AWI Quarterly

The Kingdom of the Pigs

By Vangelis Stoyannis

The traveller heading from the city of Trikala towards the Pindos mountain range (Southern Alps) sees the imposing passage of the "Gate" opening in front of him. Through this passage—which looks like a wound opened by the sword of a Giant during the mythical times—Lethe, the river of Oblivion, flows towards the plain which emerged from the bottom of the inner sea. Through this Gate, 13 centuries before Christ, the servants of Aesculapius passed, bringing the miraculous mountain herbs to the father of Medicine. Through this Gate nations and civilizations, merchants and invaders passed towards the plain. In the 11th century B.C. the Doric Nation, and in the 2nd century B.C. the Roman Legions passed, heading towards Pidna for the battle which determined the fate of the Macedonian King Perseus.

The mountains, the Gate and the plain. The cradle of the 32 greek nations, their passage towards history and the place where the discovery of agriculture and stockbreeding gave birth to civilization. The Gate, of legends and history, is a place of rare beauty, imposing and ancient which, when you get closer, makes you feel the unbearable burden of history on your shoulders. The Gate leads also to the ancient kingdoms of the farmers, who cultivated wheat for the first time, and the stockbreeders who utilized the acorns, chestnuts and the rich mountain grasslands in order to feed their herds of goats, sheep, pigs and small cows. People still cultivate wheat in the plain and still pasture their animals on the mountains.

November 2000. A few kilometers on the right of the Gate, on the mountain roots, on the line where the short mountain range of Hasia connects Pindos with Olympus and marks the plain towards the north, there lie the stockbreeders' villages: Pialia, Megarhi, Oihalia, Diasselo, Eleftherohori.

Since the ancient times, Pialia has been a village of pig breeders and shepherds. Each family owns about 30 female pigs and 200 sheep or goats. The village of Pialia is a place where the 21st century meets the 13th century B.C. Today the village, built on the foot of the mountain, lives simultaneously in two ages. The families living at the side of the plain breed their pigs in small, industrial-type farms. The families living at the side of the mountain, breed free ranging pigs in the forest. Their farms are simply small, wooden constructions, under ancient walls (possibly the walls of the ancient kingdom). There, they enclose the female pigs when they give birth in order to keep the newborns safe from wolves and bears until they are a month old. Then, the young pigs and their mothers are freed into the forest. Apart from some corn that they give to the animals in order to get them used to returning to the farm at night, the animals feed on what they find in the ancient forest: roots, acorns, chestnuts, and mushrooms.

Those are strange pigs, not like those bred in the industrial farms. Their owners crossbreed pigs of ancient races with wild boars they catch on the mountain, the result being that almost every farm breeds its own race of animals. Their productivity and output are extremely close to the output of improved hogs which are bred at the industrial farms of the plain. The health level of those animals could produce a nervous breakdown of the veterinarians and antibiotic salesmen of the 21st century.

These are stockbreeders who live in two ages. Their houses have the comforts of a 21st century house, they themselves use mobile phones and go to their farms in modern pick-up trucks. They still bake their bread, however, on woods according to the ancient way and throw coins in the coffins of the dead, in order for them to be able to pay the ferryman who will take them to the other world.

The answer to the question of the contemporary traveller, how those people survive together with their animals in the age of industrial stockbreeding, is simple.

They base their survival on memory. Here come the inhabitants of the near villages, those who insist stubbornly to cultivate wheat in 4 hectare fields, in order to buy pigs, sausages and pork meat for their Christmas table. From here the families of the plain buy small pigs which they will breed at their houses for Christmas. Ancient people, keeping still alive the ancient tradition. The pig-fatlings in December, to honour the Goddess of Agriculture Demetra, survived through the Christian age together with the Christmas customs of the Greeks. The stockbreeders of free ranging pigs survived as well. It is not by chance that such stockbreeding farms still survive at the ancient places: in Pialia, at the ancient kingdom of hogbreeders; at the foot of Olympus, the mountain of the Gods; in Arcadia, at the mythical kingdom of Lycaon; in Thrace, at the ancient kingdom of Diomedes; at Vermion, the cradle of the ancient Macedonians. That is, where memory still transforms the places into ways.

Perhaps such places show us the solution to the tragic dead-ends of the contemporary industrial stockbreeding, with the inhuman breeding conditions, the antibiotics and the products of dubious quality. Perhaps the solution for our modern problematic societies also lies here, through the activation of people's memory.

In the 13th century B.C., when Ulysses returned to Ithaca after his 10 years of wandering, he couldn't go to his palace. The King's palace was invaded by suitors who wanted to kill him in order to marry his wife and change things in his kingdom. Homer, the blind poet, says that the King found shelter at the house of Evmeos, his loyal pig shepherd, where he prepared his strategy.

Is this just a coincidence or does the blind poet give a lesson, 33 centuries after his era? Perhaps, after all, the voyages and adventures Ulysses suffered because he defied the Gods is a symbol of contemporary corporate man who, confused, breaks natural laws.

Is returning a solution? Nobody knows. The fact is that in Greece, at the place which once was a way, the descendants of Evmeos, the loyal pig shepherd, still survives.

Photo: A wild boar with four domestic free-range pigs on a mountain-top pasture. (Vangelis Stoyannis)

Ducks-Yet Another Animal Factory Victim

As the old adage puts it, ducks are not adapted to exist without access to water, but that is exactly what 24 million ducks being raised in deplorably inhumane conditions on duck factories throughout the US are being forced to do each year.

Part of the ducks' sensitive upper bills are cut off, as shown above at Grimaud Farms, causing excruciating life-long suffering. (Viva!USA)

The most common ducks in these factories descend from the largely aquatic Mallard. They can never fly or swim and live in filthy sheds crammed together with hundreds of other ducks. They are denied access to sufficient water for bathing and preening, which is essential to their health. Such deprivation often results in serious eye problems and eventual blindness. They can barely walk because of bone deformities caused by slatted or wire mesh floors.

One of the cruelest practices is bill trimming or "debilling," which destroys the ducks' ability to fulfill their natural instincts to preen and forage for food. The very sensitive top portion of the bill is burned off with a stationary blade or cut off with a knife or scissors without anesthesia, in an attempt to prevent pecking and cannibalizing of other ducks in the overcrowded shed. According to Sarah Stai, a Muscovy duck expert from the University of Miami, this practice does not necessarily address confrontation among Muscovy ducks, which are known to fight with their feet and wings.

According to lauren Ornelas of Viva!USA, the organization responsible for exposing the cruelty perpetrated on ducks, the largest supplier of factory raised ducks in the US is Maple Leaf Farms headquartered in Indiana, which produces about 15 million ducks a year. Grimaud Farms, located in California and is a major producer of Muscovy factory-raised ducks, processes as many as 8,000 ducks a week. Muscovy ducks are the only modern domestic duck not descended from the Mallard. Their wild counterparts are strong flying birds that inhabit wetlands near wooded areas, using trees for roosting and nesting. Despite misrepresentations by duck factory operators, the Muscovy duck is indeed a species of waterfowl and does require full body access to water.

Colored Wild Muscovies are drastically different than their domestic cousins  raised for food. (USDA)

Grimaud contacted the University of California at Davis to evaluate its duck husbandry practices. A summary of the study released by Ralph Ernst, Extension Poultry Specialist at the UC Davis, confirmed that Grimaud is indeed an industrial duck factory. The report justifies Grimaud's practice of bill trimming and confinement as a "carefully planned program for duck husbandry that considers the welfare of the ducks under their care." Mr. Ernst's writings clearly demonstrate his support and promotion of the cruel methods employed by those in the intensive animal factory industry.

Based on the initial review and findings at Grimaud, Mr. Ernst is developing a set of guidelines for raising ducks. AWI received a draft copy of the UC Davis study from Grimaud for review and comments after requesting to discuss the issue. Following consultations with avian veterinarians from the Association of Veterinarians for Animal Rights and the Muscovy duck expert at the University of Miami, AWI determined that the study, if enacted as written, is far from humane.

If you shop in any of the following stores please urge them to stop selling ducks raised in cruel and inhumane duck factories such as Maple Leaf and Grimaud Farms: Wal-Mart SuperCenter, Kroger's, Albertson's, Safeway, Trader Joe's, and Whole Foods/Fresh Fields.

Grimaud-Full of Foie Gras

Grimaud is not only the leading supplier of Muscovy ducks in the US, it also provides ducklings to Sonoma Valley Foie Gras, one of only two foie gras producers in the US-the other being Hudson Valley Foie Gras. However, this relationship does not end with the ducklings. Grimaud then markets the final Sonoma Valley Foie Gras product. Even though Grimaud claims not to be involved in the inhumane process of force-feeding the ducks, they do handle almost every other aspect of this cruel business.

All Laboratory Animals Deserve Protection

The federal Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 set minimum requirements for handling, housing, and care for dogs, cats, primates, rabbits, hamsters and guinea pigs in the premises of dealers and in laboratories. In 1970 the Act, renamed the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), was amended to extend protection to all species of warm-blooded animals. However, the regulations promulgated for enforcement of the law arbitrarily excluded birds, mice and rats from the definition of animals, thus denying these species the protection to which they are entitled. There are no concrete figures, but it is generally agreed that approximately 95% of all animals used for research and testing are birds, mice and rats. The vast majority of laboratory animals have been left outside the law!

Birds, mice and rats used for experimentation do not benefit from the routine, unannounced inspections conducted by US Department of Agriculture (USDA) veterinary inspectors. When USDA veterinarians inspect research facilities they specifically overlook the care of birds, mice and rats. Nonetheless, from time to time, inspectors have noted horrors during their inspections including the following:

"During the inspection of the unmarked paper bags in the freezer, I discovered a moribund Long-Evans rat that was barely breathing. The frigid condition of this animal and the fact that it was surrounded by chewed plastic bags containing other dead rats, indicated that it had been in the freezer for some time, possibly a day or more. The rat slowly recovered as it warmed.

"Had this incident occurred involving a species covered by the Animal Welfare Act, the University would be liable for serious violations of sections pertaining to the IACUC [Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee], euthanasia, provision of appropriate veterinary care, and training of personnel. The fact that the animal confined in the freezer was a rat and therefore not a covered species in no way diminishes the seriousness of this egregious lack of humane care for this animal. To me, this disturbing event raises grave concerns regarding the function of the IACUC and the delivery of veterinary care."

In response to a lawsuit brought by the Alternatives Research and Development Foundation et al., USDA settled the case last fall by agreeing to initiate the process for extending the AWA's coverage to these other animals. Shortly thereafter, the National Association for Biomedical Research (NABR), a long-standing opponent of the AWA that represents research facilities and animal dealers, interceded.

Dr. Henry Foster, founder and chair of Charles River Laboratories, Foster's attorney son, and Frankie Trull created NABR in Trull's living room more than 20 years ago. Foster made clear the commercial value of promoting use of the maximum number of laboratory animals: "If you read the papers, everything seems to have carcinogenic effects. But that means more animal testing, which means growth for Charles River…so you can see why we continue to be enthused and excited" (The Wall Street Transcript, May 21, 1979). Charles River has continued to expand since that time, recently opening a Gnotobiotics operation producing about 2,000 female mice per week and a new facility the company describes as "dedicated to the contract breeding and management of genetically engineered (transgenic, knockout and mutant) mice and rats." If the Act encompasses birds, mice and rats, in addition to providing humane care and treatment, researchers will have to consider alternatives to the use of these animals—this objective conflicts with animal dealers' interest in maximizing the sale and use of animals in experimentation.

Regrettably, NABR convinced US Senator Thad Cochran (R-MS) to attach a mandate to USDA's annual appropriation from Congress preventing the agency from conducting any activity related to birds, mice and rats during this fiscal year!

Much of the biomedical industry appears to be rallying behind NABR and, unfortunately, we anticipate a sustained effort by NABR and their cohorts to deny basic protections to the millions of birds, mice and rats subject to experimentation in the United States each year.

An Elephantine Question: How Many Elephant Species are There?

Arguably the biggest conservation debate concerning elephants in the last decade has been over the international ban on trade in elephant ivory. But a new debate may be arising over how many African elephant species actually exist.

It is possible for the elephants of Amboseli and the Maasai people to coexist peacefully as they have for centuries. But will elephants live free from the ivory-seeking poachers' bullets? (MERC)

It has long been assumed that there are two elephant species: the Asian elephant (Elephas Maximus) and the African elephant (Loxodonta Africana). However, in a Report in Science magazine (Vol. 293, 24 August 2001) researchers studying DNA sequences from nearly 200 African elephants found genetic distinctions that they argue warrant separation of African elephants into two distinct species: those inhabiting the savannah (Loxodonta africana) and the smaller elephants in Africa's tropical forests (Loxodonta cyclotis). According to the Report, the two African elephant species began to diverge genetically over two and a half million years ago.

Asian elephants and most African countries' elephants (except Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, and Zimbabwe) are already listed on Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), thus prohibiting international commercial trade in their parts and products. Recognizing two distinct African elephant species may have interesting conservation implications and political repercussions under CITES. Taken together, the African elephant population may appear relatively strong. But separated into two distinct genetic populations, there would only be an estimated 400,000 savannah elephants and roughly 150,000 forest elephants.

There is the possibility that some will argue that the forest elephant, taken as its own species, is not yet protected at all. Elephant poachers and ivory traders engage in myriad machinations to engage in their deadly trade. Recent evidence suggests that the relaxation of the worldwide ban on ivory in 1997 was misperceived as sending a message that the ivory trade is soon to be reopened unfettered. In the past few months, ivory seizures have been made across the globe. Reports reveal in September 2001, 20 tusks were impounded in Zurich, Switzerland; in November 2001, 30 tusks were seized at Bangkok's airport; that same month, 230 tusks were confiscated in Egypt; the biggest recent bust came in Tanzania where 1,255 tusks were found in two homes. Ivory traders continue to take advantage of understaffed and underfunded anti-poaching and wildlife law enforcement units.

All elephant species undoubtedly warrant and need complete protection under international conservation Treaties and domestic legislation around the world. Recognizing the forest elephant as a separate, fully protected species may also call greater global attention to the deforestation rampaging Africa by greedy logging companies. Perhaps heightened conservation measures will be taken to protect the forests in which the endangered forest elephant clings to existence.

The great elephant debate just got a little more intriguing; we hope the mighty elephants will get additional protection as a result.

National Gathering Calls for Humane, Sustainable Hog Farming

On January 11, 800 people from across the US and Canada packed the New Bern, North Carolina Riverfront Convention Center to discuss strategies for combating pig factories and promoting humaneness and sustainability in pig farming.

The "Summit for Sustainable Hog Farming" was organized by Nicolette Hahn, Senior Attorney for the Water Keeper Alliance, Rick Dove, Board Member of the Water Keeper Alliance and Gary Grant, Chair of the North Carolina Hog Roundtable. The day-long event included presentations from fishermen, environmentalists, religious and labor leaders, family farmers, scientists, public officials, attorneys, community activists, and animal welfare advocates.

Poignantly, neighbors to industrial pig operations described from personal experience how pig factories fouled their houses and backyards with stench and toxic gases so intense they became ill. In chilling testimonials, they detailed incidents of intimidation, even threats of violence and death, which they received from pig factory owners or operators.

The Summit's animal welfare discussion featured presentations by Paul Willis and Sue and Kelly Ryan, family farmers who allow the pigs they raise to behave naturally, in accordance with the Animal Welfare Institute's Humane Husbandry Standards for Pigs. A video prepared by the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) in cooperation with the Water Keeper Alliance showed the Ryan family farm and emphasized the value of preserving the culture of humane family farm husbandry that is being decimated by animal factories. Mike McConnell, Chairman of Niman Ranch, urged attendees not only to fight against the growth and pollution of pig factories but also to press their grocers to carry meat from humane, sustainable family farms rather than factories. Niman Ranch is the first marketing company to require that farmers whose hogs they purchase follow AWI's humane husbandry standards. Actress Rosemary Harris, winner of a Tony, an Emmy and a Golden Globe award and an Academy Award nominee, spoke on behalf of animals in a video presentation recorded in Los Angeles where Ms. Harris was filming the movie "Spiderman." Ms. Harris called on consumers to insist on meat from humane, family farms, saying that it is the plight of the sows confined to crates, unable to walk or turn around, that moves her most. A North Carolinian herself, Ms. Harris urged North Carolinians to take the lead in prohibiting animal factory practices, just as Sweden has done in Europe. Marlene Halverson, humane farming consultant to AWI, described the long history of ethical approaches to farming with animals in Sweden and their potential for serving as models for humane, sustainable farming in the US. AWI's Farm Animal Advisor, Diane Halverson, showed how factory production of pigs violates the nature of pigs, and how this leads, inevitably, to environmental and human health catastrophes. The suffering of animals in factories was also addressed in Rick Dove's video presentation which included footage of gross cruelty to pigs in a North Carolina factory, where workers beat and dismembered conscious sows. In Mr. Dove's words, "If we solve all of the environmental problems dealing with industrial hog raising, including stopping pollution, gaining restitution for pollution and solving the neighborhood odor and health problems, but we don't solve the issue of humane treatment of animals, then we haven't solved the problem of hog factories."

A captivating keynote address was given by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. who, in addressing the extreme confinement and physical abuse suffered by pigs in factories, said: "The way that we treat animals—somebody at sometime is going to be punished for that—we as a nation or somebody. Because you can't treat another work of the Creator with the kind of indignity that we are allowing to go on in this state or others without there being some kind of karmic retribution at some point in history. I think all of us understand that, and particularly the family farmers here who understand the notion of stewardship and how an animal should be treated with dignity if we want dignity for ourselves."

The Metropolitan AME Zion Church Choir, Washington, N.C. opened the Interfaith Prayer Service that followed Mr. Kennedy's address. Sister Evelyn Mattern of the North Carolina Council of Churches led the crowd in this prayer by St. Basil the Great (329-379): "O God, enlarge within us the sense of fellowship with all living things, even our brothers and sisters the animals, to whom you have given the earth as their home in common with us. We remember with shame that in the past we have exercised our high dominion with ruthless cruelty so that the voice of the earth, which should have gone up to you in song, has been a groan of pain. May we realize that they live, not for us alone, but for themselves and for you, and that they love the sweetness of life."

Water Keeper Alliance

The Water Keeper Alliance is the umbrella organization for the fifty-eight River, Sound and Bay Keepers located throughout North and Central America and Europe. The Water Keeper Alliance protects and restores waterways—including those ravaged by pollution from animal factories—using a variety of methods, including litigation. To learn more about the Water Keeper Alliance or to view presentations delivered at the Summit, visit the organization's website at

North Carolina Hog Roundtable

The North Carolina Hog Roundtable is a coalition of state-wide, community, and neighborhood organizations, with over 65,000 members collectively, that are working toward reform of corporate pig raising. The Roundtable focuses on pig factories' threats to public health, the environment and property values and has a particular concern for the disproportionate impact of industrial pig operations on poor and minority communities.


Photos:  Pigs on industrial farms are confined to metal crates so small they cannot even turn around. Unnatural conditions in the factory thwart a pig's natural instincts, and stereoptypies, repetitive behaviors such as bar-biting shown at left, are common.

Coexisting in Kenya The Human-Elephant Conflict

By Meitamei Ole Dapash

The Amboseli Maasai-elephant Dialogue is convened under a tree by the roadside to tap the inputs of passersby, who may not be residents of that location. The forum has no chairperson, master of ceremonies, or any form of authority figurehead. (MERC)

We, the Maasai have never failed in our moral duty as guardians of wildlife. However, those with myopic understanding of our way of life and its interconnectedness with nature have consistently failed both the people and wildlife of Amboseli. -Lengete Ole Manti, Amboseli resident The Maasai people name their clans after animals such as lions, elephants, or rhinos to demonstrate the importance of wildlife prosperity in Kenya and Tanzania to the Maasai culture. Each clan advocates for the protection of its particular species, which becomes the clan's totem and symbol of prestige. Wildlife conservation in Maasailand owes its success to the Maasai traditions that prohibit the killing of wildlife or destruction of forests or any part of the natural ecosystem for commercial or any other form of consumptive use. This is why, even today, wildlife thrives in Maasailand, unlike many other areas where animals have been eliminated either for food or to create land for commercial agriculture.

Kenya's prolonged droughts in 1999 and 2000, the worst in 25 years, led to widespread competition for water throughout East Africa. Many rivers, swamps, and dams dried up, and the few water sources that survived the droughts immediately became hot spots for human-wildlife conflict. This natural catastrophe caused starvation among wildlife, livestock, and even people in some parts of Kenya.

Amboseli National Park was the most affected protected area in the country. "Empusel"

Well dug by hand by the Maasai. Maintaining water wells outside Amboseli National Park in Kenya would reduce human competition with elephants for water inside the park. (MERC)

 (Amboseli) is a Maasai word for "dry land" and is located on the northern foot of Mt. Kilimanjaro, the world's tallest freestanding mountain. Amboseli was established mainly to protect Kenya's elephants and preserve their migratory routes. Amboseli is dotted with oases (created by the melting snow of Mt. Kilimanjaro) and perennial swamp grass species. These permanent sources of water and green vegetation attracted more wildlife and Maasai livestock into the park during the recent drought period than any other time in the history of Amboseli. Consequently, human-elephant conflicts erupted leading to the spearing of eight elephants-six of whom died from their wounds, while an orphaned baby was reported to have died of starvation. Reports from Maasai indicate that within the same timeframe, two Maasai (including a mother of a three week old infant) and at least 42 livestock had been attacked and killed by elephants.

The Maasai Environmental Resource Coalition (MERC), with support from the Animal Welfare Institute, set out to create a dialogue to discuss human-elephant conflict and related conservation issues in Amboseli and find long-term solutions to the conflicts. On June 30, 2001 the first meeting took place under a huge acacia tree at Meshenani area in the Olgului/Ololarrashie group ranch, the largest, most important communal land that almost engulfs the Amboseli National Park. More than 60 people, representing twelve villages within the vicinity of Amboseli National Park, attended the meeting.

Moving testimonies were heard about the peaceful coexistence of Maasai and wildlife in the delicate balance of the ecosystems within which they live. Participants expressed serious concerns over growing threats to the survival of Maasai people, elephants, and their shared habitat in Amboseli and across Maasailand. "These threats," they said, "come from commercial agricultural expansion; sidelining of the Maasai from mainstream nature conservation; insensitive tourism practices; and continued loss of Maasai traditional lands to other modern economic enterprises. The ongoing destruction of forests, commercial hunting, and loss of wildlife migratory routes and breeding grounds must be stopped now if the future of wildlife in Kenya and Tanzania is to be guaranteed. Moreover, as we lose land and culture, elephants and other wildlife lose habitat."

Intensifying competition for limited water resources was the single most important factor responsible for human-wildlife conflicts in Amboseli. According to the participants, approximately 80% of the permanent sources of water are located in the center of the park. Additionally, women and children have to endure a 10-15 kilometer daily trudge across the dry, open Amboseli basin into the middle of the park to fetch water for domestic use. This increased human presence in the park, coupled with human-elephant-livestock convergence at the watering points, creates tremendous tension resulting in occasional deadly conflicts.

Maasai communities often are forced to take the law into their own hands by killing rogue elephants when they believe that no help is coming from the park's office. An act of this nature often escalates friction between wildlife authorities and the communities. According to one elder, "elephants hardly ever attacked people unless provoked, thirsty or instinctively reacting to an experience of past attack." Although men would sometimes successfully scare away elephants from watering points, elephants in most cases prevail by maintaining their ground and forcing people and livestock to go thirsty. Many participants pointed out that water scarcity outside the park for communities and continued habitat loss to encroaching agricultural communities were some of the serious problems undermining Maasai's centuries' old peaceful coexistence with elephants.

Conflict is also exacerbated by the Maasai's dissatisfaction about the current level of wildlife-derived benefits being extended to the local communities. Currently, Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) distributes approximately US$10,000 among the seven group ranches adjoining Amboseli National Park. The forum heard that the amount was not only meager; it was erratically given, in spite of the fact that Amboseli generates more tourists' dollars for KWS than any other park in the country. Moreover, lodges in Amboseli employ more than 1,500 people of which Amboseli residents constitute fewer than 100 people, put in the most undignified, poorly paid positions. Amboseli residents feel cheated and are increasingly becoming resentful of tourism and conservation programs alike.

The dialogue revealed that there is also pressure from wildlife consumptive use proponents to persuade and manipulate Maasai into urging the government to allow commercial hunting for trophies, particularly in communal lands, as a way of enhancing wildlife-derived benefits. Because of the problems mentioned earlier on, and the feeling that the colonial government stole Amboseli to create a wildlife preserve without consultations, the Maasai are very vulnerable to these ideas.

KWS already has expressed unequivocal interest in working with MERC and Amboseli communities to address human-elephant conflicts and a number of specific actions resulted from this valuable dialog. MERC will encourage KWS to include local communities' participation in the development and implementation of conservation programs in their localities. KWS will review the existing revenue-sharing policy with the view of increasing the community's share, while job training and placement opportunities in the tourism industry will be extended to the local communities. The Maasai have proposed the establishment of a code of conduct and ethics for the tourism industry to safeguard environmental integrity and the culture of the Maasai people. Finally, MERC is proposing the establishment of a problem animal control unit in Amboseli to respond to reports of animal attacks. This unit will be responsible for rapid response in situations where people or livestock have been attacked by elephants, lions, or buffaloes. It will also discourage people from taking action on their own to address the problem.

MERC continues to promote and sustain the peaceful coexistence necessary for the safety of both human and elephant populations in Amboseli. We need to keep focused on: handling local communities' complaints and liaising with the wildlife authorities for quick resolution; initiating water projects outside the park to minimize human-elephant contacts inside the park; and initiating community-based ecotourism programs in the Amboseli area. With the active involvement of MERC and the Maasai people, wildlife in Maasailand will be protected for generations to come.

For more information or to help the work of the Maasai Environmental Resource Coalition, contact Meitamei Ole Dapash at 2020 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 136, Washington, DC 20006, (202) 785-8787,

Marine Mammals

Navy Admits to Killing Whales,
but LFAS Steams Ahead

Two studies released in mid-December provide twin smoking guns linking the killing of whales to the use of active sonar devices by the US Navy. The first was a belated admission jointly issued by the Navy and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The agencies admit that the most plausible source of the "acoustic or impulse trauma" that caused a mass stranding of whales and dolphins in the Bahamas on March 15-16 of 2001 was the Navy testing of mid-range frequency sonar used to find submarines.

The second study was funded by the Office of Navy Research and published by Hauser, Howard and Ridgeway in the Journal of Theoretical Biology. It explores the formation of bubbles by sound waves in the supersaturated blood of deep-diving mammals. Three elements of the study are critical in our battle to stop the deployment of Low Frequency Active Sonar (LFAS):

          1) Once a sound source causes the formation of bubbles in the blood (a phenomenon in human divers called the bends) they can continue to grow on their own.

          2) Bubbles can start growing at relatively low levels of sound (under 150 decibels-ten million times less than the source level of LFAS).

          3) The mechanism that causes the bubbles to grow is independent of the frequency of the sound (giving the lie to the Navy argument that even though the Bahamas stranding was most likely caused by the mid-frequency sound they generated, that the low frequency LFAS is totally different and benign).

We are still awaiting a decision by NMFS on whether it is going to ignore all evidence and grant a "small take authorization" to the Navy to kill dolphins, whales, and other marine species by deploying LFAS, with a source level of 240 decibels, in over eighty percent of the world's oceans.

-------------------- Capture/Recapture Study Kills Dolphins

After two months at sea, a National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) research cruise that had been opposed by its own scientists returned to port in San Diego. A NMFS vessel accompanied a contracted Mexican tuna boat to intentionally harass the dwindling populations of spinner and spotted dolphins to see if the creatures are indeed stressed by being chased and netted repeatedly by boats pursuing tuna. Fifteen hundred dolphins were caught in 27 sets of the net. Some were then subjected to having transmitters bloodily bolted through their dorsal fins.

The idea was to capture dolphins repeatedly and to take blood with each capture in order to see if the stress hormones known to be present in blood would increase with each capture. But only five dolphins were caught more than once. By the time the nets were hung to dry, two dolphins were killed outright and one calf was missing and presumed dead.

As an article explained in the Fall 2001 AWI Quarterly, AWI had presented a benign alternative to this expensive, highly invasive and useless study with the help of Dr. Al Myrick, the leading NMFS expert on stress in dolphins for more than ten years. The senior NMFS scientists that we met with agreed that the planned capture/recapture study was unnecessarily invasive and would yield little new information. But they were forced to carry out the study at the insistence of Congressmen Gilchrest (R-MD) and Cunningham (R-CA) and the efforts of Ocean Conservancy's Nina Young.

The study was mandated as part of the International Dolphin Conservation Act of 1997 (dubbed the "Dolphin Death Act") that attempted to drop the trade embargo on dolphin-caught tuna. More than seven million dolphins have died in the tuna fishery in the Eastern Tropical Pacific. Evidence enough, one would think, that the technique causes stress.

--------------- Mexican Tuna Super-Seiner
Busted with 10.5 Tons of Cocaine

The drug-tainted Mexican tuna industry, which has killed tens of thousands of dolphins in defiance of US and European bans on dolphin-deadly tuna, was embarrassed once again last December when the US Coast Guard captured a giant Mexican super-seiner that was smuggling 10.5 tons of cocaine in the eastern Pacific.

The 180-foot Macel was boarded off the southwest coast of Mexico on December 21, 2001 after being under surveillance for several weeks by US Navy and Coast Guard ships patrolling the region for gangsters running cocaine and heroin from Colombia to Mexico, which is the major way-station for narcotics on the way to the US and Europe.

A total of 10.5 tons of pure cocaine, with a street value of $500 million, was found hidden in special compartments under tons of yellow fin tuna. The cocaine, ship, and 19-man crew were turned over to the Mexican Navy.

Colombian and Mexican drug cartels bought up most of the Latin American tuna fleets in the 1980's and early 1990's to smuggle their contraband and to launder billions of narco-dollars. (For the detailed report, "Dolphins Die for Tuna/Cocaine Connection," see the Spring 1999 AWI Quarterly.)

The Mexican government has failed to seize the major tuna fleets and canneries that are owned by the murderous Tijuana Cartel in partnership with powerful politicians. Even Colombia's infamous Cali Cartel is a partner in major Mexican tuna companies. And the US government has steadfastly refused to acknowledge that Mexico's tuna industry is a front for drug trafficking. Instead, the Departments of State and Commerce have been actively assisting the Mexican government and tuna industry to overturn the US dolphin-safe standard for imported tuna.

World Bank vs. Tigers in India

Green mining threatens precious habitat

By Bittu Sahgal, editor of Sanctuary Asia, India's largest circulation wildlife magazine and Daphne Wysham, research fellow of the Washington-based Institute for Policy Studies.

While the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) met in Washington behind closed doors and police barricaded this week, citizen protesters pressed environmental social justice priorities from without. World Bank and IMF officials assured the public they have these issues at heart in their internal decision-making. But skeptics counter that their lack of transparency is symptomatic of a deeper top-down elitism that promotes unsustainable development for the well to do at the cost of environmental destruction and social upheaval for the poorest.

Who is right? Who is in a position to judge? Do ordinary citizens even have a legitimate role in policing international financial institutions? U.S. taxpayers, who contribute the largest portion of World Bank funds, deserve concrete information for themselves. So here is one illustrative case study: a World Bank coal mining expansion scheme in India.

U.S. companies see a hot prospective market in India, where $250 billion will be spent on power-generating equipment in coming years. Coal is India's cheapens and most abundant power source, and until recently India's coal sector was the top recipient of World Bank development dollars.

The World Bank justifies expended coal mining in India as not only good for the economy but also for then environment. Some planned mines it is backing are even touted as "environmental showcases." But these would-be "green" mines are sited in ultrasensitive habitats India's tigers and other endangered wildlife can't live without.

In the Indian stats of Bihar, Grissa, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, some 400 new open-cast coal mines are planned. The World Bank in collaboration with Coal India, and with the tactic acceptance of the Indian Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF), is financing 25 such mines in ecologically sensitive areas as models of what it calls "good environmental practice." But the label is Orwellian; environmental devastation in the vicinity of open cast coal mines is total.

These regions of India contain many of the last remaining wild tigers on Earth, as well as other endangered species including the Asiatic elephant. Its forests contain areas identified by the World Wildlife Fund and the Wildlife Conservation Society as Level One Tiger Conservation Unit warranting the highest level of environmental protection. The forests are unique because they are still connected by fragile but working corridors that allow large mammals the range they need. The planned mines will cut off the corridors, reducing the forests to islands surrounded by human activity. Stranded tiger populations inside these "forest islands" become inbred and die out.

After initially calling the mine sites "degraded" forest unimportant to wildlife, the World Bank was joined by MOEF in eventually admitting the vital function of the corridors and that the matter "merited serious consideration." It promised local groups that it would send experts to assess the situation, but never followed through. The Environmental Impact Assessments prepared by the World Bank and the MOEF gloss over the impact of the mines on the corridors and the wildlife they host.

Nor do they official assessments include an analysis of the atmospheric impact of mining and burning more coal, impacts whose brunt is inevitably borne by developing countries as climate change accelerates. Coal is the dirtiest and more carbon-intensive of fossil fuels, releasing more greenhouse gases into the earth's atmosphere than any other source. The World Bank admits the poorest will suffer the most in a warming world.

The mines' impacts on local residents have also gone unheeded. The project sites are home to tribal communities and Neolithic art now marked for eradication. To make way for the mines, entire villages have been forcibly evicted and resettled under conditions that ensure their pauperization. Those who do benefit from the mines will do so temporarily. When the coal and the money run out, vast areas of the region will be laid waste, devoid of the indigenous communities and wildlife, and all too soon, the short-lived mining economy. Coal expansion also effectively preempts development of affordable, clean, renewable forms of energy which are desperately needed and would be of sustainable economic benefit to the region.

During his March trip to India, President Clinton visited Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve where he discussed the threats to the tiger's survival and spotted two tigers in the wild. In subsequent speeches he called on business leaders to help preserve the tiger populations as part of India's heritage. But it is U.S. eagerness for Indian economic development which encourages such perverse effects as extinguishing India's tigers and pre-empting sustainable energy development.

Whether Mr. Clinton's enthusiasm for the tiger or development bankers' professed environmentalism are sincere or not is known only to themselves. But the actual track records of the institutions involved suggest a global pattern of perverse effects, like the ones that loom in India.

Nothing about globalization is simple, but it doesn't take a policy sophisticate like Mr. Clinton or World Bank President James Wolfensohn to know that devastating forests, extinguishing wildlife and dislocating and denying sustainable livelihoods to local populations are bad things. More than one million Indian children who signed an immense "Save the Tiger" scroll know it, and have a perfect right to demand the World Bank adopt an environmentally and socially responsible energy investment strategy in India. If they can do it, U.S. taxpayers can do it, too, and hopefully, make world leaders and development bankers listen.

© 2000 News World Communications, Inc.

Reprinted with permission of The Washington Times

Photo, World Bank-sponsored mining projects in India could destroy thousands of acres of essential wildlife habitat and wipe out endangered species such as tigers, a symbol of India's robust ecological heritage.  This tiger was photographed in Kanha National park in Madhya Pradesh in Central India. (Vivek R. Sinha/Sanctuary Photo Library)

Kennedy Presents Schweitzer Medal to Lepper

On Monday, June 11th, 2001, in front of a packed Mansfield Room of the United States Capitol, the Albert Schweitzer Medal was awarded to Andrzej Lepper. Lepper, who has vowed to stop "concentration camps for animals" from taking root in Poland, is the charismatic President of Samoobrona ("Self-defense" in Polish), a major Polish rural union. "The motto that I have adopted and that is adopted by the rest of Samoobrona," Lepper highlighted, "says that if a person is not capable of loving animals and nature they will never be capable of loving another human being."

Early in 1999, Samoobrona forced the Polish government to curb a flood of agricultural imports from the European Union by blockading roads across Poland. In September 1999, after visiting areas in North Carolina infested by industrial hog factories, Lepper launched a campaign, supported by AWI, to prevent Virginia-based Smithfield Foods, the world's largest pork production company, from realizing its goal of building a network of hog factories in Poland. By June 2000, Smithfield CEO Joe Luter was forced to admit to the Washington Post that his plan to establish US "industrial-style" pig farming has no immediate future in Poland.

"Farm animals," Lepper once told the University of Michigan Law Society, "like any other living beings, possess natural instincts that need to be expressed. It is essential, therefore, to do everything in our power to allow animals raised on our farms an opportunity to live their lives in the most natural conditions possible, to treat them with respect, dignity and empathy. The right to dignity, in the case of farm animals, is the right to live without suffering and without being isolated from their natural environment."

In his remarks to the gathering (translated by Agnes Van Volkenburgh, who represents Poland on AWI's International Committee), Lepper criticized the globalists who "pursue money at all costs without paying attention to the health of people, without paying attention to the health and welfare of animals, without paying attention to nature." Lepper, the indefatigable Polish farm leader, warned Smithfield Foods Vice President, General Counsel and Senior Advisor to the Chairman, Richard Poulson, that in his efforts to expand into and invade Poland he "will always feel the breath of Samoobrona on his neck and if that is not enough he will have to feel the fist of Polish farmers." He concluded: "This medal is a huge honor not only for me, but for the entire Polish movement that's involved in this battle for the welfare of animals, the humane treatment of animals, for our environment, and for the safe future of our planet."

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., President of Water Keeper Alliance and a professor at Pace University Law School, presented the award. Water Keeper Alliance has 67 keepers around the country who seek to protect and restore waterways, including those ravaged by pollution from animal factories. Water Keeper Alliance is leading a broad legal assault against hog factories, which Kennedy has characterized as "extraordinarily cruel" and lamented what he termed the corporate hog farm's "pollution based prosperity." During the ceremony, Kennedy recalled a conversation he had with Lepper after the Polish leader toured corporate hog farms along the Neuse River in North Carolina. Kennedy remembered the poignant and provocative reaction that Lepper had, in which he was reminded of "the large state farms that were created during the communist years in Poland that were also notorious for their pollution and their capacity for treating not only the human beings who worked on the land but also the animals themselves as units of production, ignoring the consequences to the community and the environment and public health in their drive to produce short term cash."

Kennedy asserted: "I think the thing that Animal Welfare Institute has recognized better than anybody else is that the fate of animals is also our fate….We can't get away with this kind of cruelty to the creatures with whom we share this planet without having some dire karmic consequences to ourselves." Kennedy praised Lepper's heroism and courage for "standing up to these bullies" who try to move industrial hog production all over the world, and for Lepper's efforts to protect "our environment, human dignity, the dignity of these animals and of future generations." Kennedy congratulated him "for the successful battle that [he has] waged against this criminal, bullying, outlaw industry."

It was Tom Garrett, a rancher from Wyoming, who had the brilliant idea of inviting Andrzej Lepper and a delegation of Polish activists on a tour of North Carolina and Virginia to observe hog factory farming, then across the country to visit humane pig farms in the Midwest. Tom has been an advisor to the Animal Welfare Institute for many years on a variety of subjects from global wildlife Treaties to steel jaw leghold traps. Tom referred to the acute battle against corporate hog farms and the collaborative international war Samoobrona and AWI waged against them: "Through Diane Halverson's videos and Andrzej Lepper's political right cross, we stopped Smithfield cold in its grandiose scheme to take over Polish pig production with a big network of factory hog farms."

Diane Halverson, AWI's farm animal advisor, has devoted herself to preventing the suffering of millions of pigs condemned to life imprisonment in metal and concrete crates in hog factories. She wrote AWI's Humane Standards for independent family farmers who raise pigs on pasture or in straw bedded barns. Diane noted during her remarks that institutional cruelty such as that in corporate hog farms is often overlooked, but quoted Albert Schweitzer who said, "Whenever an animal is somehow forced into the service of men, every one of us must be concerned for any suffering it bears on that account."

The Animal Welfare Institute, celebrating its 50th Anniversary this year, honors individuals who have made an outstanding contribution to the protection of animals with the Albert Schweitzer Medal. This tribute, inaugurated in 1953, has been awarded to deserving individuals ranging from those of modest position who have significantly bettered the welfare of animals on a hands-on basis, to towering public figures who have engendered important changes that have improved the lot of hundreds of thousands of animals. Past recipients include Senator Hubert H. Humphrey, Rachel Carson, Senator Bob Dole and Jane Goodall.

"The ethic of Reverence for Life prompts us to keep each other alert to what troubles us and to speak and act dauntlessly together in discharging the responsibility that we feel. It keeps us watching together for opportunities to bring some sort of help to animals in recompense for the great misery that men inflict upon them, and thus for a moment we escape from the incomprehensible horror of existence."

-Dr. Albert Schweitzer


Top:  Robert F. Kennedy Jr., presenting Schweitzer award to Andrzej Lepper. 

Bottom:  Farm animals, such as these endangered Polish spotted pigs of Zlotniki, "like any other living beings, possess natural instincts that need to be expressed" said Polish farm union leader Andrzej Lepper. On June 11, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. presented Mr. Lepper with AWI's Albert Schweitzer Medal. (Jen Rinick/AWI)

Syndicate content