DefenDer

ISSN: 2041-3653

Spring/Summer 2012

� New UK law on animal experiments� More countries ban animal circuses� UK promises wild animal ban � Circus owners in court� Jorja Fox takes on the elephant abusers� Animal rescue news

Magazine of Animal Defenders International

and the National Anti-Vivisection Society

Magazine of Animal Defenders International

and the National Anti-Vivisection Society

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012 NAVS & ADI2

Editorial

ANIMAL DEFENDERISSN: 2041-3653published by Animal DefendersInternationaland the National Anti-VivisectionSociety incorporating The Campaigner,published by the National Anti-Vivisection Society

©2012 ADI. All rights reserved. No part ofthis publication may be reproduced forcommercial purposes by any meanswhatsoever without the written permission ofADI/NAVS.

Millbank Tower, Millbank, LoNDoN, SW1P 4QP, UKTel: +44 (0)20 7630 3340Fax: +44 (0)20 7828 2179e-mail: info@ad-international.orgweb: www.ad-international.org

Editors: Jan Creamer & Tim Phillips

Board:Mr N. BriceMs A. BriceMs J.CreamerMs P. DibleyMr T. PhillipsMs M. Windebank

USA:6100 Wilshire Blvd., #1150,LoS ANgELES, CA 90048, USATel: +1 323-935-2234Fax: +1 323-935-9234e-mail: usa@ad-international.orgweb: www.adiusa.org

South America: Apartado Postal 359888 BogoTÁ,Colombia.e-mail: contacto@ad-international.orgweb: www.ad-international.org/adi_south_america

ANIMAL DEFENDERS INTERNATIONAL:Founded 1990. To educate, create awareness,and promote the interest of humanity in thecause of justice, and the suppression of all formsof cruelty to animals; wherever possible, toalleviate suffering, and to conserve and protectanimals and their environment.

NATIONAL ANTI-VIVISECTIONSOCIETY: Founded 1875; the world’s premieranti-vivisection group. The NAVS advocates thetotal prohibition of all animal experiments, and,pending the achievement of this aim, we maysupport partial measures which would providesteps towards reform. LORD DOWDINGFUND: Founded 1974; a department of theNAVS; sponsors non-animal scientific andmedical research.

With so many long-running campaigns foranimals coming to critical points at the sametime, we barely have time to draw breath,although it is a good place to be, as it meansthat progress for animal protection is movingahead on many fronts.

We’re approaching theend of a ten year campaign over the new rules foranimals in research. A huge concern over theimplementation of the new European Directive intoUK law, has been the drive by the animalexperimentation community to exploit everyloophole to strip animals of the meagre protectionthey already have. So we are pleased that theGovernment has finally announced that it willretain most of the UK’s ‘stricter measures’; but

surely, this line in the sand could have been drawn earlier. On the otherhand there is still a lot to fight for, as the Government’s plan incorporatesthe bare minimum of the better aspects of the Directive.

Our investigation of the MRC GM mouse factorywith some 65,000 animals shows just howdisposable these animals are – discarded with therubbish by the sackload. We are often the onlyprotection these animals have – and certainly theonly ones to tell their story.

See also our move for CCTV to be installed inanimal labs. CCTV is a common part of daily life inthe workplace and in our streets, so there is no

reason for it to be rejected in places wherevulnerable animals are in the hands of peoplelicensed to inflict pain.

In this issue, we celebrate victories for the StopCircus Suffering campaign, with Greece, Ecuadorand Paraguay joining Peru’s recent ban. We havealso tabled a Bill for a ban before the USCongress.

It almost defies belief that the UK, of all countries,is still stuck in the mud on this one – as Defra ministers look for excusesand fight both public and Parliament on it.

I also write this after sitting for an entire day in thewitness room at Corby Magistrates Court, buttoday we learn that the trial of the owners of Annethe elephant will now be delayed until November.

Let’s dig in folks, keep going. There is light at theend of the tunnel and animals need us to keepgoing!

Where there’s aWILL

there’s a WAYto help suffering

animalsHELP THE NATIONAL

ANTI-VIVISECTION SOCIETY (NAVS)

Millions of animals suffer and die each

year, in experiments that cannot be

trusted. Imagine a life imprisoned in a

cramped cage – a lifetime of suffering and

fear. It doesn’t need to be like this.

The NAVS works to end the use of animals

in research and replace them with

sophisticated techniques, more relevant to

people. We investigate, produce scientific

reports, educational materials and videos.

Through the Lord Dowding Fund, wefund non-animal scientific research.

Please make a bequest today to the

National Anti-Vivisection Society.

www.navs.org.uk

HELP ANIMAL DEFENDERSINTERNATIONAL (ADI)

Toto the chimpanzee was imprisoned in a

circus for 25 years, forced to smoke and

perform tricks for human entertainment.

Animal Defenders International rescued

Toto, returning him to Africa where he

now lives with a new chimp family.

We investigate, expose, produce scientific

reports, rescue and secure laws.

Please make a bequest today to Animal

Defenders International.

www.ad-international.org

For a free guide to making a Will

and helping animals, call us today

on 020 7630 3340

Where there’s aWILL

there’s a WAYto help suffering

animals

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012 3

This year, all EU countries willintroduce new legislation onanimal experiments in compliancewith Directive 2010/63/EU.

The UK government hastrumpeted their big move on labanimal welfare – the UK will notactually dismantle the littleprotection lab animals have. Sadto see the ambition is so low.The long campaign in Europe on thesenew regulations gained some significantground; access to information, endingthe capture of monkeys by dealers, waysto challenge animal experiments likethematic review, retrospective reviews ofexperiments. We managed to hold at baysome of the calls from industry, such ascomplete deregulation of animalresearch.

The new UK law will be framed by theDirective but there is scope forinterpretation. The Directive will governexperiments in countries like the UK,Germany and France where millions ofanimals die, as well as smaller countriessuch as Malta. It therefore allows for thedetails to be tailored to each country;nevertheless the intent of this Directivewas to increase not reduce animalprotection, improve public transparencyand accountability, and movetowards replacement of animalexperiments.

Whereas, the vivisectionindustry has attemptedto seize on every

loophole to make it easier and cheaperto experiment on animals. DespiteHome Office boasts about what hasbeen achieved, it has been a long hardbattle to retain the little protectioncurrently in place for laboratory animals.

In May, the Government finallyannounced: “...we propose to 'copy out'most of the provisions of the Directive.There are, however, a number of areasin which we intend to retain currentstricter United Kingdom standards. Forexample, we propose to retain specialprotection for dogs, cats and horses as

well as non-human primates and toretain all current UK care andaccommodation standards that arestricter than those set out in AnnexIII to the Directive.”

Key DemandsWhile participating in the regularHome Office consultations andmeetings, we’ve been educatingthe public and parliament with our

‘Cutting Edge not Knife Edge’campaign to move policy to non-

animal replacement methods.This resulted in 13,000

people participating in lastsummer’s Home Office publicconsultation.

In December, a delegationfrom NAVS, Animal Aid, PETA,Humane Society International,Four Paws, LDF and ADIpresented Home OfficeMinister Lynne Featherstone

with some key demands.Tim Phillips, NAVSCampaigns Director gave a

presentation on each area and laterpresented them to the AssociateParliamentary Group for Animal Welfareat the House of Commons.

1. No current laboratory animalprotection to be downgraded.

2. greater transparency,accountability, and mechanisms tochallenge animal research:

• More information about animalexperimentation made public; withaccountability for experimenters andthose policing them.

• Licensing process to be open withmechanisms to challenge animalexperiments.

• Retrospective review of all animalexperiments to determine scientificvalue and true suffering of animals.

• No blanket secrecy; repeal section24 (secrecy clause) of the current Act.

3. No reduction in currentrequirements for the justification ofproposed animal experiments.

4. Establish mechanisms for theimplementation of alternatives:

• The licensing process must driveforward the implementation ofalternatives – if a non-animal methodis available in the UK for all or part ofthe research it must be used

• Increase the availability ofalternatives.

5. Thematic review of animalexperiments to set targets forreplacement.

6. Restrictions on use of Non HumanPrimates in research and ending thewild capture of primates for research.

New law on animal experiments

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

New UK law onanimalexperiments

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

Help fundraise for

research without animals

For almost thirty years, the

LDF has supported the

replacement of the use of

animals in research – advancing medical

research and saving animals.

Help us do more.

Can you help with our annual streetcollections in July and August?Please give us a call on 020 7630 3340or email us at info@navs.org.uk.

Fundraise and help the

environment!

ADI can benefit from the recycling of

mobile phones and printer cartridges at

your place of work, through Recyling

Appeal, see www.recyclingappeal.comand click the ‘Recycle Now’ button for

instructions. To ensure the funds your

recycled items raise are directed to

Animal Defenders International, insert

our name in the ‘Collecting For’ field.

Or, call 08451 30 20 10 to join AnimalDefenders International’s RecyclingAppeal. We will receive around £1 for

every used printer cartridge and around

£5 for every used mobile phone donated

with our name as beneficiary.

Please

support our

2012 raffle

Enclosed are tickets for our prize draw.

Please note that the draw deadlinehas been extended to August 30th.

This is an important fundraising effort

and has our biggest ever prize fund!

All of the money raised will go towards

our animal rescues and you have a great

chance of winning. So please help by

buying or selling the tickets.

2011 Winter raffle winners: These

were the lucky winners from our last

draw:

1st prize – £1,500 – to Ms Thelma Nye

2nd prize – £500 – to Mrs Iona Strachan

3rd prize – £250 – to Miss PR Bowring

Runners up were Mrs A. Heath and Mrs

Valerie Shaida.

New law on animal experiments

NAVS & ADIThe Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012

There is a loophole on the prohibition of

the use of stray or feral animals allowing

experiments in certain circumstances.

The time foetal mammals are protected

will reduced.

Re-use of animals following procedures

classed as ‘severe’ may be allowed.

The ban on F1 primates will be delayed

as the Home Office supports a “feasibilitystudy” for the timetable. Another delay –

and monkeys will continue to be torn

from the wild until a ban is enforced.

Not yet decided:

Thematic review is under consideration

and in March, the NAVS submitted a

detailed proposal, which has Minister

Lynne Featherstone’s support for the

concept – specific animal experiments to

be reviewed and timetables set for

replacement.

The notorious secrecy clause of the

current Act, S.24 is on hold, the Home

Office wants to decide at a later time.

There are restrictions on primate

experiments, but the Home Office will not

define what they are; it will go back to

the European Commission.

Sadly the proposals indicate no

commitment by the Government to seize

the opportunity to drive forward the

replacement of animal experiments and

greater public scrutiny.

Rather, the bare minimum is being

undertaken and in some instances

advantage has been taken to ease

restrictions on animal experiments.

Overall, disappointing and much more

pressure is needed on MPs.

Action: Write to your MP, tell them you are:

– disappointed about the delay on

ending use of F1 primates

– unwarranted delay in overturning the

secrecy clause, S.24 of the current Act

– stray or feral animals are not properly

protected

– more effort is needed for bringing in

advanced non-animal methods

– you want to see implementation of

‘thematic review’, where specific

experiments will be examined and

timetable set for replacement.

See our list of other demands, on p3.

• Proscribing certain uses of primates.

• Early implementation of the

prohibition of use of F1 monkeys (born

of wild-caught parents).

The Good, Bad & Ugly in theGovernment’s ProposalsThe Government response to the public

consultation indicates the direction being

taken in several areas.

The good:

The UK will retain standards of

husbandry currently exceeding the new

Directive. Some inhumane killing

methods will still be prohibited. The ban

on the use of great apes will remain –

the “safeguard clause” exemption

allowing special applications for use of

apes is not being adopted. The current

licensing controls will not be dismantled.

Foetal birds and reptiles will now be

protected during the last third of normal

development and all cephalopods

protected once independently feeding.

Animals bred for tissues will be covered.

There are more commitments to the 3Rs

(refinement, reduction and

replacement) but we’ll need to

work to ensure this is not

window dressing.

There will not be

retrospective

reviews of all

experiments

but since

there are

currently

none, the

Directive has

at least forced

a step

forward.

The bad

and the

ugly:

Multiple generic

licences will

continue to be

granted. This

already happens

with regulatory

testing by contract

research laboratories

like HLS, but can now be

expanded to other areas.

4

5

Campaign News

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012ADI & NAVS

An LDF survey of European universities has found thatthousands of animals including mice, rats, guinea pigs, frogsand dogs continue to be used in unnecessary teachingpracticals, when humane alternatives are available. We commissioned researchers from the University of Edinburgh to conduct a Europe-wide survey on innovative teaching and learning in pharmacology and physiology inhigher education in ten European countries: UK, France, Germany, Spain, Italy,Poland, Holland, Slovenia, Czech Republic and Republic of Macedonia. We askedabout current animal use and use of computer-based replacements.

While advanced computer simulations for university practicals have becomeincreasingly sophisticated over the past twenty years, many universities continue touse animals. LDF has been at the forefront of developing replacements for animal usein teaching and our programmes have been updated for worldwide use. LDF fundedteaching suites in the UK have saved thousands of animals. However, this surveymakes it clear that much more work needs to be done to educate educationalinstitutions to move on to advanced, non-animal teaching methods.

NAVS/LDF Chief Executive, Jan Creamer, told the media: “It is often claimed that noone would ever use animals if they did not have to. Yet here we see an utter disregardof the available alternatives and for animal life. There needs to be a clear politicalEurope-wide commitment to eradicate the use of animals in university practicals.”

It is particularly disappointing that the UK had the fourth highest levels of animal use inteaching after Romania, France and Spain. The most commonly used animals aremice, rats, guinea pigs, and frogs – with dogs still being used in Macedonia and Spain.

Jan Creamer: “These are basic practicals, teaching known facts in subjects likepharmacology. The data that the student needs to analyse, understand and participatein the practical can be generated using the computer simulations we have developed.Students have been securing degrees in these subjects using humane alternatives formore than two decades, animals should not be dying in this way.”

The authors of the report, Professor David Dewhurst and Dr Akiko Hemmi, believe thisstudy could be the most comprehensive survey to date, particularly in those countrieswhere there is no systematic collection of animal use data.

Professor Dewhurst said: “Globally there are ethical objections to the use of animals inbio/medical sciences training and there are good, robust alternatives available, whichhave proved to be educationally effective. I used computer-based alternatives in myown teaching for many years. They were well-liked by students, freed more of my timeto diagnose students’ learning problems and provide additional tuition during a practicalclass, and saved considerable time and money.”

It is with sadness thatwe announce the deathof Billy, the hippo wholived at Chimfunshi, whereToto and family reside.Billy came to the Siddlefamily in 1992, when shewas only 5 days old, hermother having been killedby poachers.

An oxford nightclub planning touse a zebra for a May Day eventcancelled the booking followingopposition from locals and ADI.

The US series ‘Luck’,starring Dustin Hoffman,has been cancelledfollowing the deaths ofthree horses on location atSanta Anita Park racetrackin California. Public outcryover the deaths of the firsttwo horses went largelyignored by the producers.However, following the death of a thirdhorse, they announced productionwould cease. Some say that poorratings didn’t help.

Vision Express is in discussionswith ADI over their use of animals inadvertising. We hope that they, andother companies, will adopt a policy ofnever using exotic animalsfor future ad campaigns.

A Ten Minute RuleMotion tabled by SheryllMurray MP calling forthe keeping of primatesas pets to be prohibitedwas supported by ADI. It is estimated that2,500–7,500 primates are kept as petsin the UK.

In Cameroon, a new virus closelyrelated to HIV has passed fromapes to people, reigniting concernsthat the bushmeat trade is a majorgateway for animal viruses to crossthe species barrier and, through theexport trade, spread worldwide. AIDS,the worst pandemic of modern times,which has claimed over 30 millionlives, is thought to have begun in westcentral Africa as a result of thebushmeat trade.

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

Survey revealsanimals killedin universityteaching,despiteavailablealternatives

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

NAVS & ADI

Campaign News

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012

Circus owners in courtfollowing ADI investigationFollowing a fifth hearing for legalarguments in June at KetteringMagistrates Court, District JudgeChinnery ruled that the trial of Bobby andMoira Roberts is to proceed inNovember. The charges relate tovideo recordings of Anne theelephant, taken by ADI at the BobbyRoberts Super Circus winter quarterslast year. Charges include:

1. Causing the elephant to sufferunnecessarily, by requiring theelephant to be chained to the groundat all times, contrary to section 4(1) ofthe Animal Welfare Act 2006 (AWA).

2. Failing to take reasonable steps toprevent their employee from causingunnecessary suffering to the elephant, byrepeatedly beating her, contrary tosection 4(2) of AWA.

3. Failing to take reasonable steps toensure that the needs of the elephantwere met to the extent required by goodpractice, contrary to section 9 of AWA.

ADI released the undercoverinvestigation in 2011 showing Annechained, and beaten by workers. Publicoutrage led to Anne being removed from

the circus.

ADI bore the huge costs of theinvestigation and preparation ofthe legal case, ready for it tobe taken forward by the CrownProsecution Service.

This is the first trial of a circusunder the new AWA. It will testwhether the Act’s intention, thatowners be held responsible forthe daily life of their animals,can be upheld.

The three previous circuscruelty convictions in the UKwere also secured by ADIalso, but under the previouslegislation.

Don’t supportcharities thatfund vivisectionGet the NAVS Good Charities Guide When confronted with a charity collector in thestreet or on your doorstep, it’s difficult to knowwhat is meant, exactly, by claims that yourdonation will go to vital medical research. Little issaid about the ethics and checks on thatresearch, especially how it is conducted.

For example, Alzheimer’s Research UK spendsaround 30% (£1.35 million) of their researchbudget on animal research. A study funded by

the British Heart Foundation involvedinvasive surgery on rats and mice andused zebra fish embryos to study theeffect of a human gene on blood vessel formation. Anddid anyone contributing to Diabetes UK imagine thatthey might be contributing to an experiment in whichrabbit penile tissue was used to study the mechanismsof erectile dysfunction in humans?

The NAVS Good Charities Guide tells you whetherindividual charities fund experiments on animals. The charities arerated according to their animals use: the ‘Good’, the ‘Bad’ and thosewho will not disclose their policy. The NAVS advises that if a charityis not prepared to say whether they will or will not experiment on animals, they don’tdeserve your money. Support the LDF instead!

The good news is that the good guys outnumber the bad by 75 to 50 (with 18‘Undetermined’). If you know a charity that you would like us to approach on yourbehalf, do let us know. A pocket sized copy of the guide is available (just call 020 76303340) or you can view it online.

Circus master Gerry Cottle now supports a banAn unexpected ally in our campaign to end the use of animals in travelling circuseshas come to the fore – circus impresario Gerry Cottle. Years ago, ADI was locked inbattle with Gerry Cottle’s Circus (both in public, and legally), as it toured withelephants, lions, monkeys, and llamas. However, we must now applaud Mr Cottle forsaying that the time has come to end the use of wild animals in circuses.

Touring with his new human only circus, Cottle says he has “reluctantly decided tomove on”, conceding “The animal issue has given circuses a bad name.”

“Sad as it is for me to say, I now support the ban,” said Mr Cottle. “Times havechanged and this issue has to be decided one way or the other. I believe a ban will, inthe end, improve the image of circuses in Britain.”

Tim Phillips, Campaigns Director of ADI, “We have said for a long time that thetarnished image of the animal circus is holding back the circus industry as a whole.Every time our undercover investigations catch savage brutality in the circus, like thatmeted out to Anne the elephant, or the elephants with the Great British Circus, thenpeople come to associate that with the big top.

“The longer the Government delays implementing the ban the more harm they aredoing to animal welfare and the wider circus industry.”

There was similar good news last year when the Chipperfield Circus, previouslyexposed by an ADI undercover investigation, finally became an animal free show.

Check out theGuide online here

© P

ress

Ass

oci

atio

n

7The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012

“This is a bullhook. It’sheavy, it’s sharp, and it hurts.

This is the weapon of choice forelephant circus performers.

It is used to get elephants toperform tricks to amuse

people.”

Campaign News

ADI & NAVS

When Courtney Brothers Circus begantouring with five elephants, parading theanimals through town centres, AnimalRights Action Network (ARAN) warned ofthe risks. First there was a near escape,then a young elephant escaped, runningthrough a public carpark and onto a road.Over 30 experts including fieldresearchers, zoos, scientists and animal

Jorja Fox takes onthe elephant abusersin new ADI video

ADI Ambassador Jorja Fox (CSI’s Sarah Sidle) has released a new video for ADI, calling for anend to circus animal abuse. The 90-second video tells the story of Krissy, an elephant torn fromthe wild in Africa who ended up in an American circus. Here an ADI undercover investigator filmedKrissy being dragged to her knees with a bullhook before being kicked in the face by her Texas-based handler, Mike Swain, who continues to work with elephants, including Krissy.Krissy and her companion Queenie/Boo were also hit with a golf club and electricshocked with a stun gun, to make them move quickly to performances. Krissy is currently giving rides at fairs and other events.

The brutal scenes are juxtaposed with breathtaking images of a family ofwild elephants living free in Zambia.

WATCH THIS!

You can see Jorja’s video on ADI’s youtube site here:www.youtube.com/animaldefenders,

or simply scan this QR code on your smart ‘phone.

Please pass it on to a friend or family member.

To scan this code with your smartphone, download the ‘QRReader’ for iPhone app or the ‘Barcode Scanner’ for Androidapp from your app store.

protectionists attending the Summit forElephants signed an ADI statementcalling for an end to the use of elephantsin circuses, “This week’s escape of anelephant from Courtney Brothers Circusin Cork, Rep. of Ireland, could haveeasily resulted in disastrousconsequences for both local people andthe animal.”

Two days later, whilst attempting to breakup a fight between two elephants, atrainer was crushed and hospitalised. JimConway, general manager of CourtneyBrothers Circus, told the Irish Times: “.... two elephants were jostling outsidethe circus and a trainer happened to bein the wrong place at the wrong time."

Campaign partners ADI and ARANlaunched Stop Circus Suffering Ireland in2007, and are pressing for a ban.

John Carmody of ARAN: "With the franticimages of the elephant trying to escape ..from the circus, people are realising thatcircuses with animals have no place inIrish society. The writing is surely on thewall for those still clinging onto archaicanimal acts."

Elephant trainer crushed in Ireland©

AR

AN

our work on the EU phase out ofcosmetics testing on animalscontinues. ADI and NAVS presentedour objections to a suggestedrelaxation of the marketing deadlinefor cosmetics, to the EuropeanCommission. Allowing thedeadline to slide wouldcommercially disadvantage thosecompanies that have alreadycommitted to the ban. Maintainingthe ban would only affect newproducts until a non-animal method isdeveloped. MEPs at the Intergroupon the Welfare and Conservation ofAnimals discussed the matter in May.

North Lanarkshire Council and EastAyrshire Council have bannedanimal circuses following ADIsubmissions. Over 200 UK localauthorities now have bans in place.

The European Centre for theValidation of Alternative Methods(ECVAM) has produced an onlineguide to alternatives to animalresearch, enabling researchers toascertain whether alternatives tospecific animal experiments exist.

The European Commission has yetto commit to an eight-hour journeytime for animal transport, despiteanimals arriving dead and injured atEuropean slaughterhouses.

ADI gave several presentations atthe Summit for Elephants organisedby the Performing Animal WelfareSociety at Oakland Zoo, California,together with experts from sanctuariesand field researchers. This year sawan increase in the number of zoos inattendance, confirming asteady shift in attitudestowards captiveelephants – and theconsensus that circusesare no place forthese animals.

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012 NAVS & ADI8

Campaign News

Elephant rides halted in CaliforniaFollowing the release of our undercover investigation of Have Trunk Will Travel(HTWT) last year – who we caught on camera beating and electric shockingelephants – a series of event organisers have ended elephant rides after campaignsby ADI and our supporters. The City of Santa Ana ended over 25 years of elephantrides at the Santa Ana Zoo; the town of Sierra Madre cancelled a parade appearanceby Tai (the HTWT elephant in ‘Water for Elephants’); Orange County Fair and the LosAngeles County Fair both ended years of HTWT elephant rides and Fountain ValleyRecreation Center Easter celebration has also stopped the rides. ADI is keeping upthe pressure and urging other event organisers to end their HTWT elephant rides, too.

ADI case in the EuropeanCourt of Human RightsIn March we presented our case to theGrand Chamber of the Court of HumanRights in Strasbourg in an attempt tooverturn a law preventing ADI and NAVSadvertising on television in the UK. “Atpresent the law effectively bans thebroadcast of any advert on a matter of controversy, by anyone seeking to dosomething about that issue. So whilst primates and other animals can be used to sellproducts, it is not permitted to create awareness about the impacts on those animals.Our commercial advertised a pack which outlined the threats to primates. It wasbanned not because of content or accuracy, but because of who we are. Our caserevolves around the freedom of a company or organisation to enter into a nationaldebate on television or radio – and the right to freedom of speech.”

The iniquity of the situation was highlighted by the fact that at the same time soft drinksgiant Pepsi was using a performing chimpanzee in a TV commercial, whereas ADI’sTV advert creating awareness about the suffering of performing chimpanzees wasbanned. The case was heard by seven judges and the ruling is awaited.

Slaughter workers prosecutedIn April, two former slaughterhouse workerspleaded guilty to offences under the AnimalWelfare Act 2006 and were jailed, after beingcaught on cameras placed in a slaughterhouseby Animal Aid. One man admitted three chargesrelating to stubbing cigarettes out on the faces of

pigs, the other admitted to beating the animals with excessive force. The prosecutordescribed how one pig was hit more than 30 times in 62 seconds, including around thehead. The men were sentenced to six and four weeks. Their prison terms were

reduced because they had pleaded guilty. The case has led to plans to introduceCCTV into some slaughterhouses in an attempt to eradicate such abuses (p.17).

Kari Johnson, co-owner ofHave Trunk Will Travel,

watches in silence as theOrange County Fair Boardsees video of her beating

an elephant. After viewingthe shocking ADI video, the

Fair Board voted 6 to 1 toend the elephant rides.

© A

DI

© A

nim

al A

id

WATCH THIS!You can see our new video here:bit.ly/watchnohollywoodending

or simply scan this QR code on your smart ‘phone.

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012ADI & NAVS 9

Campaign News

In January thegovernment rejectedplans for new laboratorybeagle breeding units inYorkshire. The localcouncil had rejected theplanning application byB&K Universal in 2011; theNAVS gave evidence.B&K Universal appealed. A review by the Secretary of State forCommunities & Local Governmentupheld the Council’s refusal and theapplication was rejected.

World Week for Lab Animals: The main focus in the UKand Europe was theimplementation of the newEU Directive on animalexperiments. Tens ofthousands of leaflets weredistributed. We also raisedawareness in the USA andSouth America – picturedis our protest in Colombia.

Donald Trump’s sons, Don Jr. andEric, were pictured on the HuntingLegends website, having killed anelephant, leopard, crocodile,waterbuck, kudu and a buffalo whilston safari.

on recent reports of theworld’s first ‘chimeric’monkeys at the OregonHealth & ScienceUniversity’s OregonNational PrimateResearch Center(pictured), ADI USCampaigns Director, MattRossell who spent two-yearsundercover at the facility, “What I sawthere changed me forever and I cameto recognise the social, intelligentmonkeys at the facility as individuals,and that they were being treated likelittle more than furry test tubes.”.

We Bought A Zoo, featuring MattDamon, met with objections from ADIand the Ape Alliance (of which we area member) about the use of wildanimals in the movie.

No Hollywood

ending for Tai

and RosieElephants that starred with

Witherspoon, Pattinson and

James back with the circus

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

ADI calls for stars to end silence on abuse of animal actorsFor Reese Witherspoon and Robert Pattinson, Water for Elephants was aromantic fantasy, and they have moved on to the next glamorous project.For Tai it was a nightmare reality, and she remains in the hands of thosethat ADI caught on film abusing her, Have Trunk Will Travel (HTWT).

Tai is back in the circus, performing the same tricks seen in the film. ADIrecently filmed her and Rosie (the HTWT elephant star in Zookeeper withKevin James), with El Zagal Shrine Circus, in Fargo, North Dakota.

At the circus, HTWT trainer Joanne Smith confirms that the twoelephants are Tai and Rosie. We released new footage showing the

circus performance alongside the brutality that created those tricks. In the footage taken at HTWT, Smith is seen electric shocking the

elephants with a stun gun, and hitting and hooking them, saying to ourinvestigator, “Don’t you

be takin’ pictures of mehookin’ on them”.

Last year ADI releasedthe footage of abuse atHTWT after the makersand stars of Water forElephants, AmericanHumane and HTWT,claimed Tai was treatedwith love and affectionand never abused.

At the time we believed that Pattinson, Witherspoon and the film makershad likely been duped. We sent them the video and asked them to speakout. Not a word. We sent the video to the studio, producers and director. Noreply. Letters were sent to the makers of Zookeeper and its star, KevinJames. Again, no response.

The new video is posted on the Facebook pages and Twitter feeds of Pattinson,Witherspoon and James, asking them to support ADI’s campaign and speak out againstthe abuse of performing animals in movies. The abuse is not going to stop until thestars speak out.

What you can do: Contact ADI for our movie letter writer’saction pack: by email info@ad-international.orgor by phone 020 7630 3340.

Robert Pattinson photo © Eva RinaldiReese Witherspoon photo © U.S. Department of StateKevin James photo © www.Promiflash.de - Bitte bei Bildverwendung auch Link setzen

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

10

The government’s strategy on wildanimals in travelling circuses becamea farce with the confusingannouncement in March that theyintend to ban wild animals incircuses, but in the ‘interim’ wouldintroduce inspections and licensing.

Clearly, a ban is being avoided at allcosts – including a hugely expensive‘interim’ scheme. Once even the mostineffectual inspection regime isintroduced, with all the costs, time andtraining, it is unlikely to be dismantledlater on, meaning animals will continueto suffer.

The Department of Environment, Food &Rural Affairs (Defra) announcement wasso misleading that it was widely reportedas a ban and even some animal groupswelcomed the news. A ban is postponedindefinitely, hence the ‘whenparliamentary time allows’ caveat. Nolegislation or regulation has been draftedto ban wild animal acts, nor is there atimetable to do so.

No legal obstacles to a ban

Last year, the Government’s excuses forrefusing to introduce a ban included thatthere might be a challenge from Europe,citing a challenge to Austria’s ban, butthe Austrian courts upheld their ban.Next up was that it could be challengedunder the European Services Directive,or the Human Rights Act. Wrong again.

By March this year, Defra was perfectlyplaced to introduce a ban under theAnimal Welfare Act – again they refused.

Defra has made a nonsense of theundertakings given to both Parliament

and public during the votes on theAnimal Welfare Act 2006; a ban on wildanimals was promised, so amendmentswere withdrawn on that basis. Will theAct ever be used to end abuses as wewere told it would? Independent legalopinion is that a ban on the use of wildanimals in circuses can be introducedunder section 12 of the Act.

Now, Defra has pulled out a flawed anddiscarded internal report, based on amuddled examination of the issuesduring a working group consultation. Theprocess used was so ludicrous that, onthe day the report was presented, Defraconfirmed the method had not been usedto examine other issues, and it would notbe used again.

In contrast to this one shambolicdocument, there is a respectable body ofscientific opinion that animals suffer intravelling circuses.

Together with MP Fiona O’Donnell, ADIChief Executive Jan Creamer andCampaigns Director Tim Phillips met withDefra minister Lord Taylor to point outthe failings of inspection regimes. Weprovided the minister with case studiesof a number of inspections, dating backa decade, which failed to uncoverevidence of poor husbandry, excessive

chaining of elephants, injured animalsand abuse – all detailed in our ‘Out ofControl’ report.

Ms O’Donnell, “Last year parliamentvoted unanimously for a ban on wildanimals in circuses with the backing of95% of the public. Despite concedingthat a licensing scheme is second best,Lord Taylor has not provided any re-assurances about when the governmentwill bring a ban in. The governmentneeds to listen to the overwhelming viewof the public, animal welfare experts andParliament and get on with setting a

timetable to end this cruel practice.”

The Government’s refusal to end thesuffering of wild animals in travellingcircuses is inexplicable. It brazenly fliesin the face of the public will and lastJune, Parliament’s Backbenchers’Committee called on the Government tointroduce a ban by June 2012.

The response was on 1st March 2012;Defra launched another consultation, thistime on a regulatory regime for wildanimals (there are no plans to provideprotection for domestic species such asdogs and horses). Whereas the 2010Defra public consultation gaverespondents the option to support eithera ban on wild animals, or inspections,

Circus MadnessThe Government announces intention toban but, instead, introduces inspections

Presenter AlexLacey leads aninspector past abeastwagon where a seriously injuredlioness is concealed,behind bales of hayand shutters that aworker pretends toclean.

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

Stop Circus Suffering

ADI & NAVS 11The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012

THANK YoU to all those whoprotested, distributed leaflets andwrote to your local paper when an

animal circus came to town.

this latest consultation gave no suchchoice. Last time, less than a third ofrespondents supported inspections,while 94.5% supported a wild animalban. It appears that if the first answer isnot liked, we must do it again, withdifferent questions.

Animal groups refuse consultation

ADI studied the 2012 consultationdocument in detail to establish whether itwas in fact possible for it to reach a fairconclusion. It was not. Effectively it onlyallowed for tacit support of an inspectionregime that will not protect animals fromthe abuses we have exposed.

We therefore contacted our colleagues inanimal welfare and protection groups inthe UK and all agreed there was nobenefit to animal welfare by ourparticipation. Defra’s 2012 circuslicensing consultation was thereforeboycotted by ADI, Animal Aid, Born FreeFoundation, Captive Animals ProtectionSociety, Four Paws, OneKind, People forthe Ethical Treatment of Animals and theRoyal Society for the Prevention ofCruelty to Animals.

We cannot support the introduction of anexpensive and ill-conceived licensingregime; nor can we endorse measuresthat we believe will fail to protect thewelfare of animals and are likely to leadto continued, and perhaps increased,suffering of vulnerable animals for yearsto come. All animal groups are agreed –the proposed licensing regime would bea step backwards for animal welfare.

Inspections will not protect animals

Defra’s proposals will be expensive andwill not prevent animal suffering. In factthey may lead to an increase in sufferingdue to an unjustified sense of publicconfidence in an expensive andinadequate regime. Given thecircumstances of constant travel, withanimals contained in small, lightweight,mobile accommodation, travellingcircuses cannot provide wild animalswith the environment they need.

In the UK, inspections have failed to pickup on animal husbandry deficits andcases of abuse. It has been left to ADIinvestigators to find out how theseanimals are actually treated.

The ADI ‘Out of Control’ report revealedsick and injured animals have beenhidden from inspectors; excessivechaining, water restriction and abusehave gone undetected. The failings ofinspection regimes in the U.S. are notedin the 2010 Inspector General’s USDAAPHIS Audit Report.

In 2009, inspections by Defra, police,RSPCA and local authorities failed toidentify elephant abuse and chaining atthe Great British Circus. An ADI camerafilmed the circus concealing the chainsbefore an inspection; the beatingscontinued afterwards. Neither wouldinspections have discovered the abuseof Anne in 2011 at the winter quarters ofBobby Roberts’ Super Circus, now thesubject of a prosecution of her ownersfor failings under the Animal Welfare Act.

A ban, when?

The Government’s statement on 1stMarch indicated, “work to set out theethical basis for a ban will proceedalongside the development of a licensingscheme.” But the consultation andImpact Assessment (IA) does not includeprovisions supporting this commitment.Indeed the IA does not contain anyreference to such a ban being the aim ofGovernment policy.

Lord Taylor confirmed to us that no suchlegislation has been drafted.

The cost of the licensing scheme isexcessive and a wasteful, temporarysolution. Defra’s IA (2009) advises thatthe associated costs for the potentialregulator are £7,680-£11,500 per yearand for the circuses, £129,000-£190,000

Sir Paul McCartney: “I hateto see wild animals incircuses. It is heartbreakingto see these poor animalsconfined in small cages andcarted around the countrywith no respect for theirwelfare and well-being. Ibelieve an outright ban islong overdue".

Brian Blessed:“Government needs to dothe honourable thing andimplement a ban as soon aspossible to prevent furtheranimal suffering. We havepresented them with strongevidence and it is now timefor them to get on with it.”

Ann Widdecombe: “It is time for Defra tostop dragging its heels while the rest ofthe world takes the lead. Wild animalsdon’t belong in circuses.”

Alexei Sayle: “There aremany grey areas in mattersof morality – using wildanimals in circuses is notone of these. It is simply andobviously wrong andindefensible. The sooner thisblot on a civilised country iseradicated the better it willbe for all of us"

Meg Mathews: “The ADIfootage of poor Anne theelephant being so cruellytreated made me sick. It’stime for this government totake action to end thesuffering that animals endureevery day in UK circuses.”

Brian May: “The use of wildanimals in circuses is cruel,distasteful and unacceptablein the 21st Century. We atSave-Me call on DavidCameron personally to actnow, and take a steptowards making Britainworthy of its desired status as a nation ofanimal lovers."

Ricky gervais: “ADI’sfootage of Anne beingbeaten graphically displayswhy the Government shouldban wild animals in circuses.It is high time thatGovernment got on andimplemented one."

Left: When theinspectors visit there areno chains to be seen andno abuse is taking place.

This page: With noinspectors present the

elephants with the greatBritish Circus are inchains and savagely

beaten.

ADI Out of Control report shows how Defra’s proposed licensing regime will leave circusanimals just as vulnerable as before. Available at: http://bit.ly/y3l5Gg

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012 NAVS & ADI12

Stop Circus Suffering one-off improvement costs. The latest IAadvises that one-off costs will be£75,600 and annual costs £19,400.Thus, costs over ten years would be£269,600. Considering the economics ofthe travelling circuses, there areconcerns that the taxpayer will incurgreater costs than indicated. Each weekthe animals’ habitat changes as it moveslocation, yet there is no plan to visitevery location.

In pursuing a poorly drafted licensingregime that sets standards at far toolow a level, the government isignoring animal welfare organisations,the public and parliament.

The government’s actions areundemocratic, irresponsible and awaste of public funds. only the animalcircuses welcome these regulations.

Where do we go from here?

EDM 2563, calling for a ban on wildanimals in circuses, sponsored by MPsJeremy Corbyn, Gordon Henderson,Kelvin Hopkins, Caroline Lucas and SirBob Russell was signed by 90 crossparty MPs. ADI is working withcommitted MPs who raised over 30Parliamentary Questions betweenNovember and January.

The Government can either immediatelybring forward a ban under regulationsunder the Animal Welfare Act, or, makeparliamentary time to pass primarylegislation – knowing MPs will back it.

When Parliament was first promised aban in 2006, ADI launched a drive forlegislation in Greece. Greece has nowbanned all animals in circuses and joinsover 20 countries with national measureson circuses. The UK has stood still.

Responding to a question on 11 June,from Alun Michaels MP, Defra reaffirmedthere is no timetable for a ban.

What can YOU do?

The most important thing to do today, isto write to your MP.

– Ask for a wild animal circus ban

– Ask your MP to press the PrimeMinister to propose a ban this year.

– Distribute our animal circus leafletsand posters.

– Hand them out to friends, colleagues,local shops, or library.

Now is the time to take action, before

it is too late!

If an inspection regime is to be forced upon an unwilling parliament andconcerned public, we wanted to know what this might mean in reality, thescope, time spent on inspection, level of detail, etc. With Defra puttingforward its new regulatory regime for consultation, this was of immediatepublic interest. Defra blocked our requests for their circus inspection reports.

ADI therefore made a Freedom of Information Act application (FOIA) last summer,for Defra’s circus inspection reports from 2008. This was refused, for spurious andunfounded reasons, including “s.38 health and safety” and “s.41 informationprovided in confidence”. The excuse provided on health and safety grounds (s.38)was of particular interest – Defra cited a local newspaper report about threats toBobby Roberts’ Circus following the Anne exposé – dated after our originalapplication!

We objected and requested an internal review of the FOIA decision, pointing out thatthe ‘evidence’ Defra provided on their health & safety (s.38) point did not exist at thetime of the application. Furthermore, on the confidentiality grounds (s.41), the GreatBritish Circus (GBC) had already published details of the inspections in their showprogramme – using them in just the way we had predicted inspections would beused, as a whitewash. Defra conducted an internal review and again, refused ourapplication.

ADI therefore lodged a complaint with the Office of the Information Commissionerand MPs Peter Bottomley, Mark Durkan, Jonathan Edwards, Kelvin Hopkins andAdrian Sanders, joined by 53 MPs of all parties, demanded the Government releasethe circus veterinary inspection reports on the basis of legitimate public interest, onEarly Day Motion (EDM) 2586.

In May this year, the Office of the Information Commissioner agreed that Defra hadcorrectly applied s.41 (confidentiality) to the report concerning Peter Jolly’s Circusbut that it had incorrectly applied sections 38 and 41 of the Act (health and safetyand confidentiality) to the two reports concerning the GBC.

Defra was instructed to release the reports on the GBC in 2008. The (rather scant)reports noted: animals unable to express normal behaviours; little space; belowstandard cat enclosures; cubs born while on the road; group-living animals keptisolated; camels and reindeer kept indoors all winter, no access to fields; rabbitskept in poor quality, tiered accommodation. The inspectors expressed concernabout the welfare of dogs and horses not being included in their remit (theGovernment’s proposals do not include domestic animals).

Secret and toothless inspections with little or no public accountability. Unless ofcourse it serves the circuses to use them for their own promotional ends. Whowould have thought it?

ADI Freedomof Information

complaintexposes

secretinspections

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

The Greek Government has banned theuse of all animals in circuses following asix-year campaign by ADI and the GreekAnimal Welfare Fund (GAWF), backedby over 50 local animalprotection groups. Thenew animal protectionlaw also addresses anumber of importantissues concerning strayanimals.

During the campaign wefilmed horrific misery,such as a hippoconfined in a small, filthy cage on theback of a truck with a stinking poolbarely bigger than a bathtub.

The Greek campaign, like many othersaround the world, really took off in 1998with the launch of ADI’s ‘Ugliest Show onEarth’ video – the world’s first long-termdeep undercover investigation of animalcircuses. The exposure of the sufferingof animals in UK and European circusesand winter quarters shocked the world. Itresulted in three unprecedented crueltyconvictions in the UK.

Over the next few years, it helpedcampaigners to secure bans in townsand cities in South America, the US,Asia, the UK and Europe. Some nationalbans were gained, too, such asSingapore and Costa Rica; othersfollowed. And towns such asThessaloniki in Greece acted quickly.

In 2006, we decided to build on thesuccesses in Greece and press fornational legislation. Armed with a newinvestigation in Greece, we joined forces

with GAWF and produced specialcampaign materials.

A series of media launches were held insuccession in Crete, Thessaloniki and

Athens.

More bans in townsand cities followed, inPatras, Xanthi,Eleftheron, Kavala,Glika Nera Attikis,Elefsina, Lamia andNea Makri, Thermi,Kalamaria andPrevezaMalia,

Kalamata, Serres and Aridea Pellas.

Footage of animals suffering in circusesin Greece, including an elephant beingbeaten and dragged with a bullhook atCirco Massimo in Florina, disgusted thepublic and people wanted action.

Over the next four years anational schools writing andpainting competition included hundredsof entries condemning circus suffering.

By 2010, the Ministry of Agricultureindicated that there would be a ban; ittook two more years to secure it.

Greece is the second country in Europe,behind Bosnia and Herzegovina, to banany and all animals from circuses.Austria and Croatia currently have banson wild animal acts, and severalEuropean countries including Portugaland Denmark have measures to ban orphase out wild animals in circuses.

Bolivia was the first country to introducea national ban on any and all animalsfrom circuses. This led to the ADIenforcement operation with the Bolivianwildlife authorities, rescuing every animal(lions, primates, other wild animals andhorses) from circuses that defied the law.

ADI and GAWF are committed toassisting the Greek Government withenforcement of the ban.

Please help us

continue to expose

and end the

suffering.

Please donate.

ADI & NAVS

Stop Circus Suffering

Victory!Greece bans all animalcircuses

BANNED

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnational

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnational

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012 13

Below: ADICampaignsDirector TimPhillips isinterviewed duringa series oflaunches acrossGreece.

14 The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012

Stop Circus Suffering

When we first placed our team of field officers deep inside the SouthAmerican circus industry in 2005 for two years, we could never have daredimagine that our findings would send such a shock wave across the entirecontinent. Following the launch in 2007, governments have acted decisivelyto end the suffering.

Some of the most shocking scenes of the investigation were filmed inEcuador: monkeys living on chains in squalor; a bull being beaten to hisknees; the elderly lion Indiano (above), in a cage little bigger than his body,being dragged and kicked; a donkey being kicked and dogs being repeatedlybeaten.

Paraguay

Paraguay has become the latest country to ban the use of wild animals incircuses. Resolution 2002/12, issued by the Secretary of the Ministry of theEnvironment (Secretaría del Medio Ambiente), was issued in early June.

All shows (public, commercial or ‘educational’) are banned. Although animalcircuses can transport their animals across the country, they cannot exhibit them inpublic. ADI is in touch with the authorities to offer any assistance necessary.

Ecuador

Ecuador’s Ministry of Environment has issued Ministerial Regulation 0062, which:protects wild animals from acts or omissions which would cause suffering, injury ordegrade the animals; bans the use of native wild animals in circuses; restricts andregulates exotic wild animals through welfare conditions; closes Ecuador’s bordersto circuses with native or exotic wild animals; bans acts that could cause harm toanimals and cruelty in training; prohibits breeding of exotic wild animals.

ADI is in liaison with government officials about further provisions.

Bans and restrictions are also in place in Bolivia and Peru; legislation is beingdiscussed in Colombia, Brazil, Argentina and Chile, with campaigns in othercountries under way.

Victory!Paraguay

andEcuador

ban

wild animal acts

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

BANNED

Bill 52/2011 which prohibits the use ofexotic, wild and domestic animals intravelling circuses and provides forpenalties for violations, has passedsuccessfully through Colombia’s House ofRepresentatives. It has cross partysupport, with sixteen members ofdifferent political parties signed up.

Tabled in August 2011 by Rep. AugustoPosada of the Colombian Congress, theBill now moves on to the Senate. TheADI team (above) campaigned intenselyall day and then saw the Bill pass thisimportant second stage.

Bogotá bans animal circuses

However, leading the way in Colombia isthe capital city, Bogotá. The Mayor’s newDevelopment Plan included a ban on theuse of animals in circuses within thecapital and this passed overwhelmingly,with 36 votes in favour and just 8 against.

ADI Bogotá congratulates Mayor GustavoPetro (pictured below with ADI’s EduardoPeña), the city councillors who made thispossible, especially Councilman RobertoSaenz, and the local animal organisationsand citizens who worked alongside us toachieve this ban.

ADI’s campaign to end the use of animalsin circuses in Colombia began in 2007with our shocking undercoverinvestigation. A particularly brutal incidentinvolved a female chimpanzee namedKarla, who was punched in the face andwhipped with a chain by a trainer.

In circus after circus, we uncoveredtraumatised animals living in inadequate,barren and unnatural conditions, with littlespace to exercise and display naturalbehaviours. Animals were also kepttogether with incompatible species,resulting in a lack of social interaction.

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

Colombiamovescloser tocircus ban

Eighteen months of painstakingdrafting and preparations led upto the final two days inWashington D.C. when, on 2ndNovember 2011, ADI and thePerforming Animal WelfareSociety (PAWS) launched H.R.3359, the Traveling Exotic AnimalProtection Act (TEAPA). Introduced by Congressman Jim Moran(D-VA), ADI Ambassadors Bob Barker(award winning TV host of The Price IsRight) and Jorja Fox (actress, known to73 million CSI viewers as Sara Sidle)presented the bill to the media, togetherwith Jan Creamer of ADI and Ed Stewartof PAWS.

The packed press conference wasstreamed live online and watched byover 3,000 viewers.

Congressman Jim Moran described howthe bill would ban the use of exotic andwild animals, “The intent is to restrict themost egregious and inhumaneconditions” adding, “How we treatanimals is areflection of ournation’s moralcharacter.”

ADI Chief Executive Jan Creamer spokeof the scientific studies and the videoand photographic evidence gathered inour undercover investigations, whichunderpins H.R. 3359.

Jan introduced the new ADI video, whichshowed a flurry of undercover sceneswith elephants, tigers and other wildanimals in US circuses being viciouslyhit, hooked and shocked by theirhandlers. The animals pacing endlesslyin tiny cages, or straining at the end ofshort chains, gave attendees a briefglimpse into the misery that makes upthe life of circus animal.

PAWS co-founder Ed Stewart gave theperspective of a sanctuary caring for wildanimals noting that any captivity is acompromise, “I can tell you right now:there is no state-of-the-art keepinganimals in captivity. The state-of-the-artis Zimbabwe, and India, and the wild.”

ADI consultant Dr. Mel Richardson, awildlife veterinarian with more than 40years experience, “There is no way youcan provide the physical, psychological,social wellbeing of any wild

animal in atravelling situation.”

Cameras flashedas CSI star JorjaFox spoke

eloquently about whether circusesprovide an educational experience forchildren, concluding that children “wouldactually be very disappointed in us forbringing them to these places.”

TV personality Bob Barker anchored theevent as he passionately described thetraining and lifelong suffering of circusanimals.

Ten co-sponsors of the bill signed upimmediately, putting the bill on its paththrough Congress, and ADI is preparedfor a long, hard journey to victory.

Representative Moran summed up in hisresponse to a question about the

likelihood of success:

“Anything that’s worth doing is

not likely to be easy. But we know

it’s not going to happen if we

don’t make the

effort.”

ADI launches Bill

in U.S. Congress

to ban

wild animals in circuses

Above: Makinghistory - ourpacked pressconference at theUS Congress.

Below speakersaddressing thelaunch of the newBill (left to right):

Congressman JimMoran; ADI ChiefExecutive JanCreamer; PAWSco-founder EdStewart; actressJorja Fox; ADIveterinarian Dr MelRichardson;Celebrity andphilanthropist BobBarker.

genetic modification (gM) hasbeen the biggest growth area inanimal experimentation for twodecades. More than half of theexperiments in the UK are now ongenetically modified and harmfulmutant animals – 1.6 million. Theseare the animals the animal researchcommunity want to scrub from therecords.

An undercover investigation by theNAVS takes you inside the MedicalResearch Council (MRC) Mammaliangenetics Unit in Harwell, oxfordshire.This is the reality of a gM factorychurning out animals that are

discarded by thesackload.

gM animals havebeen heralded as a

new research tool.

The animals are given a deliberategenetic defect; prolonged suffering arisesfrom repeated surgeries, egg collection,implantation, repeated blood and tissuetesting.

They live in tiny spaces, in sterile, barrenenvironments with no stimulation.

The GM process itself can cause longerpregnancies, higher birth weights,increased deaths at birth.

Finally, there is the effect of the geneticdefect itself – severe health problems,mutations, premature death.

only 3-5% of the babies actually havethe desired genetic defect, so hugenumbers are killed and discarded.

The main animal facility at theMammalian Genetics Unit at Harwell canhouse 65,000 mice2. The problems ofover breeding and an inability to managecolonies, coupled with staffinadequacies, meant keeping control of

the colonies was almost impossible.

The NAVS investigator notedconfusion in the breeding of

mice and signs of copulation infemales being missed,

resulting in unplannedlitters3.

On one occasion ayoung male mouse hadbeen mated by hisfather and when heremoved the“copulatory plug”from his anus, halfthe hair around hisbottom also cameaway. Parents alsoattacked and ate

their pups.

The NAVS investigator attempted toprevent the deaths of some small mousepups by leaving them with their mothersa little longer, but was reprimanded andtold to accept that ‘some will die’3.

The aim of most GM projects is to createanimals with a particular trait, in order to“model” human conditions – animals areintended to be abnormal in some way.Deformities and abnormalities included:severe limb deformities; fused lunglobes; Huntington’s disease (HD) micewith hard lumps in their abdomens,strong tremors, immobility, priapism(painful swelling of the penis) and weight

loss of up to 30%; cataractsand other eye problems;mutants with extremely shortfaces and upturned nosescaused by abnormal bonegrowth; self harm, such asanimals chewing throughtheir own skin andcongestive heart failurewhich caused one mouse toswell to about three timesnormal size3.

On one occasion, female mice aged 3.5+weeks were put to mate with malesabout three times their size. The oldermales tried to mate with the females whobecame distressed and vocalised3. Onanother occasion, an animal had to bekilled following fighting.

As with many of our previous undercoverinvestigations, there were examples ofcage “run outs” (where water leaks intothe cage). This leaves the animals in wetcages, which can result in severe cold,discomfort and even death. One mousehad suffered a run out and its feet andface had become bright pink. It appearedto have hypothermia and so was killed3. References: 1. Rose, M (2009) “Welfare Phenotyping of Genetically-modifiedMice” ATLA, vol. 37, pp: 181-186. 2. Contemporaneous notes 07/08. 3.Contemporaneous notes 06.

© N

atio

nal A

nti-

Viv

isect

ion S

oci

ety

Exposed! Inside a GM animal

factory

© N

atio

nal A

nti-

Viv

isect

ion S

oci

ety

Inside a GM animal

factory

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 201216

Investigations

Body count at MRCHarwell: The deathtoll of Britain’s GMindustry runs intomillions.

© N

atio

nal A

nti-

Viv

isect

ion S

oci

ety

MORI poll found that 31% of people didnot trust the process, while 65% ‘wouldnot be surprised’ if unlicensedexperiments go on behind closed doors.

The Home Office employed 21 full-timeinspectors to assess and police the 3.7million experiments conducted during2010. Armed with a Home Officelicence, laboratory employees canundertake procedures that wouldotherwise render them liable toprosecution under the Animal WelfareAct 2006, including poisoning, braindamage, and the introduction ofcancerous tissue and lethal pathogens.

It is unlikely that negligence, or wantoncruelty, would take place in the presenceof an inspector and therefore must surelygo undetected. CCTV cameras wouldenable there to be a record in the eventof complaints either from ourinvestigation or whistle-blowers.Huntingdon Life Sciences have simplydenied the level of prolapses in themonkeys that our investigator recorded.Spot checks of footage could alsoassess the day to day care of theanimals – and could deter some abuse.

The Home Office reports annuallyon serious violations of licenceconditions. Examples in 2009-10included animals beinginadvertently starved to death,drowned, decapitated, suffocated,poisoned or killed by overheating.

Undercover investigations by the NAVSin UK laboratories over the past decadehave highlighted animal abuse, lack ofcare, and problems that were notidentified in routine Home Officeinspections, including:

oxford University: Technicianslaughing and joking as they smashedmice against bench tops to kill them andanimals torn open by hand to have theirorgans ‘harvested’.

Huntingdon Life Sciences: Monkeyssuffering prolapses due to stress afterbeing restrained; monkeys beingexperimented on in front of othermonkeys, against proper practice.

Institute of Neurology: A cat dyingafter suffering for days when the animalreceived inadequate post-operative care.

Charing Cross & Westminster MedicalSchool: A laboratory losing its HomeOffice licence after the NAVS revealedliving animals thrown into dustbin bagsfor disposal.

CCTV in animal labs is a cost-effectiveway for the Home Office to meet itsregulatory obligations, especially at atime when the department facesbudgetary cuts that could reduce thenumber of inspections of licensedpremises. CCTV cameras could alsohelp address growing public scepticismabout regulatory controls and animalprotection in laboratories. A 2009 Ipsos

Home Officestudies plan forCCTV monitoringin animal labs

A joint proposal by NAVS andAnimal Aid for the introduction ofCCTV cameras in animal researchestablishments is underconsideration by the Home Office.

The plan has already beendiscussed at recent meetingsbetween ourselves and officialsresponsible for animal experiments,and was included in the NAVSresponse to the GovernmentConsultation on the new EUDirective 2010/63, last summer.

Representatives of the biomedicalresearch industry are now to beapproached by the Home Office to

test their reaction to the scheme.

We believe the current Home Officeinspections represent only a snapshotinto laboratory practice, and thereforecannot reflect day-to-day activity norprevent serious abuse.

The proposals have been given addedweight after supermarkets insisted thattheir slaughterhouse suppliers installCCTV – a scheme backed by the FoodStandards Agency. This followed anAnimal Aid investigation of nineslaughterhouses using fixed hiddencameras, which led to two people beingconvicted of cruelty to pigs – see p8.

ADI investigations have shown animalcircuses making a complete mockery ofinspections – see p10.

Who is there to watch them?

© N

atio

nal A

nti-

Viv

isect

ion S

oci

ety Who is there to

watch them?

An NAVS fieldofficercaptures onfilm alaughinganimaltechnician atOxfordUniversity,swinging amouse by thetail andsmashing theanimal into adesktop.

But who isthere whenwe are not, inthis mostsecretivearea ofanimalsuffering inthe world?

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012 17

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 201218

Who is there to watch them?

Most of these ‘infringements’ are self-reported and therefore probablyrepresent a small proportion of the truenumber. Despite such infringementsoccurring each year, only once havelegal proceedings been started by theHome Office. This followed nationaltelevision coverage of dogs beingslapped, and admissions by laboratorystaff of the fraudulent generation of data.

Because of the high level of publicmistrust about the regulatory process,our proposal calls for an independentcommittee to monitor footage. Memberswould include a veterinarian,independent scientists, animal behaviourand welfare experts, and representativesfrom animal welfare groups. One or morefull-time specialist staff would viewrandomly selected sequences of footageobtained from establishments on a rollingbasis, and report back. The Home Officeitself would have access to all footage.

NAVS Campaigns Director, Tim Phillipssaid: “This proposal will not end all theterrible suffering of animals inlaboratories, but it represents a small,practical step. At a stroke, camerasmonitoring animal research facilities

could eliminate some of the grossabuses, mistreatment, poor handling, oranimals being killed and experimentedon in front of others. With the rightindependent oversight there is anopportunity here to change how animalexperiments are policed in the UK andbring it more in line with publicexpectations and concerns. Animallaboratories are bristling with securitycameras, they have multiple checks andscreening to ensure journalists orundercover investigators cannot getinside, all we are asking is that some ofthat security be employed to protectanimals.”

Animal Aid Director, Andrew Tyler:“Laboratory workers conducting animalexperiments have a special dispensationto inflict the kind of suffering on animalsthat would ordinarily get them locked up.That places on them, and on the HomeOffice, which authorises the activity, aduty to take every possible step toreduce animal suffering. No lab worker isgoing to engage in gross unauthorisedcruelty in front of an inspector. ButCCTV cameras can pick up suchbehaviour. Better still, they can preventit. Gross incompetence is also moredifficult to conceal and cover up ifcameras are watching. Cameras are nowgoing into slaughterhouses because thepublic and key sectors of the foodindustry itself demand it. With the publicalso deeply sceptical about what goes onbehind the locked doors of labs, the casefor installing CCTV in vivisectionestablishments is overwhelming.”

The NAVS/Animal Aid proposal is alsoendorsed by Four Paws and OneKind.

Case study: Suffering catsAt the Institute of Neurology, the NAVSinvestigator recorded how cats undergoingnerve experiments received inadequate post-operative care. Subsequently, the HomeOffice confirmed that the project had beensuspended, briefly, and that two post-operative cats had been euthanised.However, one of our most important

questions was never addressed: why was the licensee not overseeing the cats aftersuch a serious operation? The Home Office inspector was present at the laboratoryon the day of the post mortem of one cat, but had not been present for the two daysfollowing the operation when the animal was suffering, nor when the animal waseuthanised, four days before the inspector’s visit. CCTV would, in this instance,clearly have enabled the inspector to have assessed the actual levels of post-operative care and oversight by the licensee, giving a much fuller and more candidpicture than the post mortem results and accounts given by laboratory personnel.

Two HLSworkers pindown andtest on amonkey – insight andhearing ofothermonkeys(contravenesguidelines).

When we arrived to seize eight lions inone cage from the Cavallini Circus atSan Borja, Bolivia, things becameheated. There was shouting, shoving, aknife was produced by the circus ownerand the tyres of the trailer were slashed.In the middle of it all, a worker pointed toa brown horse tied to a tree – he was thelions’ dinner.

We said nothing, but the horse was notgoing to be left behind. Once Bam Bam,Morena and their starving family, Martaand Maria, cubs Rosita, Rosario andRosa and their deformed, sickly brotherCampeon, were secured, Janapproached the little brown horse.

Jan: “I slipped over to him whileeveryone was working on the truck. Hewas quiet, with gentle brown eyes. Wesimply had to take him. I called to TimPhillips and to the son of the circus

owner and said we would

Tim the Horse

Tim the Horse

© N

atio

nal A

nti-

Viv

isect

ion S

oci

ety

© N

atio

nal A

nti-

Viv

isect

ion S

oci

ety

The Animal Defender & Campaigner l Spring/Summer 2012ADI & NAVS 19

Research Without Animals

take him with us and find him a home. Inamed him after our Tim!

“This was a remote area, we’d flown inby light aircraft. The lions were headingaway on our truck, but now we had ahorse and if we left him behind I wassure he would be someone’s dinner. Halfour team were flying back to Santa Cruz,others were now on the road with thelions, and five of us were stranded inSan Borja because we could not fly atnight – and now we had a horse!

“Luckily, a local offered a field behind hishome – another kind gesture from themany Bolivians who supported ourrescues. The grandparents of one of ourteam owned a ranch where wild andsemi domesticated horses were runningfree – somehow we would get Tim there.

“One of our field officers stayed with Tim,obtained a vehicle and veterinarycertificates, arranged for a farrier to trimTim’s hooves, and finally transport Tim tohis new home in the Trinidad Region. Wedon’t like to leave anyone behind.“

Gentle Tim the horse took a while tosettle into his new home and find friends– he was too timid to join the wildhorses, but found a friend of his own,Rosita.

A stray foal has joined them so he nowhas his own family group.

They wander the countryside on theranch in Trinidad, doing as they please.

Tim the Horse

Tim the Horse

New model for breast cancer researchThe Lord Dowding Fund has teamed up withresearchers at the University of Leeds on a groundbreaking, all human model of breast cancer. Ourprimary aim is to validate two in vitro models – a 3Dcell culture model and a tissue slice model.

The 3D cell culture model is the first to contain the 3major epithelial (lining) and stromal (connective andsupporting) components of the breast. The humanbreast tumour tissue slice model will allow validationof the 3D culture model, ensuring that it retainscharacteristics representative of the original tumour.

Data produced so far has been encouraging, andconfirms that the 3D model is a good representationof living breast tissue. The team has also obtainedsamples of both normal and tumour containing breast tissue, and successfully culturedthe samples for up to 7 days. These in turn have been treated with different doses ofthree breast cancer drugs – tamoxifen, doxorubicin and exemestane.

Dr Valerie Speirs, who leads the team at the Leeds Institute of Molecular Medicine(LIMM), part of the University’s School of Medicine, said: “We are very grateful for thegrant from the LDF which has enabled us to carry out this important work. Breastcancer is a complex disease with several different molecular alterations involved in itsdevelopment and progression, so we need a comprehensive approach and look toultimately improve the efficacy of target-based therapy in breast cancer. We areexcited about this project, which cannot easily or accurately be replicated in animalmodels, and are very happy to support the ethos of the LDF.”

These models will be validated against published data, to show that they are viablereplacements for animals. Moving medical research towards these advanced methodsis good for people and animals, this project highlights the vital role our LDF plays indeveloping modern research techniques.

Europe’s first paediatric MEG scannerA brain scanner specifically for children – currently one ofonly three in the world – forms part of pioneering newresearch facilities at Aston University in Birmingham. TheAston Brain Centre (ABC), which opened in October,brings together a unique suite of equipment and facilitiesfor brain research, from child development to ageing, allwith support from the LDF.

The Centre specialises in areas including epilepsy, dyslexia, autism, ADHD, sleepingdisorders and metabolic disease. The ABC will also provide a referral service for theNational Health Service (NHS), providing innovative diagnostic services unavailablewithin the NHS. Speaking at the launch, Director Professor Paul Furlong, said: “AstonUniversity has a 40-year track record of research leadership in the study of braindevelopment and imaging. Our team of scientists will be working to understand howthe brain works in health and disease, using the latest technologyto study all aspects of brain function throughout a person’s lifefrom individual brain cells through to the whole brain.”

New ScienceThe latest issue of New Science, the magazine of the LordingFund for Humane Research, is available now, with news of ourcurrent research projects and the latest developments in non-animal research techniques and projects. New Science is sent toall LDF contributors but is also available on request to NAVS andADI supporters.

If you would like a free copy please call 020 7630 3340.

© L

eeds

Inst

itute

of

Mole

cula

r M

edic

ine /

LD

F

MCF-7 modelshowing the cell-cell adhesionmarker e-cadherin.

© A

nim

al D

efe

nders

Inte

rnatio

nal

© A

ston U

niv

ers

ity

Millbank Tower, Millbank, LONDON, SW1P 4QP, UK. Tel: +44 (0)20 7630 3340 e-mail: info@ad-international.orgwww.ad-international.org • www.navs.org.uk • www.ldf.org.uk

© A

nim

al

Defe

nd

ers

In

tern

ati

on

al

� Yes! I would like to join ADI, NAVS and LDF’s efforts to end animal abuse and suffering around the world.Please complete this form in BLOCK CAPITALS, using a ball point pen, and return by post to

Animal Defenders International, Millbank Tower, Millbank, LoNDoN, SW1P 4QP, UK.

Name: ...................................................................................................................................................... Address: ................................................................................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Postcode: ...................................................................................................We are sometimes asked by similar organisations if they may write to our supporters. We would allow this only if the organisation is reputable.

This allows us to raise funds for our work, if you DO NOT wish your name to be included, please tick here �

Please accept my donation of � £100 � £50 � £25* � £15 � £5 £ ............................................................... other* A donation of £25 or more gets you a year’s subscription to our magazine and other mailings

� Please accept my Cheque/Postal Order, (payable to ADI) or please debit my: � Visa � Mastercard � Switch/Maestro, Issue Number����Card number Valid from Date Expiry Date

���������������� ���� ����Cardholder’s Name: ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Cardholder’s Signature: ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... Date ........................... / .........................../ ...........................

� Please sign me up for ADI, NAVS and LDF email alerts! My email address is ......................................................................................................................................................................................

� I would like to give on a regular monthly basis, please send me more information.

� Please send me more information about Animal Adoptions.

Please send me � 5 � 10 � 25 � 50 ............... (other) Stop Circus Suffering leaflets.

Please send me � 5 � 10 � 25 � 50 ............... (other) Animal Experiments the Facts leaflets.

Please send me � 5 � 10 � 25 � 50 ............... (other) Huntingdon Life Sciences EXPOSED leaflets.

Please send me � 5 � 10 � 25 � 50 ............... (other) Animal Adoption leaflets.

Please send me � 5 � 10 � 25 � 50 ............... (other) LDF: Research Without Animals leaflets.

Please send me � 5 � 10 � 25 � 50 ............... (other) Good Charities Guides.

�

Help us to help them.You can make a difference. Please send a donation today

DONATE NOW!

Scan this QR code onyour smart ‘phone