don't pay hissalary, but that trapping licenses do. Herefused to get involved. As a matter offact, he advised us that it would be bestnot to get too tough with trappers be-cause they might come and set un-marked snares and traps all around ourhouse, and we might come to harm. Bythe way, our property is in Minnesota,not on the edge of the frontier. I hadunderstood that civilization had reachedhere some time ago.

My husband and I wanted our prop-erty to be a safe haven for animals,be-cause we enjoy the wild, living creaturesaround us. We had a family of ottersliving in our pond. We used to enjoywatching them play on summer eve-nings. Because my husband and I bothwork, we weren't here to watch whenthe traps were set. But we found the evi-dence of their deaths, all four of them.

Four minus four equals zero. This issubtraction not multiplication—not arenewable resource after all. Onceagain, this was done on our propertywhere the signs had been torn down.Some heroes we have here.

The irony of this situation is this: myhusband freely admits that he shot thispine martin to end its suffering. By ad-mitting this, he will probably be jailed,because he doesn't have a trapping li-cense. He'll lose his job, and won't bepaying taxes. But the silver lining is,then we can go on public assistance andthen we will have time to patrol ourproperty.

In all, this is a sorry, but true, tale oftwo people who just wanted to live inpeace and harmony with nature on thepioperty that they bought and paid for.It's also a story of those truly heroicnorthwoods trappers, who let nothingstand in the way of their frenzy to muti-late another live animal. Sign us trulydisgusted in northern Minnesota,

Timothy and Maxine Hughes

17

HUMPBACK WHALES AS INDIVIDUALSI n the mid-1970s, researchers led by

Steve Katona of the College of theAtlantic (COA), showed that individualhumpback whales, Megaptera novaengliae,could be identified over a number ofyears from photographs of markings onthe ventral side of the tail flukes. Sincethen, Katona and his colleagues havecoordinated and curated an extensivecatalog of fluke photographs of over3,600 individual whales.

The NMML computer system is sim-ple. Researchers select a pattern typethat most closely resembles the patternin the photograph, and then enter thelocation of various marks and scarsbased on the Balcomb/Katona flukesector map. This information is storedin the data base. When a match of anunknown whale is requested, a flukematching algorithm (developed by Mac-gill Lynde of OceanTech, Inc., Seattle,WA) compares each photograph in thedata base to the unknown. The com-puter automatically displays the photoson the video screen in likely order ofmatch. A researcher can scan hundredsof sorted photographs in just a few min-utes.

As the number of identified whalesgrew, it began to take more and moretime to match new photographs to thosealready in their collection. COA workersestimate that they spend well over anhour matching each new photograph. Inthe late 1970s, Ken Balcomb and Katonatried to speed the matching process witha computer sorting program linked to avideo disc, but their efforts were limitedby the computer technology of the day.

Meanwhile, researchers were collect-ing photographs in different regions ofthe North Pacific. Individually each haddeveloped a catalog, containing about150-1,400 different whales, but therehad been no comprehensive catalog that

synthesized all the North Pacific collec-tions. So the National Marine MammalLaboratory (NMML) began developing anew computer system which was looselybased on the Balcomb/Katona model,though more advanced.

In April, 1986, the NMML assisted bythe University of Alaska Sea Grant pro-gram sponsored a workshop to demon-strate a working version of the new com-puter system to the North Pacificresearchers.

Since its inception, the NMML hasimproved the system. Based on thecomments from researchers attendingthe workshop, a User's Guide is beingdeveloped by Mizroch and Beard, andthe current version was demonstratedat the recent Seventh Biennial Confer-ence on the Biology of Marine Mam-mals in Miami, Florida. In addition, theNMML has received photographs fromall the North Pacific resarch groups. Itnow has nearly 8,000 photographsfrom over 15 collections, representingperhaps as many as 3,000-4,000 indi-vidual whales. Last December theentire North Atlantic and North Pacificcollections of photographs was mas-tered onto a video disc.

P hoto-identification techniques havebeen developed for many other

species of whales, and new studies arebeing initiated for a number of speciespreviously thought to be difficult toidentify. Several long term photo-iden-tification studies of individual cetaceanshave provided information about mi-gration, distribution, abundance, andpopulation parameters such as repro-duction and mortality, but even theselong term studies have presented ana-lytical difficulties at times.

The International Whaling Commis-sion is conducting a ComprehensiveAssessment of Whale Stocks, and in this

context has agreed to sponsor a Con-ference on the Use of Non-LethalTechniques, especially Photo-Identifi-cation Techniques to Estimate Ceta-cean Population Parameters. The Con-ference will be held in La Jolla, Califor-nia, and will address such topics as:• Procedures and problems in data col-

lection• Criteria for identifying and matching

individuals• Assumptions of analytical methods

and models used for estimating pop-ulation parameters

• Methods of obtaining representativesamples from populations

• Sample size requirements for obtain-ing estimates for different levels ofprecision

j4PT he first days, 29 April through 1

May 1988, will be an open sympo-sium, with a number of talks, posters,and special evening sessions. The nextpart, 1-4 May 1988, will be a workshop(due to space limitations, by invitationonly) that will address a number of thetopics listed above. The proceedings ofthe Conference will be published as anIWC Special Issue. For more informa-tion about the symposium, contact:

Sally A. MizrochNorthwest and Alaska Fisheries

Center, NMFSNational Marine Mammal Lab.7600 Sand Point Way, NE, Bldg. 4Seattle, Washington 98115(206) 526-4045

—Sally Mizroch

Sally Mizroch is a biologist for the NationalMarine Fisheries Service Marine MammalLaboratory and coordinates the humpbackwhale photo identification program.

Drawings show some of the humpback whale fluke*terns used in computer recognition program.

18 Nt9j-Xty

0

A starving dog in Greece

Struggling to protectanimals in GreeceSince it was founded in 1959, the GreekAnimal Welfare Fund has been strug-gling to protect animals. In Greece, ani-mals face problems which don't existelsewhere. There is a deep-rooted fearof cats and dogs carrying rabies andechinococcus—both dreaded diseases.And many Greeks abhor euthanasia, sofatally injured and starving animals areleft to suffer needlessly. Veterinariansfor domestic animals are scarce or non-existent in rural Greece and on many ofthe smaller islands.

Despite these obstacles, and a lack ofAnimal Welfare organizations, GAWFhas made great strides. In the words ofan Athenian lady, "The Greek AnimalWelfare Fund should be proud of thechange it has brought in Greece in thecare of animals. Even though Greece isno paradise for ani-mals, it has ceasedto be the hell itwas . . ."

Eleanor Close,founder of GAWFand holder of theRSPCA's VictoriaSilver Medal, wasappalled by whatshe saw in thoseearly days. Dogs andcats were put intomalfunctioning elec-tric chambers withlong metal tongs. Soshe ordered modernequipment and bar-biturates from Eng-land for humane de-struction.

Anesthesia was introduced to the ex-perimental hospitals and vets andattendants were hired by the Society tocare for the animals, then housed indank, dark and evil-smelling basements.Outside pounds were built. Humaneslaughter was demonstrated in themunicipal abattoirs and the one andonly animal shelter in Greece wasrebuilt. The cruel traffic in equinesexported to Italy for slaughter wasexposed and, thanks to the efforts ofGAWF and the RSPCA, greatly re-duced.

Today, GAWF's main function is toraise funds to help Greek humanesocieties carry out their work. Thoughheadquartered in England, regular vis-its are made to Greece to meet with thefield workers, government officials andnew applicants for help. GAWF took afirm stand against the mass slaughter ofmigratory birds (Greece has been amajor offender) and many of its recom-

mendations were acted upon. Protestsare now being made to appropriateministries and media attention drawnto the barbaric practice of tying up andleaving old horses, donkeys and mulesto starve after a life of hard labor. Someare pitched over cliffs and left to die aslow and agonizing death.

Apart from regular financial contri-butions, GAWF has provided medicineand equipment (including two anes-thesia machines), stocked a low-costclinic in Athens, subsidized spayingand funded the purchase of worn-outequines to give them a merciful end.Recently we helped to provide a properdrainage system for the Salonica Soci-ety's shelter. Our most ambitious proj-ect to date is to build, in collaborationwith the Hellenic Animal Welfare Soci-ety of Athens, a model animal rescuecenter. Over two acres of land havebeen bought in Peania (Attica) and finalplans are being drawn up by an archi-tect and our own veterinary surgeon,David Cuffe.

The Center will be a haven for all ani-mals and provide a unique service inGreece. Adoption and neutering ofdogs and cats will be encouraged.There will be stables for sick, old orinjured equines and a low cost clinicand advisory service. GAWF has raised£50,000 ($80,000) and the Greek soci-ety will match this for the first phase;much more will be needed to completethe Center.

— Gwen Ware

Mrs. Ware is the Organizing Secretary for theGreek Animal Welfare Fund. Contributionsmay be sent to: Greek Animal Welfare Fund,11 Lower Barn Rd., Purley, Surrey, CR2I HY, England.

Animal Welfare InstituteScientific CommitteeMarjorie Anchel, Ph.D.Bennett Derby, M.D.F. Barbara Orlans, Ph.D.Roger Payne, Ph.D.Samuel Peacock, M.D.John Walsh, M.D.

International CommitteeAline S. de Aluja, D.V.M.—MexicoT.G. Antikas, D.V.M.—GreeceAmbassador Tabarak Husain—BangladeshAngela King—United KingdomSimon Muchiru—KenyaDavid Ricardo—CanadaGodofredo Stutzin—ChileKlaus Vestergaard—Denmark

Directors, cont'dGerard Bertrand, Ph.D.Marjorie CookeChristabel GoughDavid 0. HillSue HuntFreeborn G. Jewett, Jr.Christine StevensAileen TrainCynthia Wilson

Nell Naughton, Mail Order SecretaryGreta Nilsson, Wildlife ConsultantVictor Perez, Clerical AssistantLaura Swedberg, Administrative AssistantLouise Wright, Research Assistant

StaffPatrick Allen, Editorial ConsultantJessie Despard, Publications CoordinatorRose R. Eck, Administrative Assistant

for Communications

Diane Halverson, Research Associatefor livestock and poultry

Lynne Hutchison, Whale Campaign SecretaryCathy Liss, Research Associate

OfficersChristine Stevens, PresidentCynthia Wilson, Vice PresidentMarjorie Cooke, SecretaryRoger L. Stevens, Treasurer

DirectorsJohn Beary, M.D.Madeleine Bemelmans

7, 19

Infant pain recognized—now how about animals?An article entitled "Infants' sense of

pain is recognized, finally" appearedrecently in the New York Times. Theauthor, Philip M. Boffey, was makingtwo main points: one, that becausenewborn infants do not react as theirelders do to what are normally painfulstimuli, they were perceived until veryrecently as organisms too primitive tofeel pain; two, that pediatricians wereslow, (agonisingly slow for infants oper-ated on without benefit of anesthetic) toabandon this deeply entrenched beliefeven after fresh neurological evidencehad roundly contradicted it.Belatedly most pediatricians do nowaccept what mothers have alwaysknown—newborns can and do feelpain. And in most American hospitalsinfants will now receive anesthesia be-fore undergoing major surgery.

Bully for science! But wait—doesn'tthis whole case bear closely upon a

Only after parents and other lay-men raised a cry about needless supfering, and some filed lawsuits, was

there enough pressure to change.The long failure to provide

anesthesia for newborns provides asalutory reminder that medical

practices are sometimes based onflimsy science and erroneous beliefs,

and that outside critics can bringan important perspective.

—Philip M. BoffeyNew York Times

related issue? In some laboratories andmany factory farms, animals are treatedas if they were machines rather than

sentient creatures. Unanesthetized ani-mals frequently undergo operationswhich would be quite unbearably pain-ful to an unanesthetized human.

The blithe assumption is that be-cause these animals do not respond inexactly the same way adult humans doto painful or stressful stimuli, they arenot in pain. Although the assumption isnow vigorously contested it remains arelic of Cartesian orthodoxy vis-a-visanimals. This being so, perhaps the ani-mal scientists should take a look at thefindings of their pediatric colleaguesacross the tiny neurological dividewhich separates (or, as some would say,unites) people and animals.

And at the same time maybe some ofthem might care to re-examine theirown positions vis-a-vis the not-so-tinydivide which separates laudable scien-tific caution from stubborn refusal togive up long-cherished beliefs.

Video tapes at seaThe Marine Mammal Fund has pro-duced two fine 30-minute videotapes which explore the lives ofsome of our more prominent ma-rine animals. Watching the Whalestakes you among nine species ofwhales and dolphins. World of the SeaOtter deals with the social and familylife of this "clown of the sea". Thetapes, priced at $39.95, are availablefrom: Marine Mammal Fund, Ft.Mason, Bldg E., San Francisco, CA94123.

An Orca leaps from the water.

Animal Welfare InstituteP.O. Box 3650Washington, D.C. 20007

Non-Profit Org.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDWashington, D.C.Permit No. 2300

THEANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE

QUARTERLYP.O. BOX 3650 WASHINGTON, DC 20007

SPRING/SUMMER 1988 VOL. 37, NOS. 18c2

Interior ordered to enforce humane rules

nder pressure from pet industrylobbyists, the US Interior Depart-

ment tried to withdraw final regulationson Humane and Healthful Transportof Wild Mammals and Birds mandatedunder the 1981 amendments to theLacey Act. After six years of foot-drag-ging, the Fish and Wildlife Service(FWS) published the final regulations10 November 1987 to take effect 8 Feb-ruary 1988. But two days later after twoof the biggest commercial traders inwild birds, in company with the PetIndustry Joint Advisory Council's(PIJAC) chief lobbyist, insisted that theyreconsider, FWS published a retractionin the Federal Register. Outraged protec-tors of animals went to court to rightthis wrong.

Ray Bolze and Margaret Fitzsim-mons of the law firm of Howrey andSimon argued the case pro bono. TheAnimal Welfare Institute was the lead

organization joined by the HumaneSociety of the United States, Society forAnimal Legislation, Ameri-can Humane Association, AmericanCetacean Society, Animal ProtectionInstitute of America, International Fundfor Animal Welfare, The Fund for Ani-mals, International Primate ProtectionLeague, and Friends of Animals. PIJACjoined the Department of the Interiorattempting to defend its manipulationof the Administrative Procedure Act.

The lawsuit stated:As recognized by Congress in passing

these 1981 Amendments, recent investiga-tions 'uncovered a massive illegal trade infish and wildlife . . . Evidence indicates thatmuch of this, illegal, and highly profitable,trade is handled by well organized large vol-ume operations run by professional crimi-nals.' This 'illegal wildlife trade has grim en-vironmental consequences. It threatens thesurvival of many species of wildlife . .

continued on page 15

House passes elephantconservation bill page 4

US bans Burundi ivory page 5

Tuna industrydecimates dolphins page 10

1988 IWC meeting page 12

News of registeredresearch facilities page 16

Undercover operationssurface triumphantly page 18

Very special agentsjoin war on drugs page 18

Senate passes pettheft bill page 20

Labelling of furs caught in steel jaw leghold trapsThe first proposal for providingconsumers with information of thesource of the fur made into coatsbeing offered for sale was made byBritish Minister of Trade and Indus-try Alan Clark. He stated, "This is aquestion of public enlightenment,not a statutory thing. It is saying thatthe public is able to make its owndecisions, provided that it knowswhat is at stake."

The proposed order attracted muchinterest in Parliament and manyMembers supported the followingresolution:

That this House, noting the inten-tion of the Department of Tradeand Industry to introduce alabelling Order to cover the furs ofanimals caught in leghold traps, adevice made illegal in the UnitedKingdom following the report ofthe 1951 Scott Henderson Com-

Opponents of the steeljaw leghold trap, US Congress-man James Scheuer and European Parliament Mem-ber Barbara Castle at the Parliament's Animal WelfareExhibit in Strasbourg.

mittee, which describes it as a dia-bolical instrument which causesan incalculable amount of suffer-ing, congratulates the Minister forTrade on taking this valuable step,which will allow the consumer toexercise freedom of choice as towhether or not to purchase gar-ments the production of whichwill have involved extreme crueltyto animals; and calls upon HerMajesty's Government to includein the Order the furs of badger,beaver, bobcat, coyote, cross fox,ermine, fisher, gray fox, lynx,marten, opossum, otter, raccoon,red fox, and wolf, all of which arefrequently caught in leghold traps.

The Government of Canada stronglyopposed the proposal, allegedly threat-ening to give a five billion dollar order.for submarines to France instead ofthe United Kingdom if the Order was

continued on page 8

Dead smuggled parrot, its feetwrapped in masking tape.

This bird bill deserves passage into lawt was back in 1984 that New York became the first state in the Union to ban the import and sale ofwild-caught birds. The measure was aimed at lessening the pressure on parrots and other birds

plucked in huge numbers from their forest homes overseas to satisfy our ever-growing cage-bird trade.

Four years on and New York is stillthe only state to have taken this step.However, now there is a chance thatPennsylvania will follow suit. Hearingson the state's Wild Bird Bill HB 2227took place on 19 May in Harrisburg.

Primary evidence came from theBritish-based Environmental Investiga-tion Agency whose grim account of thetrapping of some 20 million birds ayear in Senegal was carried in a pre-vious Quarterly (Spring/Summer 1987).In his testimony ETA's Dave Curreyshowed a 6-minute excerpt from hison-location film graphically illustratingthe hideous cruelty and wastage in-volved in Senegal's bird trade—forwhich the US is the chief customer.

P redictably though, the vociferousranks of the pet industry remained

quite unmoved by this front-line re-port. In what the President of AWLwho herself spoke in strong support ofthe bill, described as a "stormy" meet-ing, the cage-bird lobbyists were longon invective (castigating the bill's sup-porters as hysterical propagandists) butshort on reasoned argument.

On all matters of substance the bill'sopponents were roundly routed. Theycontended that the proposed ban willlead to an increase in smuggling. Notso, said Dr. Donald Bruning, chairmanof IUCN's Parrot Specialist Group. As aresident of New York he made it plainthat his state, "is not a magnet forattracting smuggled birds."

They, the bill's opponents, con-tended too that pet stores will not com-ply with the proposed new law. Not so.In New York state most pet store own-ers are complying. (Or is the pet indus-try saving that Pennsylvania's pet storeowners are less law-abiding than NewYork's?) They also contended that be-cause federal laws, as required byCITES, already prohibit the import ofthreatened and endangered species,any further tightening of the screw isquite unnecessary. Not so. Authorita-tive estimates suggest the number ofbirds smuggled into the US may be ashigh as 100,000 a year—or almost halfthe number legally imported.

One typical kind of smugglingring begins in Mexico where

parrots are supplied toindividuals who transport themacross the US border in any of a

variety of ways. Whenautomobiles are used, they maybe hidden inside door panels,

hub caps, under seats, inpassengers' garments. Or crates

full 'of birds may be broughtacross a lonely stretch of river at

night and hidden in aprearranged spot to be picked upby a member of the ring on theUS side who then distributes thebirds to other criminals with the

right connections in the birdtrade To police the hugeAmerican-Mexican border, theFish and Wildlife Service hasonly four agents and three

inspectors!—Excerpt /iron testimony of Christine Stevens

al 11 ari n:;, on MI 2227

A things stand pet store owners and,more plausibly, the pet-buying pub-

lic are able to plead that they cannot tellthe difference between smuggled birdsand those legitimately brought in. Onlya total ban on the import of all foreignwild birds can puncture this defenseand, in the process, deal a mortal blowto the smugglers.

How so? Because the bill contains aprovision to enable anyone to tell at aglance the captive-bred bird. For thesebirds will sport a seamless leg band thatcan only be attached in the fledglingstate while it can still be slipped overthe foot.

Stopping big-time smuggling will havehealth benefits. In the first place smug-gled birds, which evade quarantining,frequently contract psittacosis and trans-mit it to people. In its human form it is avery nasty disease. Secondly, that scourgeof the poultry trade, exotic Newcastledisease, invariably owes its genesis tosmuggled wild birds that have escaped.

All in all there is every reason whyHB 2227 should become law. Willreason prevail, though? For the statethat takes its name from that eminentlyreasonable man, William Penn, theomens are surely propitious.

Smuggler jailed in GhanaDarrel Alexander was on board a planein the West African country of Ghanawhen officials arrested him for trying tosmuggle 2,000 African Grey Parrots. Aban on the export of these parrots hasbeen in effect since 1980.

33 crates of the birds were beingloaded when an observer alerted thepolice. Alexander, who was importingthe birds for Exotic Fauna of LosAngeles, also runs USDA quarantinestittions in L.A. He is now in a Ghanaianjail along with three others involved:two Ghanaian bird dealers and a Cus-toms Officer.

The parrots were in such poor shapewhen they were seized that many died.The survivors are now being housed inthe Accra Zoo.

2

United fined $11,000 for violations

T heir ads invite travelers to "flythe friendly skies" but for ani-mals, the skies of United Air-

lines have been more fatal thanfriendly.

Earlier this year, United paid an$11,000 penalty for violations of theAnimal Welfare Act involving nine sep-arate shipments of live animals. Amongthe list of violations: accepting dogsshipped in kennels of inadequate size,failing to observe and care for the dogsproperly and neglecting to supply suffi-cient ventilation.

In 1985, in the space of four months,two dogs in United's care died while intransit. One year later, another dog wasallegedly mishandled, escaped and waskilled in traffic. According to the USDepartment of Agriculture, United also"accepted a shipment of 50 monkeys incages that were not structurally soundand had no markings indicating theycontained wild animals."

The monkeys, shipped from Japan,were en route to a research facility.Under the law, United could have been

Survivalof thesmartestExtracted from an article by Jared M.Diamond, Nature, 5 November 1987.

We take it for granted that socialmammals, such as lions, acquirehunting skills only after lengthyperiod of watching, imitation andpractice. Birds supposedly rely oninstinct and are poor at learning.But consider the implications ofWerner and Sherry's work for birdsliving in the world's most species-rich habitats, the continental tropi-cal rainforests.

An insectivorous bird is facedwith tens or hundreds of thousandsof local insect species, includingmore than a thousand beetle speciesin one tree species alone (Erwin, T.Coleopt, Bull. 36, 74-75; 1982). Manyof these species are poisonous orspiny, others are nonpoisonous butclosely mimic the poisonous ones,and still others are concealed or eva-sive.

fined $1,000 for each monkey shipped;a fine which would, perhaps, reducefuture violations.

But United is not alone. "This is notan isolated case," says Fay Brisk, whohas been monitoring the care given toanimals in transit for the past two dec-ades. She cites a case of four grey-hounds who died on their way to Port-land from St. Louis when their planereportedly lost pressure. Two othershad to be euthanized after landing."We don't know how often that hap-pens because we don't have the re-ports."

Airlines are not required to report toUSDA when an animal in their caredies so there is no way of establishinghow many of these deaths are occur-ring. Occasionally, a pet owner will suethe airline, but pets make up only asmall percentage of animals beingshipped each day. "We have to remem-ber that many lab animals are shippedby air, as well as wildlife and puppiesfrom puppy mills," Brisk points out.For this reason, "airports are an excel-

Each species poses different prob-lems of search and capture. Simi-larly, a frugivorous bird is facedwith hundreds of fruit species, someof them nutritious, others poison-ous and others non-poisonous butof low nutritive value. Each fruitspecies exhibits different externalsigns of when it is ripe to eat.

Although tropical entomologistsand botanists devote their entireprofessional lives to learning to dis-tinguish a small fraction of a localflora or insect fauna, a tropical-for-est bird must master this enormousamount of local information morequickly if it is to survive. Juvenilesspend months foraging with theirparents after fledging, and manyspecies forage in mixed-speciesflocks outside the breeding season.

These behaviours could providethe schools for learning. The pen-alty for failing avian examinations issevere: many juvenile birds inSarawak forest die of starvation andother causes within a few weeks afterdispersing (Fogden, M. Ibis 114,307-342; 1972). Thus, tropical-rainforest birds may have beenselected for learning ability.

lent place to catch other (Animal Wel-fare Act) violations, such as unlicenseddealers."

Despite increased penalties for vio-lations instituted in 1985, animals con-tinue to suffer when traveling by air.One of the reasons is a shortage ofUSDA inspectors. USDA is responsiblefor enforcing the Animal Welfare Act,which contains a provision for animalsin transit. But they have neither the staffnor the money to effectively police theenormous numbers of animals shippedevery day.

"They can't handle it," says Brisk.With the few inspectors available toinspect airports, "only 20 or 25 majorairports can be inspected. Last yearthey spent $141,000 on airline inspec-tions; that's around two percent of thetotal budget of five million (allocated toenforce the Animal Welfare Act) for1987. It has the lowest priority of anyprogram." Yet USDA surveyed onemajor airport and found that over 25%of the 200 shipments examined were inviolation of the Animal Welfare Act.

To keep the airlines on their toesand catch violations, USDA inspec-

tors must make unannounced visits.But often when the inspector arrives,the animal shipment has left or hasn'tcome in yet. "USDA ought to have anidea of when large shipments comein...Most arrive in the morning or atnight," says Brisk. This is especiallyimportant since inspections may be fewand far between.

Ultimately, it is up to the airline toimprove the treatment of the animalsthey carry. One simple but importantchange airlines can make is to changethe category under which animals areshipped. Currently, though the animals'crates must be marked 'live animals,'the shipping manifest offers only twochoices: 'freight' or 'cargo'. "If they aregoing to label them baggage, they'll behandled like baggage," says Brisk, add-ing that there is no separate compart-ment for animals once they are placedin i the plane.

For those animals on the ground, shesuggests involving local humane soci-eties. "if they can make an arrangementwith the airlines to have a humaneagent to go in and check the animals,not as an agent of the law, but as a pub-lic service to assist the airlines, I thinkthe airlines would welcome that."

3

Elephant Conservation Bill passes HouseThe disastrous decline of the African

elephant as a result of the ivorytrade was discussed at hearings 22 June.

Congressman Gerry Studds, whochairs the Subcommittee on Fisheriesand Wildlife Conservation and theEnvironment, outlined the three pro-posals: Congressman Anthony Beilen-son's H.R. 2999 to ban importation ofelephant ivory; Congressman JackFields' H.R. 4849 to ban importation ofivory from "intermediary" countries;and a staff draft requiring effective con-servation programs.

The bill approved by the Subcommit-tee, passed the full House on Monday,the eighth of August and awaits actionby the Senate Finance Committee.

The powerful testimony of Dr. lainDouglas-Hamilton brought home theextent of the disaster in populationswhich he and other scientists havestudied over the past 15 years. Figures

the Convention on International Tradein Endangered Species of Wild Faunaand Flora (CITES), Dr. Douglas-Hamil-ton said:

The CITES Ivory Quota agreement,

when I fly surveys each time I find fewerelephants left alive, and thousands ofcarcasses, sonic killed in the last fewyears and some recently. I know that it isthe ivory trade which is responsible, andeven as we talk, elephants are beingkilled for ivory.

The quota system is not working. In1986 it was estimated that only 22% ofthe ivory traded on the world marketwas legal. It hasn't worked in the pastand all the signs are that it will not workin the future. There arc too many mid-dlemen. There arc too many ways forthe ivory to get into the world trade ..

The whole system at present is out ofcontrol. There isn't time to get propercontrols. The traders arc too clever atfinding loopholes. One only has to lookat the rhino situation to see what willhappen to the elephant. The only meritof the system is if it can lead to unitedinternational police action to eliminatethe illegal ivory trade. This is what I re-commended to your committee in 1979,

Number of Elephants Decline

Country* 19 73 198 7 Numbers

Kenya 130,570 19.749 -110,821 (-85%)

Uganda 17,620 1,855 15,765 (-89%)

19 77 1987

Tanzania 184,872 87,088 -97,784 (-53%) In recognition of twenty years of work to save the African elephant,Congressman Anthony Beilenson firesents Dr. lain Douglas-Hamil-ton with a statuette created In' sculptor John Perry.

showing the widespread decimationappear above.

"Recently," Dr. Douglas-Hamiltonstated, "even supposedly small and wellprotected elephant populations havecollapsed. For example, the elephantsof Lake Manyara live in a small and iso-lated park and I have been studyingthem for 20 years, and have flown peri-odic aerial surveys. At one time I knew400 of them individually. The numberscounted from the air gently increasedfrom about 300 in 1967 to 485 in 1981,but in the last two years over half theelephants have been lost. In Novemberlast year we counted 181 live elephantsand 94 dead. Of the 25 or so old matri-archs that I knew there were only threeleft, and no large bulls survived. It wasas if a whole elder generation had beenwiped out."

Of the much touted quota system of

conceived in 1984, came into effect in1985 and was intended to control thetrade in ivory. In theory strict controlson all ivory were to be instituted. Eachtusk was to be registered at source, andtracked by a computer. Rapid communi-cations were to be set up between themanagement authorities of producerand consumer countries in order tocatch illicit traders. In practice the com-puter registration happens, but with afew notable exceptions the rapid com-munication and the crime busting capa-bility has not materialized.

Yet it was claimed in 1986 by theCITES secretariat that the system hadalready reduced poaching. This simplyis not true. The surveys in which I haveparticipated show how ivory poachinghas continued to decimate elephantpopulations.

As a field biologist I am perplexed byall the claims made by the trade that theofftake is sustainable. I only know that

but it has not happened.

He predicts:

As the elephants become scarcer theprice will continue to rise. Even now thedemand of Hong Kong, Japan, Europeand America cannot be met. It wasthought that when the large Singaporeivory stock of 297 tonnes came on themarket in the latter half of 1987, that theprice of ivory would fall. It did not. Itcontinued to climb up to $150/kg andbeyond. At present levels of demand wecan expect the price to go on up

(through the roof.tie concluded that "The time for

action is now, not when the elephantshave followed the route of the rhinoc-eros" and recommended "eliminatingthe role of the United States in creatinga demand for ivory is crucial if we areto reduce the volume of ivory beingconsumed by the developed world."

4

April: US bans Burundi ivoryAugust: Burundi joins CITES and jails ivory dealer

As from 29 April the US has banned allimports of ivory from Burundi andwarns that it will extend the ban toother nations trading in ivory with thisEast African country. The US actionfollows the discovery, confirmed byCITES, of 16,000 elephant tusks (whichmeans at least 8000 dead elephants) inprivate ownership in Burundi.

This vast haul of ivory has accumu-lated since 1 December 1986, by whichdate Burundi's stockpiled ivory had tobe registered with CITES if it was to beallowed into international trade. Thecontroversial deal—which enraged sev-eral African nations, not to mention theconservation community, when it latercame to light—was sanctioned by theCITES Secretariat on the strength (ifthat's the word) of Burundi's promise tobecome a party to the Convention.

The promise proved empty. After"legally" selling off no fewer than

Elephant tusks. Note the steel jaw legholdtraps piled in the background.

18,148 CITES-registered tusks, Burundiceased all further communication withthe CITES Secretariat.

Now, less than 18 months later, thistiny country, which has no elephants of

its own and to which no elephant nationhas authorized any exports of ivory, hasyet managed to stockpile ivory almost tothe level of December 1986.

Most and perhaps all of this ivory waspoached. There can also be no doubtthat it will be traded internationallyunless prohibitions are imposed fastthroughout the international commu-nity. Other countries are therefore beingurged to follow the US lead.

STOP PRESS!Burundi has ratified the Conventionon International Trade in EndangeredSpecies of Wild Fauna and Flora(CITES) and will officially become aparty to the Convention 8 November1988. The Burundi government re-portedly took all the stockpiled ivoryinto custory, but an undisclosedamount is missing. One trader hasbeen jailed. The remaining 108 tons isworth about $200 million.

The rhino in peril—"we are really fighting a war"Congressman James Scheuer called hearings on "Conservation Strategies/Saving the Endangered Rhinoc-eros" in the Subcommittee on Natural Resources, Agricultural Research and Environment, which he chairs.The hearings followed those held on elephants in the morning of June 22nd.

In his opening statement, Congress-man Scheuer said:

Rhinos have been on the Earth for 36million years, much longer than ourown not-so-humble species. For mil-lenia, rhinos have thrived, populatingAfrica, India, and much of the NearEast, and even reaching the East Indies.Today, rhinos are reduced to remnantpopulations, persisting only in pro-tected pockets, under the watchful eveof armed wardens. We have assailed thehabitat of rhinos, causing their popula-tion to plummet as our own humanpopulation soars exponentially to disas-ter.

More recently, the destruction hasbeen even more direct as poachers havekilled tens of thousands of rhinos. Onlythe horn is taken. It is sold at exorbitantprices to be made into daggers forNorth Yemen or pulverized into powderto fulfill the fanciers of Oriental folklore.

At the turn of the century there weremore than one million rhinos in Africaalone, but today less than 3,500 blackrhinos remain. All other species of rhi-nos are also imperiled. This Subcom-mittee held hearings in the 99th Con-gress that led to Singapore signing

At the turn of the centurythere were more than one mil-

lion rhinos in Africa alone,but today less than 3,500

black rhinos remain.

CITES (Convention on InternationalTrade in Endangered Species), greatlyreducing the illegal trade in rhino prod-ucts.

.. Rhinos are symbolic of our effortto preserve biological diversity. We arelosing biological diversity at an unprece-dented rate. By the end of the century,scientists estimate that we may lose asmuch as 25 percent of the world's ani-mal and plant species. If the rhinos goextinct on our watch, we will have onlyour own species to blame.

Rhino expert Esmond Bradley Martincalled for strong diplomatic pressureon the United Arab Emirates whoseMinister of Commerce and Industrypromised to close down the trade inrhino horn. However, nothing hasbeen done. He stated that Zambia was

causing the single biggest problem inAfrica with respect to rhino poaching.

Dr. Willie Nduku, Director of Zim-babwe's National Parks, said they arewaging a war against the poachers.Some are financed, he said, by "peoplefrom across the waters." Questions byCongresswoman Claudine Schneiderbrought out the fact that the same peo-ple are involved in trafficking of drugs,diamonds, gold, and rhino horn. Dr.Nduku stated, "They use militaryequipment for fighting back [againstthe game wardens], so we are reallyfighting a war."

In questioning the panel of rhinoexperts, Congressman Scheuer said heunderstood that in many cases poach-ers were really out there to kill ele-phants, but when they found rhinos,Made them a "secondary target." Dr.lain Douglas-Hamilton, who joined therhino expert panel at the request of theChairman, responded, "Rhinos willnot be protected by rarity becausepoachers can still make an easy livingoff elephants." He pointed out that thesame people are poaching both species.

5

Insider's view of pesticide adoTwo industry publications, Agri Marketing and Agri News recently ran commentary by Ciba-Geigy's Director of Communications, Phil Koch. Following are excerpts:

When are we in the pesticideindustry going to come to our

senses and stop advertising pesticideson television? The ag-chemical industryadds to its own problems with contin-ued massive spending on a mediumthat provides the weapon—if not theammunition—used in shooting one'sself in the foot.

All of us have known how inefficientTV is-95 percent of our viewing audi-ence being non-farmers. But over theyears, we could see the value of itsimpact and awareness unmatched byother media. The total acreage poten-tial of the TV buy made it worthwhile ascost-per-thousand acres of a target cropseemed reasonable. Forget the ineffi-

ciency. The message segmented theaudience; the 95 percent non-farmerstuned it out.. .

That's a valid rationale as long as the95 percent is neutral—doesn't care—infact, does tune out.

There's a big change that's comeabout in the non-farm 95 percent.They're not tuning out..

State legislators, sensitive to changingwinds and encouraged by environ-mentalists, muster local support forgroundwater, pesticide control, endan-gered species and other anti-pesticidelegislation. They are getting it from allthose non-farmers—the 95 percent thatnever really tuned out.. .

In recent months, I have received

serious pleas from farm leaders, and atleast five letters from commodity groupsurging us and others in our industry tocut out TV ads. These aren't the "cutyour advertising and sell cheaper"pleas. They're from front-line agricul-turalists fighting the battle of image andopinion influence ..

There are smarter ways of spendingbig bucks on a decreasing number offarmers, and we're less apt to contributeto the growing negative image and mis-perception of pesticide abuse that willcome back to haunt us.

Phil Koch is director of communications for Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, N.C.

Reprinted from Agri-News, 7 April 1988.

There can be no victory in thewar against the tsetse flyH igh on the list of loony develop-

ment programs foisted on devel-oping nations by the international aidlobby must be a project sponsored bythe European Economic Communityon behalf of the third world countriesof southern Africa. It requires the elim-ination of the tsetse fly so that domesticcattle (which are vulnerable to tsetse-spread disease) may supplant the re-gion's abundant wildlife (which cannotbe harmed by the tsetse) in order toadd to the European beef mountain.

Where the goal is purposeless whilethe means to achieving it are highlydestructive, there you have lunacy of apretty high order.

After many years of costly and stren-uous endeavor, the main "fruits"' ofthe project to date include: cruelinroads into wildlife populations tomake room for the cattle; potentiallydisastrous losses amongst animals atthe top of the food chain, notably birdsof prey, due to repeated spraying ofDDT in generous quantities acrosshuge tracts of land; increasing desert-ification where cattle have been movedin; increasing pauperization of the verypeople whom the project is designed toassist.

AWI has received a first-hand reporton the anti-tsetse campaign in the

Zambezi Valley of northern Zimbabwe.It comes from Ian Sinclair and makessad reading.

Referring to the unauthorized in-flux of settlers with their live-

stock into areas cleared of the fly, hetells us that the resulting land degrada-tion is such that the EEC has given uptrying to promote sound policies ofland-use and "is washing its hands ofthe chaotic mess." He states, "Theintroduction of cattle and cash cropfarming into these areas will create des-erts within five years."

On a more upbeat note, however, hetells of a new project sponsored byZimbabwe National Parks known asOperation Campfire. Here in southernZimbabwe "cattle and plough havebeen discarded for the more lucrativegame." Careful use of the wildlife hasnetted the project and the local peopleinvolved (who receive cash and a con-tinual supply of meat) more in one sea-son than cattle ranching could beexpected to produce in 5-6 years.

Nor do the benefits stop there. Thesoil remains in good shape, over half theincome is in the form of foreign ex-change and the people willingly abide bythe management plan because it closelyaccords with their traditional practices.

recent issue of Zimbabwe Science Newsalso comes down firmly in

favor of wildlife ranching as against cat-tle. Looked at from whatever angle—economics, the environment, the localpeople— the case for large-scale cattlefarming on the vulnerable soils of thesesouthern African countries is a case thatdoes not add up.

In a fundamental sense the tsetse flyis the prime defender of the life and fer-tility of these areas. Attempting to erad-icate the tsetse in order to introducecattle can only do irreversible hurt toland, wildlife and people.

In any case, in the view of manyexperts, the attempt is itself fore-doomed. Failing total elimination ofthe tsetse throughout the region, a her-culean task, recolonization from un-cleared areas to cleared areas is only toolikely.

As for the threat posed to humanhealth by the tsetse, this should be seenin ; perspective. While sleeping sicknessis ertainly a nasty complaint it is veryseldom fatal—just five recorded casesin 25 years.

One way or another the moral wouldseem to be plain: Live and let live. Or asIan Sinclair puts it: "The land hasalready been developed by nature to itsfull potential."

6 a0V

STRYCHNINE RESTRICTEDLast April in what was hailed as "themost broad-ranging opinion ever is-sued under the Endangered SpeciesAct" US District Judge Diana Murphyruled that the Environmental Protec-tion Agency had violated the ESA inpermitting farmers and ranchers to usestrychnine-laced bait to control pests.Her nationwide ban on its future useabove ground will remain in perpetuityunless the EPA can demonstrate howthis virulent and intensely painful poi-son can be applied so as to destroy onlytarget species.

In their suit filed in August 1986against the EPA, environmental bodieshad supplied Murphy with documents

A great swathe of northern California'scoastline is fast being denuded of itsage-old redwood forests. America'slargest privately owned virgin red-woods now belong to the MaxxamGroup under the directorship of Hou-ston financier, Charles E. Hurwitz. Hehas doubled the rate of felling withinhis 300-square-mile fiefdom in order

to repay the $795 mil-lion borrowed in 1985to buy out the pre-vious owners, the Pa-cific Lumber Company.

The latter's respon-sible attitude to thesevenerable forestsmeant harvesting at agentle pace to preserve the oldest standswell into the 21st century. This contrastssharply with Maxxam's policy of—in thewords of a former employee—"just chew-ing so there won't be anything left for

reporting the "accidental" killing bystrychnine of five condors, six pere-grine falcons, 15 golden eagles, 31 baldeagles and 724 other birds and mam-mals across 24 states. And that wasonly recorded mortalities. Undoubtedlyon the vast and sparsely populatedranges the deaths from strychnine pois-oning of huge numbers of protectedanimals have gone quite unrecorded.

Murphy determined that in recentyears up to 200 tons of the deadly andviciously unselective baited carcasseshave been used annually, chiefly inwestern states. But now, praise be,that's one hazard our embattled wild-life need no longer face.

the future."For it is not just a matter of rapid fell=

ing. It is a rapacious and destructiveonslaught in which towering virgintracts are losing all their trees, many ofthem over 1000 years old. Clear-cut-ting, a dubious practice at the best oftimes, is downright wicked in the cli-mate of northern California. A formerlogger explains: "We get monsoonshere eight months of the year; soil isdrained off the land. But people areafraid to speak up. They're stuck here.They can't afford to move out."

Maxxam are not, however, having itall their own way. Environmentalists,supported by many loggers and saw-mill workers appalled by the com-pany's actions, have won court deci-sions blocking harvesting in severalareas. Two bills have been introducedin the California Legislature to prohibit

Redwoods:an oldgrowth (top)and clearcut(left).

logging companies from cutting moretimber than they grow. A number ofalleged irregularities in the takeover ofPacific Lumber by the Maxxam Groupare also under investigation.

A donor'sdisillusionment0 ti the outskirts of Washington in

neighboring Virginia is the ClaudeMoore Conservation Education Center com-prising 357 acres of ponds, cat-tail marsh,meadows and woods.

For over a decade the Center was run bythe National Wildlife Federation under theterms of an agreement made with donorClaude Moore. To guard against any possi-ble misunderstanding, before committinghis property to the trusteeship of Amer-ica's biggest and wealthiest conservationbody, Dr. Moore required all 20 or somembers of NWF's board to sign a letterstipulating that the land remain for all timea nature education sanctuary.

But the board of NWF voted to sell theCenter to developers for $8.5 million. Theyplan to erect 1,350 houses, condominiumsand apartments on these 357 'inviolable'acres, keeping just 53 acres, the minimumrequired by law, as open space.

Outrage from many quarters greeted thisact of bad faith, not least from ClaudeMoore himself, now a spritely 97. In June of1987 he filed suit charging the Federationwith "fraud and deceit" and demanding thereturn of his property.

A whirlwind of litigation has followedsince that time. In March of this year,Moore withdrew the original suit and refiledwith broader allegations. The new suit al-leged that the Federation exchanged landfor cash throughout the country, and citedexamples in both New York and California.

Though the Judge ruled in favor of theNWF on Moore's charge that the federationhas acted deceitfully nationwide, he gaveMoore 21 days to replead. Moore did justthat, and has not given up the fight to savethe sanctuary from development.

Meanwhile, the developers requested thatthe land be rezoned so that they may build,but, the Loudon County Board of Supervi-sors has denied their request. They wouldlike to buy the property themselves toensure that the wildlife, which includes therare Henslow's sparrow, is not ousted fromits home.

Where once money was raised to buysanctuaries, now 'unprofitable' sanctuaries(the Moore property is not the only exam-ple) are sold to raise money.

The application of a strictly businessapproach plainly pays off. By 1986 NWFclaimed to have 4.8 million "members andsupporters" and a budget of close to $60million—money that must go to pay forcomputers and other pricey hardware to aidresearch on endangered species, not tomention a spanking new headquarters indowntown Washington.

While pondering these matters it is aswell to rem( mber that NWF, alone of thebig conservation bodies, continues to advo-cate the use of the steel-jaw leghold trap.

Redwoods felled to fuel debt repayment

.3& 7

Dogs being transported to market where they will be sold for human consumption.

Please help stop this barbarous customAre you off to the Olympic Games inSeoul? Then, as you tour the SouthKorean capital, you're quite likely tosee dogs in cages strapped to the backsof bikes and mopeds. But where arethey going? No, they are not about tobe exhibited at some friendly local dog

show. They are off to market—the res-taurant market.

These dogs suffer from extremeovercrowding on their way to marketfor slaughter. Puppies are crammedinto tiny cages which are stacked ontop of one another while large dogs areoften piled together in the same cage.

Once arrived at the "dog shops"they will be unloaded and crammedcheek by jowl into other cages, there tostay until sold for consumption. Theirwait may be a long one; their suste-nance meager.

A study by the World Society for theProtection of Animals reports thatKoreans believe dog meat has manymedicinal qualities, not least that itgives protection from heat-induced illsbecause dogs do not sweat. Dog meatis therefore especially popular in sum-mer.

Dog-breeding farms ensure that sup-ply keeps pace with demand. In the res-taurants, which range in size fromshacks to mansions capable of seating

hundreds, dog-meat soup and basteddog meat are staple fare. Menus areopenly displayed even though "dogshops" are officially illegal. Large sumsof money are involved in sale of dogsand dog meat.

We ask you to write to one or both of

South Korea's diplomatic representa-tives in the US to inform them that youare aware that dog-eating is against thelaw but remains widespread through-out all sections of Korean society.

Ask that the government 1) imme-diately expand the law to cover alltransport, handling, confinement andkilling of these dogs and 2) provideeffective enforcement to prevent theongoing cruelty.

The addresses are:

His Excellency Kyung-Won KimAmbassador of The Republic of Korea

to the United States2370 Massachusetts Ave., NWWashington, DC 20008

His Excellency Dr. Keun ParkAmbassador of the Permanent Mission

of The Republic of Korea tothe United Nations

866 United Nations PlazaNew York, NY 10017

Labelling of furs caught insteel jaw leghold trapscontinued from page I

approved by Mrs. Thatcher. The USState Department opposed it, too, andsubmitted material collected from avariety of sources (carefully avoidingany consultations with animal welfareorganizations) as back-up.

Thirty-three members of the Houseof Representatives addressed a letter tothe Prime Minister in support of theOrder, but just before the summitmeeting in Toronto, the UK govern-ment rejected the Order. A question inthe House of Commons (23 June 1988Hansard) demanded: "Was that propo-sal reversed to smooth the Prime Min-ister's way in Toronto or to sell subma-rines?"

In the European Parliament ques-tions on fur labelling have twice beenraised by Madron Seligman, Chairmanof Intergroup on Animal Welfare, anorganization composed of members ofthe European Parliament committed toanimal protection. Mr. Seligman hasemphasized the public's "deep con-cern and moral outrage about thetrapping by means of leghold traps offur-bearing animals and the use oftheir fur in consumer products."

Recommendations of the EuropeanParliament must be approved by theEuropean Commission before bindingdirectives are issued. The remarks byCommissioner Stanley Clinton Davisin his speech to Intergroup for AnimalWelfare 7 July are thus of major inter-est. Mr. Davis is responsible for all ani-mal welfare issues other than thoserelating to agriculture. He reportedbriefly but trenchantly on fifteen differ-ent broad fields of concern. Under theheading of Fur, he said:

As members well know, the UnitedKingdom notified to the commissionunder directive 83/189/EEC a propo-sal to label furs of certain speciescommonly caught in leghold traps sothat consumers may be better in-formed and may be able to chooseaccordingly. That notification wasrecently withdrawn by the UnitedKingdom, the UK legal authoritieshaving decided that the legal instru-ment to be used was not in fact suitedfor this particular purpose.

The UK proposal was of course ofconsiderable interest to the commis-sion, both from the trade and theanimal welfare point of view. In thecontext of the Europe of 1992, and

8(a(p

the need to avoid internal barriers totrade, it could be argued that com-munity measures are in any case tobe preferred to national measures.

I can now announce the following:• The commission will be making a

proposal, in the context of the newdraft directive on the protection ofhabitat and of wild fauna and florafor a total ban within the commu-nity on the manufacture, sale anduse of leghold traps. (In this con-nection, I note with interest themotion for resolution tabled underrule 63 by Barbara Castle and oth-ers urging us to do precisely this).

• I have also instructed my servicesto prepare urgently a proposal fora community fur labelling rule,drawing whatever inspiration maybe appropriate from the draftorder presented by the UnitedKingdom. I hope it will be possibleto make such a proposal before theend of the year. In this connectionI note that a motion for the registerhas been tabled under rule 65 byBarbara Castle and MadronSeligman "calling on the commis-sion immediately to introduce pro-posals for the labelling of fur prod-ucts imported into the EEC toindicate whether they derive fromanimals caught in (steel-jawedleghold) traps."

Congressman James Scheuer (D-NY)who has long sought an end to the useof the steel jaw leghold trap in theUnited States was invited to speak atthe Intergroup meeting. He character-ized Commissioner Davis' report asinspirational and commended the"broad array of issues on which vouare showing leadership." He praised inparticular the move for fur labellingwhich he said would have a powerfulinfluence because Europe is the largestmarket for American and Canadianfur. "I value your commitment," he

said, "to abolishing steel jaw legholdtraps. The environmental ethic links uswith everything decent and civilized.Animals have a right to respect fromus. We should view ourselves not asconquerors of the earth but as fellowtravellers with them."

He spoke, too, of the reductions innumbers of elephants and rhinos, thelatter disappearing at a rate of 50%every year after prospering for sixtymillion years ". . . until they met man.We are the ultimate predator. It is ashame and disgrace that we are."

Congressman Scheuer concluded byemphasizing the interconnectedness ofanimal welfare and environmental is-sues, the bulldozer, axe and buzz sawdestroying animals' habitat, de-struction of the ozone shield, misuse ofCFC's (which he pointed out DuPontitself said must not wait for years to bephased out), global warming. "Na-ture," he said, "is sending shots acrossthe bow . . . calling on us to summonup our finest instincts."

Mrs. Barbara Castle, MEP character-ized the meeting as an historic occa-sion. A vigorous and effective leader,Mrs. Castle organized the animal wel-fare exhibition at the Parliament,opened on 6 July where powerful vid-eos and displays against the steel jawtrap, clubbing of baby seals, cruelentertainments such as bullfighting,and cruel treatment of stray dogs wereshown.

"We will have a Directive banningthe use and sale of these traps in theCommunity, but that is not enough,"she said, "The next step will be moredifficult. We should be fighting forlabelling." She cited figures of 12 mil-lion fur pelts from the United States and2.6 million from Canada imported intothe EC each year, 50% of which aretrapped—"a mass trade in misery."

TAMING THETRAPPERSrr he biggest fur-trapping enterpriseI in the world, the Hudson's Bay

Company, is quietly collapsing afternearly three hundred years of violentexploitation of beavers, wolves, foxes,lynx, martin, and other inhabitants ofCanada whose fur could be sold forprofit.

True, the British royal family stillowns shares in The Company of Adventur-ers, as the corporate giant has enjoyedcalling itself all these years, but HBC'sadventures have largely shifted to dis-count stores, department stores, andreal estate, under the guidance ofbillionaire majority stockholder, Ken-neth Thomson.

Indian trappers sing songs to wardoff the evil spirits they believe inhabitthe empty York Factory, HBC's chiefheadquarters in the seventeenth andeighteenth centuries. HBC's northernstores, now owned by the Mutual TrustCompany, were traditionally unheatedtrading posts where Indians couldobtain guns, traps, and staple foods inreturn for beaver pelts.

According to a National Geographicarticle, "It was not until the 1960s thatthe company finally began to heat itsnorthern stores . . . 'They didn't wantanybody hanging around—theywanted everybody out trapping,' re-calls Stuart Hodgson, who served 12years as commissioner of the North-west Territories."

The Hudson's Bay Company wasresponsible for making Canadian na-tive people dependent on the steel-jawleghold trap. To quote again from theGeographic article, ".. . the Indians wereanxious to supply pelts in return forgoods that transported them instanta-neously from the Stone Age."

The fur trade continues to exploitnative trappers and to disregard themwhen it is convenient to the industry todo so. An example is the widespreadsale of captive-bred arctic foxes whosefur is a more perfect white than that ofarctic foxes trapped in the wild. At thesame time, the industry pushes nativetrappers into the front ranks when theywish to make their advocacy of thesteel-jaw leghold trap seem as thoughit were based on sympathy with thevery native peoples they have ex-ploited.

Contributions to the Animal Welfare Institute are deductible in computingincome tax returns, and donations, large or small, are most gratefullyaccepted for the general fund or for special purposes. Bequests to the Insti-tute will help guarantee the continuance of its 37 years of work to protect ani-mals. Please remember the Institute in your Will.

The Board of Directors suggest the following language for use in Willswhen making a bequest to the Animal Welfare Institute:

"1 give to the Animal Welfare Institute the sum of dollars."

(or if other property, describe the property)

For further information on planning your Will, write to AWI at P.O. Box3650, Washington, DC 20007.

&C., 7 9

wok

Dolphins entangled in tuna purse seine into which they were deliberatelydriven.

=116&411.14011111"1001101111I

Crew members remove dead dolphins from purse seines. Only eighttuna were captured on this set which killed hundreds of dolphins.

TUNA INDUSTRY DECIMATES DOLPHINS

The Marine Mammal Protection Ation this year, and hearings wereConservation and Environment

chant Marine and Fisheries Committee.part of this landmark legislation relates toof dolphins in giant tuna purse seines in

ct, passed in 1972, is up for Congressional reauthoriza-held 10 May 1988 in the Fisheries, Wildlife

Subcommittee of the HouseThe most heavily contestedthe so-called incidental catchthe Eastern Tropical Pacific.

Mer-

Greenpeace spoke for 19 humane andconservation groups, documenting thedisastrous destruction of dolphins inthe huge tuna purse seines:

... the time has come to return to theoriginal goal of the Act and mandatea zero mortality level. We wouldpoint out that this carnage is not an

A tuna boat sets sail for Costa Rica.

`incidental' take—it is an intentionaltake. Unlike other fisheries withmarine mammal kills, these dolphinsare not passively taken when theyencounter fishing gear. Rather, itinvolves a take which is deliberateunder the definition of 'take' in theAct. It is a purposeful hunting,harassment, capture and, in somecases, killing of marine mammals.

The figures are alarming, and the testi-mony contin-ues, "We be-lieve, however,that mortalityestimates issuedby the NationalMarine Fish-eries Service[NMFS] and theAmericanTropical TunaCommissionare but a frac-tion of theactual lethaltake."

There areseveral reasonsfor this; for ex-ample, ". . . no

provisions are made in mortality esti-mates for cryptic kills, i.e., animals re-leased from the net which may later diefrom shock, stress or unseen injuries.Over 2 million animals are taken eachyear by the US fleet alone."

The same school of dolphins may berounded up and caught in the net sev-eral times in a single day. This cruelharassment is especially hard on infantand aged dolphins who cannot endurethe repeated stress.

Dolphin defenders won a series oflawsuits against the tuna industrywhich forced US tuna boats to modifythe fishing methods they had inventedto compete with labor-intensive Jap-anese long-liners. But despite the in-tent of the law to require foreign purseseiners to adhere to US regulations, theMarine Mammal Protection Act hasnever been enforced against Mexicanand other foreign purse seiners.

Purse seiners locate schools of yellowfin tuna by observing the dolphins whoswim with them. Because dolphins areair-breathing mammals, they must sur-face frequently. The big tuna boat sendsout small motorboats to round up thedolphin school and encircle both dol-phin and tuna with the huge net whichis then closed like a purse string. US

Dolphin Mortality140,000

120,000

100,000 NON-U.S.

80,000

60,000

40,000U.S.

20,000

01983 1984 1985 1986 1987

fishermen are required to back down,lowering the back of the net so the dol-phins can leap over the cork line andescape. But the numbers of governmentobservers on the US tuna fleet havebeen greatly reduced, and there arenone on foreign vessels at all.

The terrible suffering undergone bythe dolphins has been documented bySam LaBudde, a former US govern-ment biologist who went undercoveras a crew member on a foreign tunaboat and got extensive film footage. Hestated, in part: "Listening to 500 dol-phins shrieking in panic as they fightand gasp for air . . . standing by help-lessly as living dolphins were draggedaloft thrashing and flailing in terrorbefore being literally crushed to deathin the power block . . . it's enough tomake you give up tuna for life."

There can be no dispute about thenumbing cruelty of these massdrownings of highly intelligent and sen-sitive animals. But what of their effecton dolphin populations? The industryasserts that they are healthy. Theexperts, the genuine experts, think oth-erwise. US dolphin biologist Dr. Wil-

Liam Perrin writing in the IUCN Bulle-tin, states that since the 1960s the popu-lation of the eastern spinner dolphin isestimated to have declined by no lessthan 80%.

When the Marine Mammal Pro-tection Act was passed in 1972, US ves-sels were responsible for most of thecatch in the Eastern Tropical Pacificusing purse seine nets. The Act calledfor a goal approaching zero mortalityand serious injury rate of dolphins inthe purse seine tuna fishery. At thetime, hundredsof thousands ofdolphins werebeing killed,and this wasratcheted downto 20,500, butthe increase inforeign tunafishing hasbrought thosenumbers up tomore than100,000—thelargest slaugh-ter of marine A living dolphin, crushedmammals in by the hydraulic powerthe world. To- block.day the foreign purse seiners greatlyoutnumber American tuna boats, andNMFS has failed to take any effectiveaction to enforce the provisions of theMarine Mammal Protection Act withrespect to foreign tuna captains.

Fortunately, on 13 April a motion forresolution was introduced in the Euro-pean Parliament which could result in atotal ban of tuna caught by setting ondolphins.

The motion hasreceived supportfrom representa-tives of each of theparties within theParliament and isbeing sponsoredby the chairs andvice chairs of thetwo committeeswhich have juris-diction.

If the UnitedStates and theEuropean Eco-nomic Commu-nity prohibit

continued on page 15

A first hand account of the slaughterJanuary I, 1988 — Aboard ship a new year dawns lavender above a tranquil sea.The main engine rumbles to life and a course is set for Costa Rica. We havejust received permission to fish in that country's territorial waters. In honor ofthe occasion and to celebrate the beginning of a new year we travel to within afew miles of the mainland and kill 5-10 percent of the world's populations ofCosta Rican spinner dolphins before lunchtime. Rounded up with the use ofspeedboats and explosives, some 2000 dolphins are intentionally captured inan effort to harvest the yellowfin tuna swimming below the herd. I watch help-lessly as hundreds of dolphins become trapped under the walls of the net andstruggle furiously, their shrieks and squeals audible even above the drone ofthe machinery.

As the net is hauled aboard ship, scores of dolphins become snagged inthe mesh and are hoisted aloft out of the water. Thrashing and flailing in theirefforts to free themselves from the net, many of the dolphins actually havetheir beaks and flippers broken or ripped right out of their bodies as they fallback to the sea only to become ensnared once again moments later. Manymore are too exhausted or embroiled in the net to escape and are literallycrushed alive in the hydraulic power block that is used to retrieve the net. Mostof these die immediately but few survive a few moments longer and I watchas they are untangled from the net, their spasms of pain no less real for thebrevity of their duration.

The net is finally close-hauled and the crew descends into the net toremove about 200 drowned dolphins. Young and old alike, the dolphins arecast adrift in the waves, magnificent creatures reduced to nothing more thancompost and sharkbait. As the last dolphins are thrown clear of the net itbecomes apparent that nearly all the tuna escaped the encirclement. No morethan eight tuna have been captured at a cost of hundreds of dolphin deaths.

—Samuel LaBuddeVideo stills courtesy of Samuel LaBudde/Earth Island Institute

10 3 9 1 1

STOP PRESSAugust 1988. Acting pro bono

Ipehalf of the Animal Welfare Insti-tute and 17 other conservation and,nimal welfare groups, Arnold &

porter filed suit against Secretaryof State George Shultz and Secre-tary of Commerce William Verityfor failure to certify Iceland for its"research" whaling. alma,

1988 IWC MEETING

IWC condemns "research" whalingbut Iceland, Norway and Japan

continue their defiance

T he 1988 annual meeting of theInternational Whaling Commis-sion, in Auckland, New Zea-

land in June, adopted resolutions re-jecting the proposed research whalingschemes of Iceland and Norway anddirected Japan to desist from any re-search whaling until the IWC has fullyreviewed any new schemes. Last year theJapanese fleet began whaling before theIWC completed a postal vote condemn-ing the kill. All three nations are attempt-ing to continue commercial whalingunder the guise of scientific research.

Iceland, which defied IWC oppositionin 1987, again ignored a 1988 resolutionand began whaling shortly after the IWCmeeting. Unfortunately, the US, whichhas enforced IWC regulations in the pastby threatening sanctions against the fish-ing industries of defiant whaling nations,capitulated to Icelandic pressure andmade a bilateral agreement condoningthe kill.

The US apparently made a secret dealwith Iceland to allow another "research"whaling season in spite of Iceland's fail-ure to gain the support of the IWC's Sci-entific Committee and the full commis-sion.

Iceland used threats against the strate-gic US airbase at Keflavik—a vital link inthe surveillance of the Soviet fleet—toforce the US to accept its whalingscheme. Because of the threats to theairbase, the Defense Department andthe National Security Council (NSC)entered into US policy-making on thewhaling issue. An NSC staffer was on theUS delegation to the IWC meeting and itwas obvious that the US commissionerto the IWC, Dr. William Evans, wasunder orders to placate the Icelanders.

Shortly after the IWC meeting, an 8-man US delegation flew to Iceland andnegotiated a bilateral agreement inwhich the US found the planned kill of68 fin whales and 10 sei whales wouldnot "diminish the effectiveness" of theIWC's whale conservation program.That finding, expressed in an offi-cial letter from the US ambassa-dor to the Icelandic foreignminister, means that the

12

US will not certify Iceland under thePelly Amendment. Certification author-izes the president to embargo the fish-ery products of the offending nation.

I celand, whose major industry is fish-ingg and whose fish exports pro-

vide more than 70% of export earnings,does not want to risk an embargo bythe US, which imports about 30% ofIceland's fish. The US capitulation wasan extraordinary reversal from posi-tions in 1987 and even at the 1988 IWCmeeting, where the US commissionerargued that Iceland must submit a newresearch plan to the IWC and complywith the recommendations of the Sci-entific Committee before doing anyresearch whaling. When the SovietUnion, Norway and Japan engaged insimilar defiance of IWC regulations inrecent years, the US certified them.

Iceland made no commitment to haltcommercial whaling or to comply withIWC regulations concerning legitimateresearch. In fact, Iceland announced itwould increase the fin whale kill in1989 to 80 and indicated it would con-tinue "research" whaling indefinitely!

N orway, which was on the verge ofending whaling after the IWC's

rejection of its "research" proposal,decided to continue after hearing aboutthe US-Iceland agreement. In fact, Nor-way made its decision within hours ofthe Reykjavik announcement.

The Norwegian whalers plan to kill 30minke whales for commercial consump-tion (after the "research") and will likelykill another five minke whales whenthey attempt to anesthetize them toattach radio beacons for tracking.

Iceland continues to ship hundreds oftons of whale meat to Japan from the"research" kills of the big fin and seiwhales. In June, a shipment of 197 tonsof whale meat was blocked in the Fin-nish port of Helsinki when Greenpeaceprotesters charged a violation of Finnishand international bans on trading inendangered species. The Icelandic meatwas being routed east on the Trans-Sibe-rian Railway to Japan. Finland orderedthe illicit cargo sent back to Iceland.

Japan appealed to the IWC tor emer-gency "relief' for its coastal whalers bycalling for a new category of whaling tobe established: coastal subsistence. Butthe IWC flatly rejected the scheme ascommercial whaling by another name.The Japanese will attempt to conductanother season of "research" whaling inAntarctica beginning in December.Their ploy is to submit a "new" planfor scientific killing in late 1988 andcall for a special meeting of the Scien-tific Committee to review it. Last yearJapan did the same thing, then pro-ceeded to ignore the negative findingof the scientists while sending thewhaling fleet south. By the time the fullIWC had conducted a postal vote (20to 6) condemning the Japanese scheme,hundreds of whales had died.

Because of it's outlaw whaling Ja-pail's huge fishing fleet was barred from

the US 200-mile zone in Febru-ary. President Reagan re-

fused to embargo Ja-pan's fish but askedfor a report by 1December on Japan's

further whaling activities.

0

Staunch friend to whales

Oswaldo Vasquez, a scientist from the Dominican Republic withHumpback whale.

In recent times the Dominican Re-public has proved a staunch friendto the whale. In October 1986 thecountry's ruler, President Balaguer,decreed that Silver Bank, a reef sys-tem 60 miles offshore and theworld's largest breeding ground for

humpbacks, be madea whale sanctuary.

Since then the Cen-ter for Coastal Studies,whose headquartersare in Provincetown,Massachusetts, havebeen providing on-sitetraining for Domini-can marine scientists.And now the latterhave discovered thatSamana Bay, quiteclose to Silver Bank, isof peculiar impor-tance to humpbacks.

Many have been sighted there and itis plainly a significant mating groundand nursery for newborn calves.

It is hoped the Dominican govern-ment will agree to enlarging the pres-ent sanctuary so as to include thisbay.

Brazil has banned the killing orharassment of all cetaceans. Thedecree to this effect was signedby President Jose Sarney lastDecember, and it strengthens andsupersedes a presidential decreeof December 1985 which hadbanned whaling for five years.

This new law represents the tri-umph of a 20-year battle by Bra-zilian conservation groups.They helped draft the originalbill introduced two years ago

and turned up in their hundredsat the National Congress in Bra-silia to demonstrate againstthe delaying tactics of Senatorsfrom northeastern Brazil wherethe Japanese-owned whaling com-pany Copesbra is based.

Following the demonstrationthe leaders of all political partiescalled for an extraordinary ses-sion of the Senate and unani-mously approved the anti-whal-ing bill.

Dolphins, continued from page 11

importation of tuna from countries thatfail to reduce dolphin kills to zero, thenecessary changes in fishing methodswill take place. Sixteen years after theAct was passed it is time for the practiceof setting on dolphins to be stopped.

Alternative fishing methods are avail-able. For example, "log fishing" takesadvantage of the propensity of yellowfin tuna to gather under logs or othermaterials floating in the ocean. But thefull development of existing aggregat-ing devices for this purpose was aban-doned when pressure on the tunaindustry lessened after humanitariansand conservationists believed the Ma-rine Mammal Protection Act was pro-gressively increasing protection for dol-phins.

ACTION NEEDED: Boycott tuna,and tell the manager of the store thatyou will not buy tuna until the chaseand killing of dolphins by tuna fisher-men is stopped.

Urge the government to completethe development of aggregating devicesto substitute for purse seining. TheNational Marine Fisheries Service suc-cessfully developed the Turtle ExcluderDevice (TED) to save sea turtles fromdrowning. It should and could do thenecessary technical work to save dol-phins from mutilation and drowning.

Faroese dolphin huntThe Faroe Islanders have been killingpilot whales for hundreds of years, andfilm and photographs of this kill havebeen shown all over the world. TheEnvironmental Investigation Agency(EIA) has been visiting the Faroe Islandsevery year since 1984, and has been toldon numerous occasions that, as well aspilot whales, the Faroese also kill dol-phins, porpoises and killer whales. But itwasn't 'until 1987 that we actually saw,filmed and photographed a slaughter ofdolphins for ourselves.

Special dolphin gaffs were broughtout by men on the shore. The killingstarted when a dolphin tried to jump thenet and was hauled into a boat beforebeing knifed to death. A second dolphinsuffered the same fate.

Three others were beached, and twomen set on each of them with a gaff andknife. One dolphin was attacked by adrunken Faroese man who slashed at itsthroat with a penknife. Another mantook over to finally kill the thrashinganimal.

EIA photographers and observerswere then attacked by the crowd. Withpassive resistance we were able to avoidreal confrontation until our smallestteam member, Vanessa, was grabbed bya drunken man. She tried to pull awaybut another man also held on to her, try-ing to prise a camera from her hand.Meanwhile, one of our photographershad the sleeve of his sweater pulled off ina struggle.

Vanessa was dragged around by twodrunks and a third man as EIA support-ers tried to free her. When she collapsed,pleas to the crowd for a doctor wereignored.Excerpted from "Dolphin Killing in theFaroes", by Dave Currey in InternationalWhale Bulletin, Summer 1988.

Commerce Secretary Verity has thepower to embargo tuna from countrieswho flout the Marine Mammal Protec-tion Act. In addition, he can order theNational Marine Fisheries Service toreactivate the work on alternative fish-ing methods.

Write:Hon. C. William VeritySecretary of CommerceWashington, D.C. 20230

For full details, send for the 49-pagebooklet, "The Tragedy Continues: Kill-ing of Dolphins by the Tuna Industry,"Earth Island Institute, 300 Broadway,San Francisco, CA 94133 ($4.95).

L7/ 13

16,000

14,000 3,48312,756

• 12,000

• 10,000

8,000

04 6,000

• 4,000

2,000

10,208 9,750

9,783

0 ill I1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979

FERTILITY CONTROL

Death in the sun for wildhorses as officials blunder

L ast September in temperatures of1—Jover 90 degrees around 130 wildhorses from the Augusta Mountainarea of Nevada were rounded up andmade to travel some 15 miles to assistthe University of Minnesota's fertilitycontrol study. The animals were drivenby helicopter through a gap in thefence that defines the border of theirhome range to the study center. Thenafter field surgery to implant birth con-trol hormones, and after fitting ofradio collars, they were released to tryto find their own way home.

For 48 of them the return journeywas never completed; their corpseswere found strung out along the fenceby an aerial survey almost a monthlater. They had died from thirst andand exhaustion while vainly searchingfor the gap. Eight others died slowlyand painfully as a result of infectioncaused by radio collars placed muchtoo tightly around their necks.

The agency responsible for this de-bacle was the Bureau of Land Manage-ment which awarded the million dollarcontract to the University of Minnesota

upon recommenda-tion from the NationalAcademy of Sciences.Other more promisingfertility studies werepassed over in favorof this poorlyplanned and im-properly executedone. The opera-tion violated twofundamental con-ditions of thestudy: horses from Augusta Mountainwere not supposed to be rounded up atall and no horses were supposed to bedriven more than five miles.

Though the Nevada BLM field offi-cials knew that these conditions werebeing violated, they did nothing to stopthe gathering of horses because, ac-cording to a report issued by the BLM,"no on-site project inspector was ap-c

pointed by the Washington Office,therefore impeding clear lines of com-munication and delegation of author-ity." The report also blamed all partiesinvolved for poor communications and

for failing to plan and monitor theherding process.

BLM has admitted blame and, withregard to the research program, hasspelt out various changes in procedurewhich should ensure that in the futurethere will be no confusion in the chain ofcommand. The agency has, however, re-jected the call by six humane organiza-tions, including the American HorseProtection Association, to terminate theUniversity of Minnesota contract and todismiss the BLM project inspector. Thecontract stands and there will be no dis-ciplinary action.

Early neutering: a new solution to an old problem

P et overpopulation is a critical prob-lem facing animal shelters and one

which shows little sign of abating. Mostshelters insist that when puppies andkittens are adopted out, they be neu-tered at six months of age. But manynever are.

Why not neuter these animals at thetime of their adoption? According toveterinarian Leo Lieberman, neuteringanimals at two months instead of sixmonths (the generally accepted age) is"not only practical and feasible, it isbeing done regularly. . . One shelterreduced euthansia numbers more than32% over a period of years, which theyattribute to the very early age neuterprogram."

Lieberman's idea is gathering mo-mentum among shelters and veter-inarians. His paper, "A Case for Neu-tering Pups and Kittens at Two Months

Euthanasia rates in a Medford, OR, SPCAstudy

of Age" was published in the Journal ofthe American Veterinary Medical Associationand was supported by Cornell's AnimalHealth Newsletter.

Besides a reduction in the surplus ofanimals and the resultant drop in costto shelters, Lieberman lists other ad-vantages to early neutering: "less stresson the animal and quick recovery;reduced effort and time spent by thesurgeon; a people-oriented pet that ismore calm, gentler and less likely towander; reduced aggressiveness; and areduction of unwanted litters."

As for the disadvantages, Liebermanbelieves there are few. In fact, in hisstudy of more than 100 pups and kit-tens which were neutered at eight to tenweeks, he found that "during a two yearperiod. . . undesirable effects were notreported by the owners of such ani-mals."

14

Non-lethal controlof feral catsThe Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW) in England hasdeveloped an effective, humane way to control colonies of homeless catswithout killing. A videocassette shows the capture of the animals in boxtraps, neutering, marking, and returning the cats to supervised sites wheretheir long-term care can be assured. The system is being used not only inBritain but in Greece, Kenya, and North Africa by local animal welfaresocieties.

The videocassette shows a series of color slides narrated by Brian Redhead.It is available in VHS or Betamax, runs for 15 minutes, and costs $27.00 post-age paid to the United States. Copies are available from: UFAW, 8 HamiltonClose, South Mimms, Potters Bar, Herts En6 3QD, England.

--from Spring/Summer 1987 Quarterly

Lockheed heedsadvice

Just occasionally one comes across acompany open-minded enough to

change course when told of a betterway of doing things. Such a company isthe aerospace firm, Lockheed, inBurbank, California. A year or so agoAWI learned of the sad story of the CatLady of Lockheed and the sad endplanned for the feral cats she hadbefriended for over 30 years.

The company had decided that thecats, though excellent at keeping therats down, were now so numerous theyconstituted a hazard to health andsafety. A pest control firm was calledin—and the Cat Lady, Marie New-berry, was sacked for refusing to stopfeeding her animals.

Protests poured in from individualsand local humane groups. Lockheedalso received a letter from AWI enclos-ing a recent Quarterly article (see below)on how feral cat populations can bekept within bounds and still be activeas rat-catchers. A plea was made toofor the Cat Lady to be reinstated sothat she could continue her fine felinework.

We have learned that on both countsLockheed has acted. The cats, nowspayed and neutered, have a roofed(and carpeted!) 10-foot-long feedingstation and the Cat Ladv is back in bus-iness.

Whether AWI's letter proved the cat-alyst that swung Lockheed round wedo not know. Nor does it matter. Theimportant thing is that secondthoughts have prevailed and sense andsensibility have won. Our complimentsto Lockheed!

Interior ordered toenforce humane rulescontinued from page 1

The international trade in wild-caughtbirds has a vast impact on the conservationof wild species by depleting their popula-tions in order to supply the pet market. Sen-egal alone has an annual bird catch num-bering in the millions, many of which diebefore export. The Trade in Live Wildlife, the1987 Report of Environmental Investiga-tion Agency, states 'Airlines transport thesurviving birds to consumer countries. Thestress caused in air transportation and quar-antine kills at least a further 20% of thebirds. Hardly any survive for more than ayear. Because of this, the demand for birdscontinues. The wealthy consumer countriesexploit the inability of poorer exportingnations which are unable to adequately con-trol the traders.' The United States is thelargest market for these wild creatures. Upto 62% of birds captured in Senegal (theworld's largest bird exporter) die prior todeparture from the exporting country,according to a Fish and Wildlife Servicebiologist .. .

Not until November 10, 1987 did theSecretary of the Interior publish final regu-lations pursuant to the 1981 Lacey Amend-ments. This was six more years of delay inaddition to the 32 years of inaction underthe Secretary of the Treasury. During theSecretary of the Interior's recent jurisdic-tion, the subject of appropriate rules wasexhaustively scrutinized. . . .

Thus, thirty-eight (38) years after theExecutive Branch was provided authority topublish regulations to assure the humaneand healthful transport of wild animals, thiscountry in November 1987 had such a finalrule. Those involved in the wild animaltrade, as well as air carriers and others, hadan opportunity to comment.

Following the November 10, 1987announcement of the final rule, various

members of the wild animal trade, as well asair carriers and their representatives metprivately with the Service and again pres-ented their views for forestalling and alter-ing the final rules. Many if not all of theircomments had been presented to the Serv-ice during the official comment period pro-vided by the Administrative Procedures Act,including the plea that these regulationswould be 'more costly' to the wild animaltraders.

Following the above private comments,all occurring after the publication of thefinal rule, the Service on February 10, 1988published in the Federal Register a new rulepostponing the effective date of the Novem-ber 10, 1987 final rule from February 8,1988 until August 1, 1988. The statedreason for the post-ponement was concernover 'confusion or misinterpretation' of theNovember 10, 1987 final rule, which sup-posedly could lead to shipping practicesharmful to the wildlife or impose 'economichardship on the industry' .. .

At Miami Airport, authorities report thatin January and early February, 1988, birdsarrived in greatly increased numbers,crammed into small, overcrowded crates, toavoid the impact of the new Rule. Theseinhumane practices will continue unabateduntil the Rule on Humane and HealthfulTransport of Wild Mammals and Birds ismade effective.

On 18 April, 1988, Judge John H.Pratt issued the following decision:

ORDERED that plaintiffs' motionis granted; and it is

ORDERED that defendants shallreinstate the November 10, 1987Final Rule on Humane and HealthfulTransport of Wild Mammals andBirds to the United States, and deemit effective as of February 8, 1988; andit is

ORDERED that the defendantsshall be enjoined from further post-poning the effective date of the afore-mentioned rule without complyingwith the notice and comment re-quirements of the AdministrativeProcedures Act; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that noticeof this court's decision shall be pub-lished in the Federal Register.

The well drafted regulations thusremain in effect to protect birds andmammals.

Interior published a 5-page analysisip the 10 August Federal Register of sug-gested modifications of these rules.AWI is submitting critical comments.Meantime humanitarians are urged toreport any mistreatment, overcrowd-ing, or lack of food and water ob-served on arrival of birds or mam-mals from foreign countries. CallAWI at 202-337-2332.

15

NEWS OF REGISTERED RESEARCH FACILITIES

LABORATORY ANIMAL USE INCREASESDespite frequent claims by experimen-tal laboratories that they are reducingthe numbers of animals used, thereport released in July by the USDepartment of Agriculture shows thatnumbers of dogs, primates, guineapigs, hamsters, rabbits and wild ani-mals are increasing. The report isbased on documents submitted annu-ally by the laboratories themselves as

DOGSCATSPRIMATESGUINEA PIGSHAMSTERSRABBITSWILD ANIMALS

TOTAL

16

required by the federal Animal WelfareAct. According to this information,1,969,123 animals were used in FY1987, an increase of nearly 200,000over the previous year, including thelargest number of primates used inover a decade. The report also indi-cates a marked increase in the numberof animals suffering unrelieved pain.

Fiscal Year 1986 Fiscal Year 1987176,141 180.16954,125 50,14548,540 61,392

462,699 538,998370,655 416,001521,773 554,385144,470 168,032

1,778,403 1,969,122

113,161 130,373

The US Senate adopted SenatorJohn MeJuliet's amendment to theHealth and Human Services Ap-propriations bill which prohibitsuse of US funds to proctor wild-caught chimpanzees fOr researchpurposes. Labs located outside theUS which receive federal funds aresubject to the same restriction.

Cruel lab exposedAn investigation of Bioscarch, a testinglaboratory in Philadelphia, revealed over100 alleged violations of state and federallaws including falsification of recordsand test results; subjecting unanesthe-tized animals to painful and unnecessaryprocedures; and failing to provide ani-mals with adequate food, water and vet-erinary care. People for the Ethical Treat-ment of Animals conducted the eightmonth long investigation.

Besides using painful testing methods,including the Draizc test and LD 50, ani-mals were often totally neglected. Ac-cording to an investigator, a guinea pigwho appeared to have a spinal cordinjury "was whimpering and could notstand or lift his head up. His eves werehalf closed and he was lying in his ownfeces which covered his hind quarters.When I picked him up to weigh him hisbody was limp and he was whimpering.(Employee) said he could have beendestroyed yesterday when it was noticed,but that everybody was too busy to weighhim and he had to be weighed beforebeing killed." Another group of guineapigs were "screaming all day long" aftera dermal test was performed.

A videotape distributed by PETA doc-uments cruel and needless tests. It showsrabbits with holes burned deeply intotheir bodies during tests of a productalready known to be corrosive. Accord-ing to the investigator's report, techni-cians had been warned to wear gloveswhen handling it. It further states thatthe rabbits screamed and struggled soviolently two employees had to holdthan when the bandages that kept theburning substance in place were un-wrapped.

Bioscarch conducts consumer, cos-metic and household product testing forover 200 companies, including EsteeLauder, L'Oreal, Noxell, Revlon, Benet-ton, A.H. Robins, S.C. Johnson, Procter& Gamble, and Mennen.

3 -757

ANIMALS EXPERIENCINGUNRELIEVED PAIN OR DISTRESSFigures include only those animals currently protected by the Animal Welfare Act as listed in the chartabove.

Appropriations Committee calls foraction on Animal Welfare regulations(From Senate Report on the Agriculture, Rural Development, and Related Agencies AppropriationsBill, 1988)

Animal Welfare Act— For enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act, the Commit-tee recommends $6,197,000, an increase of $1,275,000 over the budgetrequest, and the same as the House and 1988 levels. This amount is actually a$750,000 increase over the 1988 level because the Committee does notrecommend a transfer of this amount to the National Agricultural Library[NAL] for the information service. Rather, funding for this service is includedin the NAL account.

The Committee wishes to express strong support for the APHIS animal wel-fare inspection program and its commitment to ensuring that both humanand animal health and welfare will continue to advance through humane andresponsible animal research.

The Committee has included additional funds in the bill to enhance the ani-mal welfare program through increased frequency of inspections and inspec-tor training. The Committee expects that a portion of these funds will bedirected toward developing and implementing a comprehensive training pro-gram to provide inspectors of research facilities with basic competence in lab-oratory animal medicine, knowledge of animal behavior typical of the differ-ent species used in research and an appreciation of both scientific methodsand animal welfare. Through this training, the Committee expects that theagency will better fulfill its responsibility to carry out adequate and regularinspections of facilities.

The Committee is concerned by the long delay in publishing final regula-tions for enforcement of the Improved Standards for Laboratory Animalsamendments to the Animal Welfare Act passed in 1985 (effective date, Decem-ber 23, 1986) and expects expeditious action on the final regulations so thatthe law can take effect before the end of calendar year 1988.

NEWS OF REGISTERED RESEARCH FACILITIES

Animal Incident Report Form

DATE OF INCIDENT:

TIME OF INCIDENT :

A N INAAL

Day

Hour

INCIDENT REPORT

MO yr

Min. A.M. P.M.

SPECIES:ANIMAL TAG NO.DISCOVERED BY:WITNESSED BY:LOCATION OF INCIDENT:TYPE OF INCIDENT ((specify):

SURGICAL

0 PAINO INADEQUATE ANESTHESIA

❑POOR POST-OP CARE

CI INCISION DEHISCED

COMMENT :

ANIMAL CARE:O UNSANITARY CONDITIONS

❑INADEQUTE TRANSPORTATION

0 LACK OF FOOD AND WATER0 OTHER (specify)

University of MinnesotaCharged by USDA with operating sub-standard research facilities, the Univer-sity of Minnesota has agreed to pay a$5000 fine and to cease and desist fromfuture violations of the Animal WelfareAct. The University has also agreed toplace all animal facilities under strongprofessional veterinary direction, to es-tablish a training program to ensure allpersonnel are aware of the Act's re-quirements and to allocate substantialcapital for the replacing of equipmentand the hiring of sufficient support staff.

Louisiana StateUniversityLouisiana State University paid a $6,000penalty in April for violations of theAnimal Welfare Act. The violationsdate back to 1985 when on four occa-sions, US Department of Agricultureinspectors found inadequate housing,sanitation and veterinary care.

The violations included housing ani-

mals in unsound facilities and in cagesthat are too small for normal posturaladjustments, neglecting to provideclean food containers or enough water,and employing insufficient staff to carefor the animals.

The University agreed to maintainan institutional animal care committeeand submit a written report to USDAwithin 60 days detailing their plans tocomply with the Animal Welfare Act.

USDA inspection reports going backto 1981, documented in AWI's 1985book, Beyond the Laboratory Door, revealmajor problems with the housing andcare of animals at Louisiana State. In fact,some deficiencies were left uncorrectedfor five years until USDA finally threat-ened to file a case against them in 1984.

Record penalty upheldA federal judge upheld a $40,000 pen-alty against James Hickey, an Oregonanimal dealer, following his appeal.The decision, which also called for sus-pension of Hickey's federal license for

Biohazardous BaylorIt appears that cleaning up its act isproving no simple matter for BaylorCollege of Medicine. Following AWI'sdocumentation of the disgusting con-ditions in a cancer laboratory at theCollege (see last issue of the Quarterly)we were told that matters had greatlyimproved. But in March an inspectorfrom the area's pollution controlagency found large amounts of biohaz-ardous waste, some of it of a singularlydistasteful nature and much of it noteven wrapped in biohazard bags,dumped at a local landfill. Numerousbits of correspondence on Baylor let-terhead plainly revealed the culprit.

On being apprised that the collegewould shortly be on the receiving endof a formal citation, Baylor Vice Presi-dent and Dean for Academic and Clin-ical Affairs put out an urgent memo-randum to all department chairmenand administrators. "I am sure you areaware of the very sensitive nature ofthis type of discovery if distributed inthe public media," he wrote, "Pleasegive this your immediate attention."Faculty with questions were advised toconsult "Guidelines for LaboratoryUse of Infectious Agents, OncogenicViruses, and Chemical Carcinogens."

25 years and a cease-and-desist orderagainst future violations, was the high-est ever imposed for violations of theAnimal Welfare Act.

In a decision signed May 27, thejudge found that Hickey, doing busi-ness as S&S Farms and also as S.S.Farms, Inc., grossly neglected to com-ply with housing, sanitation and veteri-nary care standards for dogs and catskept at his commercial facility. (SeeAWI Quarterly, 36, #3)

He also found that Hickey falselyreported the dollar amount of sales onhis annual license renewal report for1984, deliberately refused inspectorsand law enforcement officers access toHis business records in 1985 and con-sistently showed false and misleadinginformation on the description, num-ber and origin of dogs and cats heacquired and sold to registered re-search facilities, thereby concealing thesource of stolen and fraudulently ob-tained pets found on his premises.

PROTOCOL NO.You may choose to be anonymous _,

POST-SURGIC AL

O GROSS WOUND INFECTION

0 ANIMAL MORIBOUNDO HEMORRHAGE0 OTHER (sPecitY )

0 CROWDING0 ABUSEO POOR ANIMAL CARE

A useful form to facili-tate prompt reportingon laboratory animalsin trouble is includedin Guidelines for LayMembers of Animal CareCommittees, publishedby the Canadian Fed-eration of HumaneSocieties (September1986). The content ofthe form appears atleft in its entirety.(The original, ofcourse, is less com-pressed, allowingspace for com-ments.)

COMMENT

Fines for violations of the Animal Welfare Act

17

Clark Bavin, chief of Fish and Wildlife Law Enforcement, is surrounded by the confiscated wild-life products seized in the sting.

Undercover operations surface triumphantlyo n the morning of 24 February

nearly 100 Fish and Wildlife Serv-ice agents moved in to make arrestsacross 12 states from Alaska down toTexas, so bringing a 4-year "sting" to asuccessful conclusion.

Targeted initially at law-breakingguides offering "guaranteed hunts"(one reputedly earned $50,000 in aweek from clients paying up to $10,000for brown bears), the Service set up itsundercover stall as Abrams Creek Outfit-ters in Purcellville, Virginia. It operatedas a booking agency through whichhunters could arrange big-game expe-ditions.

One nasty illegality exposed was thepoaching of black bears in the south-ern Appalachians including the Shen-andoah National Park. Hides werebeing sold for up to $250 each andgallbladders for a lot more.

Another prime center of investiga-tion was Alaska, following reports ofairborne hunting and out-of-seasonkilling of caribou and brown bears.The reports proved all too true. Air-craft were being used to herd animalstowards the hunters in violation of theAirborne Hunting Act.

T he conclusion to a separate under-cover operation which spanned

almost two years was announced on 1March. In what was described as "one

of the largest investigations of its kindin the western United States," agentsof California's Fish and Game Depart-ment arrested 52 alleged black bearpoachers and dealers. With each bearcarcass potentially worth more than$800 to the poacher—through the sep-arate selling of the various parts of theanimal—illegal kills in northern Cali-fornia are thought to number two orthree times the figure for legal kills.

Among those arrested were 23 Asian

herbalists whose Chinese and Koreancustomers will pay as much as $540 anounce to acquire the alleged rejuvenat-ing properties inherent in the bear'sgallbladder. It transpired, though, thataround 90% of the gallbladders sold inthese stores at sky-high prices camefrom pigs and cows. The fraudulentnature of this racket is being widelypublicized by Fish and Game in thehope that it will dampen the enthusi-asm of potential buyers.

Very special agents join war on drugsF ederal agents Barco, Duko and1' Rocky have in the past yearunearthed $100 million worth of her-oin, cocaine and marijuana, and helpedjail more than 100 smugglers. Comparethis haul with the $600 worth of drugsseized during the same period by theentire (Mexican) Border Patrol of 3200agents and it is plain that Barco, Dukoand Rocky must be very special agents.

They are! They are canine agents, starmembers of a team of 20 BelgianMalinois dogs . specially trained to sniffout drugs. 1987 was their first year inaction—and already they have spreadalarm and despondency in the enemyranks. So much so that there is re-portedly a $30,000 price tag on theirheads with the bounty being brazenlyadvertised in a Mexican newspaper.

The three stars are accordingly givenSpecial agent Rocky of the Border Patrol withhis handler.

`Z top security treatment. They sleep inelectronically protected quarters andwill accept food only from their hand-lers. Furthermore, one of the three,Barco, now wears a bullet-proof vest. Ifhe shows this 70Ib garment in no waymars his performance in 110 degreeheat, then his two co-stars will be simi-larly garbed.

The three dogs were received byNancy Reagan on 11 May and the Sen-ate unanimously agreed that a Wash-ington Post article on their exploitsshould be printed in the CongressionalRecord.

Canine agents have scored suc-cesses for USDA, too, but have notbeen drafted to use their superiorolfactory powers to help curb themultimillion dollar wildlife smuggl-ing racket.

18 376,

Adele in Paola and Francesca

Adele Schoepperle1906-1988

S he was born in Rhode Island; but her father's business kept the family moving from one place in New England to

another, and she had in consequence a rather scattered edu-cation. Interested in the drama from an early age, she some-how managed at the age of eighteen to land a part in the 1924Broadway production of Stephen Phillip'sPaola and Francesca. She also had a role inThe Trial of Mary Dugan, a big thriller in itsday. But when the Depression set in, shefound work in John Campbell's rare bookstore in Rittenhouse Square, Philadelphia,where, since there were very few customersthen, there weren't many weekly paycheckseither, and Mr. Campbell was often re-duced to paving his employee with books.Still it was just possible in those days, bytaking one's meals in Home and Hardart'sautomat, to live on a very small amount ofmoney. The book shop constituted a tinycultural center for semi-employed writersand collectors who had plenty of time tosettle the issues of the day. Above the shoplived a couple of musicians of the Philadel-phia Orchestra from whom Adele receivedfree lessons until, it seems, she could playbadly enough to join The Silly Symphony, alocal music group that did their work withgreat enthusiasm. She also joined theChestnut Hill Players, and then the Hedge-row, devoted as it was and still is, to present-ing those plays that represent "the best thathas been thought and said in the world,"was as a result unable to pay any but themost essential expenses; and then WorldWar II made matters still more difficult foreveryone, and Adele migrated to New York

City to find a paying job. This turned out to be with the DutchInformation Service, tending their mailing list. In fact, it washer fate, she said, wherever she went, to end up doing themailing list. It was at this time she changed her name to Mrs.John Schoepperle, and then, some time after the war, moved

with her husband to White Plains and wassoon immersed in animal work—first, alost-and-found service for lost and foundpets, then a long stint with The S.P.C.A. ofWestchester, then a local radio programabout advice on animals, and finally workfor The Animal Welfare Institute, for whichorganization she again did (among otherthings) the mailing list.

—John Schoepperle

Adele Schoepperle, who died this winter had been associ-ated with the Institute almost since its founding in 1951.She wore many hats, finally being named AssistantTreasurer, but all her assignments reflected her carefuland painstaking approach to even the most mundaneand demanding tasks involved in keeping an u.n.derstaffed and overburdened office functioning smoothly.The following resolution passed by acclamation at themeeting of the AW I Board reflects the respect and affec-tion Adele inspired.

"In view of the long association andselfless service by Adele Schoepperle tothe Animal Welfare Institute, the Board ofDirectors extends to John its deepest andmost heartfelt gratitude for her unceasinglabor on behalf of all animals, her cheerfuland buoyant attitude toward her work andthe high quality of her precise and ency-clopedic grasp of her duties."

Animal Welfare Institute

Scientific Committee International Committee Officers Directors, cont'dMarjorie Anchel, Ph.D. Aline S. de Aluja, D.V.M.—Mexico Christine Stevens, President Marjorie CookeBennett Derby, M.D. T.G. Antikas, D.V.M.--Greece Cynthia Wilson, Vice President Christabel GoughF. Barbara Orlans, Ph.D. Ambassador Tabarak Husain—Bangladesh Marjorie Cooke, Secretary David 0. HillRoger Payne, Ph.D. Angela King—United Kingdom Roger L.Stevens, Treasurer Sue HuntSamuel Peacock, M.D. Simon Muchiru—Kenya Freeborn G. Jewett, Jr.John Walsh, M.D. David Ricardo—Canada Directors Christine Stevens

Godofredo Stutzin—Chile Madeleine Bemelmans Aileen TrainKlaus Vestergaard—Denmark Gerard Bertrand, Ph.D. Cynthia Wilson

StaffPatrick Allen, Editorial ConsultantJessie Despard, Publications CoordinatorRose R. Eck, Administrative Assistant

for Communications

Diane Halverson, Research Associatefor livestock and poultry

Lynne Hutchison, Whale Campaign SecretaryCathy Liss, Research Associate

Nell Naughton, Mail Order SecretaryGreta Nilsson, Wildlife ConsultantVictor Perez, Clerical AssistantLaura Swedberg, Administrative AssistantLouise Wright, Research Assistant

197

Drugs in the bullringThe Spanish bullfight is not just asickening spectacle, but often a fraud-ulent one as IV !toe '141*.#1well. An articlein Spain's chiefnational daily,El Pais, revealshow a Madridveterinarian,his suspicionsaroused by thebizarre b e hav-ior of bulls inthe bullring,found they hadbeen drugged.

Post-mortemanalysis showed that one group ofanimals, suffering from severe lack ofcoordination, had each received some

25 kilograms of Epsom salts —where four or five kilograms is, in the

words of thevet, "a brutaldose". An-other grouphad been tran-quilized and yetanother ren-dered virtuallyblind by (prob-ably) a chem-ical sprayed mo-ments beforethe fight.

Will these re-velations prove

the death blow to any lingering ro-mance still attaching to the bullfight?Let us hope so.

Animal Welfare InstituteP.O. Box 3650Washington, D.C. 20007

Periodical Pleasuresoday, when there is so much inter-est in the work that can be done to

alleviate the plight of homeless animals,it is a salutary shock to read in the July24, 1988 issue of the New York Timesabout Rick Caron who bears the dreadtitle of Dogcatcher (remember the vil-lain of our youth) and goes about hisduties with compassion and a single-minded devotion.

His base is a metropolis in Maine

named Jay (population 5068, Zip Code#04239), and he routinely capturesstrays from Jay and six surroundingcommunities. Unable to bring himselfto adhere to the established practice ofa few days of incarceration followed bydeath, he is currently hosting about 40dogs, 15 cats and such transients as apigeon and a raccoon in a shelter heused his savings to build. I don't knowhow spacious the guest quarters are, butthey are there, open and filled with love.

There is a Mrs. Caron who mustcatch occasional glimpses of her hus-

band as he goes about his dogcatchingduties and works two other jobs to helpmeet expenses.

It's nice to report that situations likethis bring out the best in so many peo-ple. A media favorite, high-fashiontitan has donated, without fanfare,enough money "to buy us food for ayear" according to grateful RickCaron, the size of whose heart ismatched only by the strength of hisstamina.

—John Gleiber

Senate passes PetTheft Act of 1988

A new version of the Pet Theft Act,introduced by Senators Wendell Ford(D-KY), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), RobertDole (R-KS), and Kent Conrad (D-ND)was passed by the US Senate 10 August.It now goes to the House AgricultureCommittee for action.

Senator Ford, speaking for his bill onthe Senate floor said, "The problem ofpet theft is so pervasive, occurring inevery jurisdiction, and because no re-sponsible researcher wants anything todo with stolen animals, I look forwardto swift passage of this legislation."

Agriculture Committee Chairman Leahystated, "This legislation bans auctionsales of animals for research purposesand would thereby eliminate the abduc-tion of pets in our neighborhoods."

Non-Profit Org.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDWashington, D.C.Permit No. 2300