Why I started the Animals Asia Foundation by Jill Robinson

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, June 1999:

It is offensive and incorrect to say
that Asian people don’t care about animals.
They do––which is why I started the Animals
Asia Foundation in August 1998, after working
for 12 years as a consultant in Asia for the
International Fund for Animal Welfare. The
growing number of Asian environmental and
animal welfare groups is a clear indication that
many Asians share the concerns of animal
lovers worldwide.
Asia lacks animal protection legislation
and realistic educational programs, but
what it needs to improve the situation is help
and encouragement rather than condemnation.
Asian governments are generally receptive to
animal welfare initiatives, and many people in
the local community would welcome the
chance to join with foreign organizations in
making a difference.

Read more

Free Willy! six years later

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, June 1999:

OSLO, Norway––Responding on
four days’ notice to a Japanese plan to capture
four orcas in Norwegian waters, former
“Flipper” trainer Ric O’Barry recently scored
one of the biggest, quickest victories of his 30-
year crusade against marine mammal captivity.
Yet mass media and even Internet
animal rights forums scarcely noticed.
O’Barry was used to the silence.
Arrested on Earth Day 1970 for tryting to free
two captive dolphins, he campaigned virtually
alone for almost 20 years. Then the 1993 hit
film Free Willy! and sequels made opposition to
marine mammal captivity briefly the fastest
growing and most lucrative branch of the animal
rights movement.

Read more

Humane Societies, Guts, & Moral Leadership

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, June 1999:
Because Japan annually kills almost twice as many Dall’s porpoises as scientists believe the population can withstand,
Switzerland on May 27 asked the International Whaling Commission meeting just concluded in Grenada to protect small whales as well as large.

“It’s none of their business,” fumed Japanese delegate Mayasuki Komatsu, storming out. “We are going to continue to kill Dall’s porpoises just like you kill cows.”

Conservationists countered that Japan does not breed and raise Dall’s porpoises–but that missed the point. Even if Dall’s porpoises could be factory-farmed with the heartless efficiency applied to pigs and chickens, neither porpoises nor any other species should be raised en masse in misery and wantonly killed.

Four thousand miles away, Lynda Imburgia of Langley, Washington, hit the same note in a letter to the South Whidbey
Record, published on May 29. “I am a meat eater,” she wrote, “and would be a hypocrite to condemn the Makah whalers. What happens to the meat most of us eat is far more inhumane, on a much vaster scale.”

Rather than quit eating meat, even knowing the production process to be inhumane, Imburgia defended other cruelty. The 1985 Canadian government paper Defence of the Fur Trade anticipated the Imburgia response, as did the 1989 American Medical Association Animal Research Action Plan. So long as “the general public [is] not prepared to give up meat,” the AMA authors explained, vivisectors can defend almost anything they do by comparing it to meat animal husbandry and slaughter.

Other animal use industries got the message. Just in the two days it took to draft this editorial, we saw whalers, sealers, furriers, trappers, hunters, bullfighters, and rodeo cowboys–among others–reflexively reaching for the meat argument as their ultimate rejoinder.

Tacitly acknowledging that standard agricultural animal husbandry, slaughter, and hunting practices are inherently
inhumane, meat producers and hunters have even achieved legislation exempting themselves from humane laws in at least 29 states. Yet the meat habit is not invulnerable. The ethical arguments against meat convinced whole Asian nations to go vegetarian as long as 3,000 years ago. Their educated descendants are still overwhelmingly vegetarian, chiefly for ethical reasons. So many younger Americans are giving up meat now, from a combination of ethical and health concerns, that per capita spending on meat of all kinds, including chicken and fish, is a third lower among people under 35 than among those 55 and older.

The ecological arguments against meat were never stronger. A Union of Concerned Scientists study published on Earth Day 1999 confirmed that meat-eating, after driving motor vehicles, is the most environmentally damaging of all U.S. consumer activities. Producing grain-fed beef, the Union of Concerned Scientists found, is 17 to 20 times more damaging than making the same grain into pasta. Meat and poultry production contributes half again as much to
global warming as crop cultivation–and 70% of U.S. grain crops are raised as fodder.

The Economic and Social Research Institute of Ireland published similar data just a week later, finding that raising animals for meat produces about 29% of the Irish “global warming potential,” and 49% of total “acid rain precursors.”

The front line and the bottom line

Meat-eating is thus both the front line and the bottom line in the struggles against cruelty and habitat degradation. But where are humane societies? Picking just a few quick examples from incoming newsletters, we understand the horse-oriented Hooved Animal Humane Society, of Woodstock, Illinois, apparently still derives funds from an annual benefit pig roast–as if pigs are not also hooved animals. Individual activists first protested against the pig roast more than
10 years ago.

Orphan Pet Oasis, of Palm Desert, California, serves staff a Thanksgiving turkey. Day’s End Farm Horse Rescue, of Lisbon, Maryland, in March 1999 held a “Casino Shrimp Fest,” even as shrimpers urged the 106th Congress to ease requirements that they must kill shrimp in a matter that won’t kill endangered sea turtles as well. But Day’s End also
offered vegetarian lasagna.

The Animal Humane Society of Hennepin County, Minnesota, served meat hot dogs at its annual Walk for Animals. Asked to explain by Minnesota Farm Animal Rights Movement activist Julie Derby, Animal Humane Society assistant to the executive director Michael Petersdorf offered the whole litany of conventional excuses.

“In the 25 years of hosting the Walk for Animals,” Petersdorf began, “there have been an extremely small number of
people who have expressed concern over the choice of food served at this event. Most were complaints regarding their simply not liking hot dogs, rather than a lack of a vegetarian entree or lack of empathy for the plight of farm animals.” In effect, Petersdorf argued that because the public doesn’t care about farm animals, the Animal Humane Society need not, either.

“We consider our supporters to be well-educated professional people who are well aware of how farm animals are treated and slaughtered,” Petersdorf continued–a dubious claim when neither local news media nor the Animal Humane Society, by far the largest humane society in Minnesota, have either aired or discussed on the record the undercover video that activists Steve Wong and Dug Hanbicki made in early 1998 at the Concord Meat Processing Company and Long Chen Hmong Livestock Inc., both of South St. Paul.

ANIMAL PEOPLE specifically asked Animal Humane Society executive director Alan Stensrud to view and comment on the Wong/Hanbicki video, for the record, after we ourselves viewed the uncut tape. If he ever viewed it–and it showed cruelty that appears easily prosecutable despite the Minnesota exemptions for “standard” farm and slaughter practices–we received no comment.

Ten years earlier, we understand, actvist Becky Sandstedt had a similar experience with the Animal Humane Society after videotaping the mistreatment of downed animals at the South St. Paul stockyards, even though in the 19th century it was among the first humane societies to address abuse of cattle.

“Most of our supporters are not vegetarians,” Petersdorf went on. “The Animal Humane Society cannot jeopardize the success of its largest fundraising event by offering food that is not well-liked by the majority of the participants,” as if there were not a multitude of popular non-meat alternatives available, from apple pie to corn-on-the-cob.

“In addition,” Petersdorf said, “we cannot force our supporters to become vegetarians at an event that is intended to
raise money and create awareness of our organization,” as if even heavy meat-eaters don’t on average forgo meat at about 20% of all their meals.

“The Walk for Animals is the Society’s largest fundraiser, accounting for approximately 16% of our annual operating budget,” Petersdorf added. “Its main purpose is to raise funds, not create social awareness or instigate social reform.” Yet the original constitution of the Animal Humane Society, drafted in 1891, when it was still called the Minnesota Humane Society, stipulated that “the inculcation of humane principles” should at all times be the first objective of the organization.

“While the Society does have an obligation to promote the humane treatment of all animals,” Petersdorf acknowledged, “it has chosen to concentrate its efforts toward the domestic animals it commonly encounters. Due to budgetary restraints and the amount of work still to be done in reducing the number of animals surrendered
to shelters, the Society must remain focused on these domestic animal issues.”

But focusing day-to-day activity on dogs and cats in no way precludes adopting policies and promoting attitudes that benefit all animals. The public and media look toward humane societies to set the standards of treatment for all species; a so-called “Animal Humane Society” that neglects that duty is not worthy of the name.

“As you are well aware,” Petersdorf went on, “the hot dogs we receive for the Walk are both donated and easy to prepare,” raising the question as to whether the Animal Humane Society would also accept the opportunity to raise funds by auctioning donated hunting weapons, or a round trip to Mexico to watch bullfights and cockfights.

“If the Minnesota Farm Animal Rights Movement could provide a vendor willing to donate 200-300 vegetarian entrees that can be easily prepared the morning of the event,” Petersdorf concluded, “the Animal Humane Society would be happy to offer it as an alternative and it addition to the hot dogs we now serve.”

Derby and friends donated several hundred vegan hot dogs–but ran into resistance from the Animal Humane Society, they said, when they tried to announce their availability.

Under the circumstances, we were disgusted but not surprised to receive a report from Joanne Murphy of the Minnesota Animal Rights Coaliton that Animal Humane Society cruelty investigator Keith Stref, in testimony at a recent hearing of the Minnesota legislature, allegedly described how he spends his vacations at his sister’s farm killing runt piglets with a hammer. We asked Stensrud to confirm, deny, or clarify. He did not respond.

LaRussa sets an example

Unfortunately, these are not isolated cases. Recounts Grateful Acres Sanctuary founder Shannon Lentz, of her experience earlier this year as a participant in an online discussion group for humane professionals, “Someone suggested that a local grocery might donate hot dogs to a shelter promotion. I respectfully reminded the list that the humane ethic we try to promote should include all creatures, not just dogs and cats, and that the public looks to
humane workers to set a standard of compassion. Did I ever get e-mail! These folks were hot! You’d never have guessed they were in animal welfare.” Lentz’ message was seconded only by “a woman from Tony LaRussa’s Animal Foundation.”
St. Louis Cardinals’ manager Tony LaRussa and his wife Elaine are perhaps the most admired of many vegetarians in professional sports. Even before they lent their names to a highly regarded no-kill humane society, they were never reluctant to explain why they gave up meat, for humane reasons, nearly 30 years ago.

Other humane societies with the guts to put principle first are beginning to demonstrate that the public will respond positively to the vegetarian message. The Progressive Animal Welfare Society, for instance, of Lynnwood, Washington, is not only a leading dog-and-cat rescue agency and outspoken foe of Makah whaling, but also blew aside the whaling-is-no-worse-than-meat argument by devoting the entire Spring 1999 edition of PAWS News to the cover message “Go Veggie!”

This is not the first time PAWS has promoted vegetarianism. And the PAWS position on meat does not seem to hurt their fundraising. According to the most recent available IRS Form 990 data, PAWS annually raises and spends almost exactly the same amount as the Animal Humane Society–against stronger local competition for the animal protection dollar.

The American SPCA, whose board ousted 14-year president John Kullberg in 1991 for promoting vegetarianism, has recently published numerous articles critical of meat-eating in ASPCA Animalwatch. PIGS: A Sanctuary during mid-May took the issue one step farther. In keeping with longstanding PIGS policy, the reception for high donors at the grand opening of a new rescue farm in rural West Virginia was strictly vegan, as was the concession stand at the
public opening the following day.

“Everyone raved about the food,” reports PIGS cofounder Jim Brewer. “Many of our supporters are not vegetarians, and we had people visiting just out of curiosity who were not even supporters. People kept asking who our caterer was. We sold tons of vegetarian hot dogs and burgers, and passed out vegan soap samples donated by Tom’s of Maine. The key, I think, is that we didn’t do anything to make it seem freakish or abnormal that we didn’t serve meat. We just
served good vegan food, and the people ate it up.”

Editorialized ANIMAL PEOPLE in September 1994, “If it isn’t cruel to hang eight billion chickens a year upside down and slash their throats, why should anyone care about a boy who beheads a canary? If it’s okay to shoot cattle in the head, why not shoot dogs and cats? What people choose to put in their mouths in their own homes may be their business, but at a humane event, it’s our business–and if we don’t separate ourselves from the meat habit, we
really can’t expect the public to see us as the principled people we presume to be.”

Five years later, it is long past time for the humane community to realize that only those with the courage to lead have  any hope of being followed.

Whale blood and Gore foul Puget Sound

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, June 1999:
NEAH BAY, Washington–“Al Gore and the U.S. Coast Guard got their whale,” the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society sluglined a May 17 e-mail, detailing the Makah tribe killing of a two-to-three-year-old female gray whale.

At 6:55 that morning, the whale spy-hopped beside the Makah whaling canoe and looked directly at the killers. As documented by a KING-TV/Northwest Cable News helicopter, Makah harpooner Theron Parker stabbed her before she had any evident sense of danger. Putting up no fight, trying to duck under the bow of the canoe, she was then stabbed by a second Makah, Donny Swan, 23, and was machine-gunned from the speed boat used to tow the canoe, taking about 10 minutes to die as her blood stained the green sea a sickly red.

“It was easy,” boasted Makah whaling chaplain Darrell Markishtum to Lynda V. Mapes of the Seattle Times.

The age and conduct of the whale brought speculation that she was J.J., the gray whale who was rescued and rehabilitated by Sea World at San Diego after stranding nearby in January 1997. About three days old then, she became quite trusting of humans. She was returned to the ocean on March 31, 1998, outfitted with two radio
transponders–but she lost them both within days.

After sinking once in 25 feet of water, due to inept carcass retrieval, the dead whale was pulled back to the surface by a fishing boat and dragged to shore at Neah Bay, as the whalers blasted air horns and the Makah schools shut for an impromptu holiday.

Makah tribe members were videotaped dancing on her remains and drinking Pepsi-Cola at an all-night party, while a hired Aleut butcher hacked off strips of her flesh. “Hey, we need some Makah over here!” the Aleut reportedly called at one point when left to work almost alone.

Makah whaling captain Wayne Johnson made plain that the first whale-killing wouldn’t be the last. Johnson said another Makah crew, representing different families, could soon begin training to kill more whales.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in 1997 authorized the Makah to kill as many as five whales a year through 2002, under a annual quota of 140 shared among Russian and U.S. aboriginal tribes. Breach Marine Protection and coplaintiffs argued unsuccessfully in a 1998 federal suit that the IWC did not mean for the Makah to have part of the quota, since the resolution allotting it stipulated that it was for the use of tribes dependent upon  whaling for subsistence–which the Makah are not.

Rejected by the U.S. District Court in Tacoma, the case is now under appeal.

Both U.S. Vice President Al Gore and President Bill Clinton were in Seattle only hours either way of the whale-killing, in part to promote Gore’s bid to succeed Clinton in the White House. Neither commented on the whale-killing, but it was a major step toward the global resumption of full-scale commercial whaling that the Clinton/Gore administration has quietly pursued since taking office, in keeping with their endorsement of “sustainable use” wildlife management.

Said Sea Shepherd captain Paul Watson, “Today, with speed boats, military weaponry (a .50-caliber modified anti-tank gun), and the draconian assistance of the U.S. government in stifling all dissent, American whalers managed to blast a whale out of existence in American waters on the pretext of cultural privilege. A tribe that has made no secret of its intention to return to commercial whaling has brought the U.S. one giant unwilling step closer to the day when the wholesale slaughter of whales for profit will be permitted within the coastal waters of every nation,” exactly as Ireland proposed a week later at the annual International Whaling Commission convention in Grenada.

Taking no part in opposing Makah whaling, Greenpeace IWC observer Gerry Leape told Danny Westneat of the Seattle Times’ Washington D.C. bureau that it was a mere distraction from efforts to squelch the Irish proposal, which was made after Japan heavily subsidized the Irish fishing industry.

“Now that the Makah have landed one whale,” Leape continued, “we may spend a fourth year at IWC arguing about the Makah instead of focusing on Japan and Norway, who are killing 1,200 whales this year.” Actually, the first argument at IWC this year concerned a Japanese motion to bar Greenpeace, because members of Greenpeace Australia in November 1998 delayed the departure from New Caledonia of a Japanese whaling vessel which had put in for emergency repairs. The motion failed, 22-9.

Other whale-killing

But Leape was right that the Makah whale-killing drew attention away from much other whale-killing. As the May 24-29 IWC meeting approached, and the Makah stepped up their efforts to kill a whale before any resolution could be passed to stop them, a six-man crew from the Bering Strait village of Little Diomede on May 6 killed a bowhead whale– among the rarest of whales–for the first time since 1937. Little Diomede villagers last struck a bowhead in either 1953 or 1979, depending on which accounts are believed. The IWC authorized them to kill two bowheads a year in 1991, but hunting expeditions since then hadn’t found any.

The 40-vessel Norwegian whaling fleet sailed, to little notice, on the same day the Makah killed the gray whale. The
self-set Norwegian quota this year is 753 minke whales–the most hunted since 1988. Japan on May 9 lifted a 27-year-old ban on hunting rare bottlenose whales, also known as Baird’s beaked whales, in the Sea of Japan, setting a 1999 quota of eight. Japan already allows the killing of 54 bottlenose whales per year in Pacific coastal waters.

On May 12, the Environmental Investigation Agency published a report arguing that the current Japanese massacre of 17,700 Dall’s porpoises per year–down from 40,000 in 1987, but rising again each year since 1992–could jeopardize that species. The IWC in 1991 asked Japan to hold the Dall’s porpoise kill down to 10,000 or fewer.

Switzerland moved this year that the IWC should begin to regulate the hunting of small whales. No action was taken, after Japan briefly walked out in protest.

Japan had on the IWC agenda a proposal to repeal the 1994 designation of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary, ringing Antarctica. The proposal could not have been passed without the support of 30 of the 40 IWC member nations, but was seen by New Zealand IWC delegate Jim McLay as “a strategic move to head off a proposal to establish a South Pacific sanctuary,” around New Zealand and Australia, “which would add on to the Southern Oceans sanctuary.”

Brazil meanwhile proposed extending sanctuary status to the South Atlantic, Italy proposed making the Ligurian Sea a fin whale sanctuary, and the Indian Ocean was declared a whale sanctuary well before the Southern Oceans sanctuary was designated. The new sanctuary proposals were taken under study.

The fishing firms which own the Japanese whaling industry are interested in the money to be made from whaling–but are even more interested in guarding their ability to fish in distant waters by fighting any precedents for stronger international oceanic regulation. The IWC on May 26 restrained Japan somewhat with a resolution telling the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species not to change the “trade prohibited” status of any whale without IWC approval. Japan has been lobbying to drop minke whales and other species from the “trade prohibited” category.

Makah open path

The Makah were allowed to resume killing gray whales, after a 73-year lapse, on condition that none of the meat or byproducts be sold, though potlatch trade with other tribes is permitted. But the original Makah proposal to resume whaling, issued only hours after gray whales came off the U.S. endangered species list in 1995, spoke bluntly of reviving the former Makah commercial whaling industry, to offset reservation unemployment currently at 55%.

Timber holdings are reportedly the biggest source of tribal revenue other than government aid, but are depleted. The Makah have made little effort to develop tourism potential–including whale-watching. Many later statements by Makah Tribal Whaling Commission spokespersons left no doubt that the tribe hopes to eventually export whale meat to Japan.

Within days of the Makah whale-killing, Japan–as expected–asked the IWC to authorize “cultural” whaling by coastal
Japanese communities. The IWC refused.

The 13 tribes of the Nuu-Chah-Nulth Tribal Council in southern British Columbia reiterated their interest in whaling, too.  Canada quit the IWC in 1982. Responded B.C. premier Glen Clark, “We will not sign any agreement nor entertain any discussion about going back to the past and allowing any whale hunt in B.C. by aboriginal peoples.”

But B.C. aboriginal affairs minister Gordon Wilson speculated that B.C. might have little say in the matter if Ottawa decides to let indigenous tribes resume whaling. Nuu-Chah-Nulth Tribal Council co-chair Nelson Keitlah stated that whether Clark liked it or not, whaling would be discussed as part of upcoming treaty negotiations also pertaining to salmon fishing and logging rights.

Most B.C. tribes have never signed treaties with the Canadian government. The negotiations are intended to resolve a long list of resultant legal problems. “The Makah success certainly lays out a blueprint for us,” fellow Nu-Chah-Nulth Tribal Council co-chair Francis Frank told Alex Tizon of the Seattle Times.

Other Nuu-Chah-Nulth leaders include Tom Happynook of the Huuayaht Nation, who chairs the World Council of Whalers. Based in Port Alberni, B.C., the World Council of Whalers was formed in 1997 with Japanese and Norwegian funding, specifically to promote “cultural” whaling.

Gore cuts deals

Norway unilaterally resumed commercial whaling in coastal waters in 1994, soon after Gore, at a White House meeting with then-Norwegian prime minister Gro Brundtland, in effect agreed to trade U.S. failure to enforce the 1986 IWC moratorium on commercial whaling for the completion of a $261 million missile sale to Norway. The sale, headlined and detailed in the June and July/August 1994 editions of ANIMAL PEOPLE, helped major defense contractors in Congressional districts held by Democrats.

The Clinton/Gore administration then backed Makah whaling to the point of building the Makah a new marina; funding the Makah delegations to the IWC; funding the Makah public relations campaign; and ordering the Coast Guard to keep protesters 500 feet away from the whale-killing vessels, ostensibly so that the protesters would not harass the whales. Puyallup and Tulalip tribe supporters of the Makah were allowed much closer.

The Clinton/Gore administration claimed their support for the Makah was just a matter of respecting language in the 1855 treaty that established the Makah reservation, which granted the Makah fishing and whaling rights “such as may be enjoyed by any other citizen of the United States.”

Whaling foes hold that since other citizens of the U.S. do not have any whaling rights, the Makah should not have any, either. This contention was rejected in November 1998 by the U.S. federal court in Tacoma; the verdict is under appeal.
Cynics note, meanwhile, that the major interest Clinton and Gore have had in Native American treaty rights pertains to the operation of gambling casinos. Native-run casinos have heavily donated to the Clinton and Gore campaigns, and to other Democratic candidates.

Price

Whether or not Gore pays a political price for the whale-killing would appear to depend mainly upon how vigorously
animal and habitat protection groups work to remind the public of his role in bringing it about. Protest vigils held in Seattle and Portland drew only about 100 people and 40 people, respectively– but opinion polls showed huge disapproval of the whale-killing.

The Seattle Times reported receiving 552 telephone calls and e-mails on the day of the killing, 71% of them opposing the Makah. Ten days later, with video of the whale’s death no longer on news broadcasts, a McLaughlin Group poll showed 82% opposed, nationwide–and found a similar balance of opinion among all ages surveyed: 89% opposed among ages 16-21, 84% opposed among ages 22-35, 77% opposed among ages 36-64 (the group most likely to have
come into political awareness during the heyday of the American Indian Movement in the 1970s), and 80% opposed among ages 65-plus. A Victoria Times-Colonist telephone poll, in the World Council of Whalers’ home town, recorded 769 respondents opposed, to just 52 favoring the Makah.

Congress

“Sea Shepherd and other whale protection advocates will now ask Congress to amend the 1855 treaty with the Makah in order to bring it into compliance with international regulations,” the Sea Shepherds pledged, suggesting that the Makah might be given land in trade for their claim to whaling rights. Senator Slade Gorton and Representative Jack Metcalf, both Republican residents of Whidbey Island in Puget Sound, indicated they would be listening.

Gorton told Peggy Andersen of Associated Press that the Makah decision to go whaling was “extraordinarily foolish, and an affront to the sensibilities of tens of millions of their fellow Americans. This is an aggressive effort by the tribes to show they can avoid the laws that govern the rest of us,” Gorton continued. “I am more convinced today than ever before that we must bring common sense back to the relationship between this country, our laws, and Native American tribes.”

Gorton’s position further split the formerly strong “wise use” Republican faction in Congress, who were already divided by disputes among fishers, farmers, and loggers over who is to blame for declining salmon runs. Aligned with farmers and loggers, Gorton on Makah whaling directly opposed Richard Pombo (R-California), a Gorton ally just four years ago in efforts to weaken the Endangered Species Act. Pombo delivered– by video–one of the welcoming speeches to the March 27-30 World Council of Whalers meeting in Reykjavik, Iceland.

Influential Democrats as well as Republicans opposed the whale-killing–and not just after the fact. On May 10, a week before the killing, the Central Committee of the Democratic Party for Los Angeles unanimously ratified a resolution adopted earlier by the Malibu Democratic Club and Malibu City Council, calling “on the Clinton and Gore administration to rescind the recent policy decisions of the Commerce Department to permit and encourage the killing of our Pacific gray whales by U.S. and Russian-based whalers,” and calling also “on the U.S. Navy and the Coast Guard, who recently facilitated the release of J.J., to abstain from giving assistance and protection to whalers who will now attempt to kill J.J. and her kin.”
Further, they resolved, “We call on all deliberative bodies of the Democratic Party to adopt resolutions similar to this.” The bipartisan opposition to whale-killing enabled Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) to push a rider through Congress as part of a budget bill which forbids beluga whale hunting in Cook Inlet, Alaska, by either of two rival indigenous factions, until they have reached a co-management agreement with the National Marine Fisheries Service. The Cook Inlet beluga population has dropped from circa 1,350 as of 1990 to as few as 275 today, as each faction presses a claim to ownership of the whaling rights. President Clinton signed the budget bill and the Stevens rider into law on May 21.

Back flips

Makah tribal chair Ben Johnson Jr. complained to media of allegedly receiving threats among 32 telephone calls of protest that the tribe answered during the first two hours after word of the whale-killing was broadcast as part of local noon news programs–and evicted KIRO Newsradio reporter Steve Knight, of Seattle, from the press conference, after Knight asked him to respond to allegations that the Makah’s claim of reverence for the dead whale were belied by
a tribe member who was seen doing back flips off the carcass.

The Coalition for Human Dignity, Daybreak Star Indian Cultural Center, Washington Association of Churches, Seattle office of the American Jewish Committee, Northwest Coalition Against Malicious Harassment, Asian-Pacific American Coalition for Equality, and Japanese American Citizens League all lined up in defense of the Makah at a May 21 press conference, emboldening Johnson and other Makah to accuse whaling opponents of racism.
Paul Watson had a quick response to that, having evaded the FBI in 1973 to enter the beseiged American Indian Movement encampment at Wounded Knee, South Dakota. Serving as a volunteer medic, Watson had a dream while there that an elder interpeted as meaning he should devote his life to saving whales. “I don’t care if the whale is being hunted by Norwegians, Japanese, Tongans, New Zealanders, or the Makah,” Watson said.  “We will oppose it.”

Watson’s best-known campaigns over the years have been against Portuguese, Russian, and Norwegian whalers, and
Canadian sealers–virtually all of them Caucasian. “The whale killing, I feel,” said Green Web founder and Native American rights advocate David Orton, “will be a turning point for environmental/aboriginal relations. A message has been sent that it is all right to kill whales for ‘cultural’ reasons.

This is a massive setback, not only for the whales, but for all those who have worked to end whaling. And it is a setback for those who have worked to change the dominant view of automatically treating wildlife as a ‘resource’ for humankind. I believe it is also a setback for those aboriginals who see that seeking social and ecological restorative justice must include building alliances with non-aboriginals.”

While most Native American groups either backed the Makah or kept silent, the First Nations Environmental Network declared on May 19 that, “At this point in human history, we feel that spiritually and morally, killing whales cannot be justified.”

The war at sea

The Sea Shepherds were the first animal-and/or-habitat protection organization to respond to the Makah whaling proposal back in 1995, and had maintained an on-the-water vigil at Neah Bay almost continuously since September 1998, attempting to prevent the whale-killing, but were miles away when the killing finally occurred.

Explained the May 17 Sea Shepherd release, “The Sea Shepherd patrol boat Sirenian had gone to the San Juan Islands to refuel and pick up three more small vessels [to replace three the Coast Guard had confiscated] on Sunday night. To evade activists, the Makah went out on an early tide,” instead of later in the day, as they did previously.

Until they learned of the killing, the Sea Shepherds and other protesters were jubilant over their success in preventing a whale-killing on May 15.

As of 8:35 a.m. on the 15th, according to a Sea Shepherd e-mail, “a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration boat, two Coast Guard cutters, three planes, and two helicopters” were “trying to help the Makah to kill whales. A whale was struck once with a harpoon,” but the harpoon glanced off the whale’s tail flukes. The Coast Guard armada was later described as “a large cutter, three 40-foot support craft, two Zodiacs (a motorized inflatable raft), and two helicopters.”

Either way, as Paul Watson said afterward, “It was David against Goliath. The Coast Guard arrested everyone else on the water and seized their boats on every charge they could think of, until The Sirenian and the West Coast Anti-Whaling Society’s boats were the only ones left. But we still prevented the Makah from taking a whale,” during a nine-and-a-half-hour running war of nerves.

The first person arrested was Cheryl Rorabeck-Siler, a high school science teacher from Nehalem, Oregon, who saw the Makah approaching a whale and tried to stay between the whale and the killers on a Jet Ski as other protesters sped to the scene from the temporary anti-whaling headquarters at Seiku, 18 miles away. Rorabeck-Siler and her husband Bret Siler were arrested and fined for similar actions against the desultory Makah whaling effort of October and November 1998.

Heats up

The action heated up at 10:10 a.m., according to a series of Sea Shepherd dispatches, when “a Sea Shepherd Zodiac got between a whale and the Makah canoe,” where it “blocked a harpoon shot. The Zodiac chased off the kill boat. Sea Shepherd activists Lisa Distefano and Alison Lance were arrested, charged with gross negligence, and released,” facing up to a year in prison each and fines of $5,000. “Their Zodiac was seized. Sea Shepherd supporter Scott Hopper was taken into custody,” the Sea Shepherd account continued. Hopper’s boat also was seized.

By 11:10 a.m., the Coast Guard was enforcing a moving exclusionary zone of 500 feet from the Makah vessels.
“The Makah have failed in numerous attempted harpoon strikes,” the Sea Shepherds reported. “One shot from their
.50-caliber machine gun was fired at a diving whale. Two members of the Sea Defense Alliance were charged with coming too close to a whale. Their boat was seized, but they came back with another boat.”

Complained Makah whaling captain Wayne Johnson to news media, “They’re harassing the whale.” Responded Paul Watson, “These guys want to blow a whale apart with a .50-caliber gun, and are concerned that we might get
too close to a whale?”

Exactly how many shots the Makah fired on May 15 was later disputed. Elaborated the Sea Shepherds on the evening of the 15th, “Early in the morning, the whalers, trying for a quick kill with no media present, dispensed with the harpoon and fired their anti-tank gun at a whale. The shot missed. After media arrived, the Makah did not fire the weapon again, and denied having done so, although Sea Shepherd photographers videotaped the hunters firing the gun.

The Sirenian found two dead sea lions in the water, presumed to have been victims of Makah target practice”–though the Makah are scarcely the only fishers on Puget Sound who are known to kill sea lions when able, as alleged rivals in catching fish. The May 15 skirmishes came four days after the arrests of Sea Defense Alliance activists Jacob Conroy, 23, and Joshua Harper, 24, by Clallam County sheriff’s deputies, for investigation of alleged assault. Conroy and Harper were accused of throwing smoke bombs, shooting flares, shouting threats, and spraying fire extinguishers
at the Makah crew, soon after the Makah made their first attempt to spear a whale. SeDnA spokesperson Jonathan Paul countered that the Makah had wrongly accused them of having weapons aboard their vessel, The Bulletproof.

The Sea Shepherds missed that fracas, as The Sirenian was en route to Seattle for repairs, while a larger Sea Shepherd vessel, the Whales Forever, scheduled to sail to Iceland to protest the Icelandic announcement of a resumption of commercial whaling, was disabled by an engine problem and inability to obtain replacement
parts. ANIMAL PEOPLE had observed earlier in May that apparent Native American lookouts seemed to have the Sea Shepherd docking area at Friday Harbor under constant surveillance.

Fire hits Arapawa feral goat rescuer

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, May 1999:

“In early March,” according to
the March 1999 edition of the New Zealand
Anti-Vivisection Society newsletter
Mobilize, “NZ/AVS life member Betty
Rowe lost her house and all her possessions
in a fire. Betty lives with her husband on
Arapawa Island in the Marlborough
Sounds,” between the two major islands of
New Zealand, “and founded the Arapawa
Wildlife Sanctuary approximately 20 years
ago,” after organizing the first New Zealand
animal rights conference in 1978.
“The wildlife sanctuary is one half
of Arapawa Island,” Mobilize continued .
“About 200 Arapawa Island goats live there,
along with other rescued animals. Betty
became involved in animal protection when
the government tried to kill all the goats on
the island. Betty and her husband were left
with only the clothes they were wearing. It
is unclear if they will be able to stay on the
island.”
Betty Rowe may be addressed c/o
Arapawa Wildlife Sanctuary, Private Bag,
Picton 412, New Zealand.

Fixing the problem in Connecticut

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, May 1999:

WESTBROOK, Ct.––If the
Guinness Book of Records had a line for
most animals fixed in a year by a mobile clinic,
the Vernon A. Tait All-Animal Adoption,
Preservation & Rescue Fund’s TEAM
Mobile Feline Unit would be in it––twice.
Put into service on March 1, 1997,
the TEAM unit had by March 1, 1998 fixed
8,000 cats, at $35 each including all standard
vaccinations. That shattered the old mark of
just over 6,000 animals fixed set by Jeff
Young of the Denver-based Planned Pethood
Plus mobile clinic back in 1992.
Then, from March 1, 1998 to
March 1, 1999, the TEAM unit fixed another
10,000 cats, for a two-year total of 18,200:
more low-cost neutering operations than the
six Connecticut Humane Society facilities
appear to have done in the past five years,
and more than all but a handful of the biggest
and busiest fixed-site clinics anywhere.

Read more

ANIMAL CONTROL

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, May 1999:

Thailand is stepping up a six-year
drive to eradicate rabies. In 1998, says the
Thai government, 3.3 million of the estimated
5.2 million Thai dogs were vaccinated,
700,000 were sterilized by injection (method
not specified), and 165,000 were surgically
sterilized. Only 200,000 free vaccinations
were done, but this year 1.5 million dogs will
be vaccinated without charge, while one million
are to receive the injection sterilant and
238,650 are to be surgically sterilized.

Read more

People & Organizations

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, May 1999:

Carol Moulton, heading the
American Humane Association animal protection
division for two years and an AHA
staffer for 15 years, has resigned effective
May 19 but will continue to assist AHA as a
consultant, AHA president Robert Hart told
ANIMAL PEOPLE. Added Hart, “Connie
H o w a r d, our director of shelter operations,
will handle all functions dealing with shelters
and companion animals. At this time, we are
not announcing a search for a director, but
want to examine a range of options that could
involve some restructuring.” Hart is believed
to be seeking ways of more closely integrating
the work of the AHA animal protection
and child protection divisions. Competition
between the divisions over funding priorities
and board influence has been involved in several
other recent departures of both senior
personnel and longtime board members.

Read more

U.S. SUPREME COURT AFFIRMS TWO VERDICTS FOR ANIMALS

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, May 1999:

ALDF v. Glickman stands
WASHINGTON D.C.––The U.S.
Supreme Court on April 19 upheld without
comment appeals of two landmark appellate
verdicts favoring citizen lawsuits seeking
stronger enforcement of the federal Animal
Welfare Act and Endangered Species Act.
The September 1998 verdict of the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in
Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Glickman now
stands as precedent establishing the standing
of concerned individuals and animal advocacy
organizations to sue the USDA for allegedly
failing to fulfill the intent of Congress in
adopting the AWA.
In the specific case at hand, New
York activist Marc Jurnove contends that the
USDA has been negligent of duty in failing to
issue AWA enforcement regulations strong
enough to ensure the psychological well-being
of captive nonhuman primates.

Read more

1 125 126 127 128 129 250