Dog Nurses Homeless Baby Squirrels

Metro:

Three baby squirrels who were left homeless after the tree they lived in was chainsawed have found a foster mother in the shape of a poodle called Pixie…

Bullfighting Film Condemned

Telegraph:

Animal rights activists have called on cinemagoers to boycott a film about Spanish bullfighting hero Manolete…

The Elephants Went In 4 x 4…

AFP:

Elephants’ legs work like a four-wheel drive vehicle, making them probably unique in the animal kingdom, scientists said on Tuesday.

Their “four-leg-drive” system means power is applied independently to each limb.

All other four-legged animals are thought to have “rear-leg-drive”, in which the hind legs are used for acceleration while the front legs are used more for braking…

Animal Mass Grave Discovered At Chinese Zoo

Times:

The bodies of more than 30 animals, including rare white tigers and lions, that died of malnutrition have been found in a mass grave near a Chinese zoo.

The discovery comes just weeks after more than a dozen tigers were found to have died of starvation at another Chinese zoo amid suggestions that the administrators wanted to harvest their parts to make expensive – and banned – tiger-bone tonic…

Wild Animals To Be Banned From Travelling Circuses

Daily Mail:

Elephants, tigers and other wild animals will be banned from the family circuses under new animal welfare rules.

Widespread outrage at the use of animals will see the family circus tamed. Only domesticated animals, such as rabbits, cats and dogs, will be allowed to be used in live performances.

A public consultation by the government found a massive 94.5 per cent of people opposed the use of animals including tigers, elephants and kangaroos in performances.

Other animals used by circuses in England including lions, zebras, camels, llamas, reindeer, crocodiles and snakes, will all need to be rehomed, possibly in zoos and wildlife parks…

Hasta La Vista, Fur

I was asked by a man called Ryan if I’d like to review a dog grooming tool from the US company FURminator.  I love freebies, so of course I said yes! My parcel arrived the next day.

FURminator say that their deshedding tools are ‘Guaranteed to work better than any brush, rake or comb and reduce excess hair in long and short-haired pets by up to 90%*’ (*statistics from the PMFA).

Our dog, a short haired lurcher sheds enough hair to fill a mattress about twice a year. Typically just when I had the tool to (hopefully) deal with it she decided to hang on to her hair.

Despite not having much fur to tackle, my son’s girlfriend gave the dog a good brush with the FURminator she was quite impressed – and the dog seemed to like it too! FURminator held on to the fur well, when it was full we opened the window, pressed the button (about 3 times) and the fur fell to the ground easily (making great nesting material for the birds ).

My son was impressed with the handle, which to be honest is something I wouldn’t have thought about. The fact sheet says: ‘…features a new sleek, ergonomic handle, making the tools more comfortable to grip.’ So it was.

The only problem I had was when I combed my dog around her neck where it seemed a bit matted, FURminator was quite harsh pulling her fur, so I stopped. The teeth are very fine, so areas like this I would revert to a more gentle brush.

FURminator looks and feels very well made and is slightly heavier than expected, but this is a good thing as it seems very sturdy. I wonder though if it may be a tad expensive? Prices start at £25.82 for a cat/small dog, £31.56 medium and £41.12 for a large dog.

The next step for a more informative review is to find a hairy dog! So I’ll put FURminator in my handbag to test it on the next long haired creature I bump into on our walkies…

Historic EU Ban On Selling Animal-Tested Cosmetics Could Be Delayed By Years

Humane Society International [1], one of the world’s leading animal protection organisations, reacted strongly today to signals that a long-awaited EU ban on selling animal-tested cosmetics could be delayed, perhaps by years. The ban is due to come into force in 2013, but the European Commission is already preparing for a delay [2]. HSI has criticised the stalling tactics, saying it should be morally unthinkable for the EU to allow companies to profit from animal suffering it has banned in its own laboratories. Humane Society International has rejected an invitation to join a Commission working group being convened to justify the postponement.

Following years of public protest, animal testing of cosmetics was banned within the EU in 2009 as part of the 7th amendment to the Cosmetics Directive [3], but cosmetic products containing ingredients tested on animals outside the EU are still legally on sale. The phased introduction of an EU sales ban on these products, which would in effect lead companies to stop animal testing outside the EU if they intend to market here, should be fully implemented by 2013 according to the Cosmetics Directive. However, this measure has long been opposed by the cosmetics industry [4].

How the sales ban works:

• Phase one 2004: prohibited marketing of cosmetics ingredients tested on animals using test methods that have been replaced in the EU;
• Phase two 2009: banned sale of cosmetics tested on animals for all but three animal tests––repeat dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity and toxicokinetics;
• Phase three: sale ban should apply to these last three animal tests and is due to come into force in 2013. EU lawmakers can choose to proceed with the 2013 ban regardless of whether or not non-animal alternatives are available.

The European Commission is now positioning itself to propose a delay, and a series of stakeholder working groups are being convened to assess the availability of alternative methods. However, animal welfare experts from Humane Society International say cosmetics animal testing is morally unacceptable and so the ban should go ahead irrespective of alternatives.

Says Troy Seidle, director research and toxicology for Humane Society International: “European citizens want to see an end to animal testing for cosmetics, no matter where it happens in the world. Achieving a legislative ban on the sale of animal-tested cosmetics in the EU was an historic victory for animal welfare and there is no excuse whatsoever for delaying its implementation. It should be morally unthinkable for the Commission to consider continuing to allow companies to profit from animal suffering that it has banned in its own EU laboratories. Using a lack of alternative test methods to justify postponement is unacceptable. The bottom line is, there can be no justification for subjecting animals to pain and suffering for the sake of producing lipsticks and eye shadow. European citizens expect shop shelves to be cruelty-free in 2013. EU decision makers have a moral obligation to not let them down.”

Humane Society International says:

• This is not a safety issue—there are more than 8,000 cosmetic ingredients available that are already established as safe and actively used by cruelty-free companies participating in the international “Leaping Bunny” programme [5].
• This is not an “alternatives” issue—alternative tests for the toxic end-points may be desirable but are not necessary for the 2013 ban to be implemented and unless the Commission publishes a proposal to delay the deadline, the existing ban will stand. Cosmetics are trivial non-essential products and ending their animal testing will not prevent further alternatives development in the future.
• This is an implementation issue—the revised Cosmetics Directive promised a 2013 sales ban and citizens expect that to be honoured.

Thousands of animals such as mice, rabbits and guinea pigs, continue to be subjected to cruel toxicity tests outside Europe in countries such as China, Israel and the United States. Cosmetic chemical ingredients can be force-fed into an animal’s stomach or applied to its shaved skin. The animals can suffer swelling, soreness, organ damage, nausea and convulsions.

Notes:

1. Humane Society International and its partner organisations together constitute one of the world’s largest animal protection organisations — backed by 11 million people. For nearly 20 years, HSI has been working for the protection of all animals through the use of science, advocacy, education and hands-on programs. Celebrating animals and confronting cruelty worldwide — on the web at HSIEurope.org

2. Correspondence from EU Commission to Humane Society International 9 March 2010

3. 7th Amendment to Council Directive 76/768/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products (website: http://bit.ly/dwEe6k)

4. In 2003, France lodged an official challenge to the revised Cosmetics Directive published in the Official Journal of the European Union July 19th 2003; the European Federation for Cosmetic Ingredients’ challenge published in the Official Journal of the European Union August 2nd 2003.

5. The Leaping Bunny program is an internationally recognised cruelty-free standard for cosmetic, personal care and household products. The program is run by the Coalition for Consumer Information on Cosmetics’ (CCIC) of which HSI is a member. For more information go to http://www.gocrueltyfree.org/c_faqs.php

6. European Commission Enterprise Directorate General (website: http://bit.ly/80mixO)

Rare Animals Are Being Eaten To Extinction

Telegraph:

Rare animals, including chimpanzees and gorillas, are being hunted into extinction because of record levels of demand for bush meat, according to a new study…

Tell Canada To End Its Shameful Seal Slaughter

PETA:

For thousands of years, harp seals have migrated from Greenland down the coast of Canada, stopping each spring to give birth on the ice floes. Every year, a band of fishers descends on the ice to beat hundreds of thousands of seals to death and sell the animals’ pelts on the international fur market. Sealers routinely hook baby seals in the eye, cheek, or mouth and drag them across the ice, often while the animals are still conscious. Many of the seals killed in the massacre are only a few weeks old.

Baby seals stand no chance against club-wielding seal hunters—pups must look on as fellow seals are bludgeoned to death only to then meet the same bloody fate. The commercial seal slaughter is an off-season profit venture for the fishing industry, and it accounts for less than 1 percent of Newfoundland’s economy. The seal slaughter is not a subsistence activity for native peoples—Inuit sealing accounts for only about 3 percent of the annual slaughter.

The price of seal fur is plummeting as international outrage against the seal slaughter rises. The U.S. and the European Union have banned seal products, and world leaders such as President Barack Obama and His Holiness The Dalai Lama have denounced the massacre.

The annual seal slaughter will continue unless people like you speak out and take action to stop it, so please add your voice to the global outcry against Canada’s shameful seal massacre. Please write to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and Canadian ambassadors around the world to demand that they bring the massacre to an immediate end.

Motion To Ban Electric Dog Collars

BBC:

AMs approves the Animal Welfare Electronic Devices Regulations 2010, that bans the use of electric shock collars to train dogs or cats in Wales, on 23 March 2010.

Wales is the first country in the UK to ban the collars which are used to train animals which behave badly…