|
AR-NEWS Digest 441
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) (US) McDonald's a loser despite winning libel case
by allen schubert
2) (UK) McDonald's wins British libel case
by allen schubert
3) (US) Group Seeks Wild Horse Protections
by allen schubert
4) (US) 2 Arrested in Reptile-Smuggle Ring
by allen schubert
5) SUBSTANTIAL & SIGNIFICANT PARTS OF THE McLIBEL CASE WON BY THE
DEFENDANTS >
by civillib@cwnet.com
6) McLIBEL VERDICT HANDED DOWN AFTER LONGEST EVER ENGLISH TRIAL
by civillib@cwnet.com
7) (UK) McLibel Activists Share Beliefs
by allen schubert
8) (US) Judge's Ruling in McLibel Case
by allen schubert
9) (US) Opposition to Genetics Blocks Trade
by allen schubert
10) Claims Surrounding Mountain Goat Shooting Proposal to be Reviewed
by millerd1@sunyit.edu (David Lee Winston Miller)
11) (TW) No pork exports within 3 years
by Vadivu Govind
12) (TW) Hog raisers to resume operations
by Vadivu Govind
13) (HK) Global ivory trading 'will see elephant holocaust'
by Vadivu Govind
14) McD's Web Site Trial Blackout?
by Pat Fish
15) Land O'Lorin Under Investigation
by Debbie Leahy
16) (Den) ALF Strikes Danish Mink Farm
by MINKLIB@aol.com
17) Pollution Settlement Expected
by Snugglezzz@aol.com
18) Deadly Bug Eludes Rigorous Testing
by Snugglezzz@aol.com
19) Stolen animals in OK (USA)
by Snugglezzz@aol.com
20) (MI) Keep pets from research lab!
by Wyandotte Animal Group
21) (US-Calif) Ex-Timber Faller Sues PL
by Persephone Moonshadow Howling Womyn
22) (US)Coyote Bounty Offered in Oregon
by angst@cdsnet.net
23) Anti McDonald's Action in NYC
by Jun1022@cybernex.net (Student Abolitionist League)
24) (HK) Local ivory traders angry at release of African stockpile
by Vadivu Govind
25) (JP) Japanese buyers welcome ivory ban's end
by Vadivu Govind
26) Admin Note...HTML
by allen schubert
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 00:51:40 -0400
From: allen schubert
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) McDonald's a loser despite winning libel case
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970620005138.006f7f20@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
It's already old news (I heard it while driving to work at 9am EST)...
from Mercury News web page:
-----------------------------------------------
Posted at 4:49 p.m. PDT Thursday, June 19, 1997
McDonald's a loser despite winning libel case
LONDON (AP) -- McDonald's won a libel case Thursday
against two vegetarian activists who still managed
to scorch the fast-food Goliath when the judge
agreed with some of their sharpest criticisms.
The 314-day trial -- England's longest -- left
McDonald's Corp. fending off embarrassing questions
after Justice Roger Bell said the chain was
``culpably responsible'' for animal cruelty and ran
ad campaigns that ``exploit'' impressionable
children.
Still, his 800-page ruling found the defendants
libeled the Oak Brook, Ill.-based McDonald's Corp.
in most other statements in a pamphlet they handed
outside its fast-food outlets in Britain.
McDonald's spent an estimated $16 million defending
its good name but received a mere $98,000 in
damages. In comparison, the lengthy trial gave the
activists priceless international publicity in
countless newspaper articles and television
broadcasts, a Web site, a book and a British TV
miniseries.
Former mailman Dave Morris and bar worker Helen
Steel had called McDonald's a multinational
corporate menace that abused animals, workers and
the environment and promoted an unhealthy diet.
McDonald's said the attacks false and defamatory.
It filed suit against the couple nearly seven years
ago. The trial began June 28, 1994, and ended after
28 pretrial hearings, 130 witnesses and 40,000
pages of documents.
The top McDonald's executive in Britain, Paul
Preston, said he was ``broadly satisfied'' but
puzzled by the judge's comments on animal cruelty.
He denied the case had turned into a public
relations disaster.
``My responsibility is to protect our reputation,
and that's exactly what we've done,'' Preston said.
But Morris and Steel marched out of court to cheers
and war whoops from dozens of supporters, insisting
they were the real winners.
``We think we've had a victory because McDonald's
brought the case to silence that criticism,''
Morris said. ``The result is we turned the tables
and put them on trial.''
Along the way, Morris and Steel became self-taught
courtroom brawlers, sometimes keeping McDonald's
executives on the witness stand for more than two
weeks as they grilled them -- at times haltingly
and confused by legal procedure -- over every
aspect of the company's business practices.
The pamphlets they distributed in the late 1980s,
entitled ``What's wrong with McDonald's? Everything
they don't want you to know'' likely would have
gained little attention had McDonald's left matters
alone.
``The leaflets are circulating in ever greater
numbers,'' Morris said, grinning as he continued to
hand them out Thursday.
McDonald's said it doesn't know if it will try
getting an injunction to stop them. There may be
little point. The pamphlets are on the Internet and
thousands are being distributed around Britain.
The defendants say they will appeal the ruling in
European courts.
``McDonald's don't deserve a penny and in any event
we haven't got any money,'' said Steel.
Morris and Steel defended themselves in jeans and
shirt sleeves, which contrasted with the robes and
wigs of McDonald's high-powered legal team.
Bell took six months to render his three-volume
verdict.
The judge said McDonald's was wrongly defamed when
the defendants accused it of destroying rainforests
and moving small farmers off their land in Third
World countries to make way for cattle farming.
The judge also said the defendants defamed
McDonald's by calling its food unhealthy -- even
though he admitted that too much McDonald's food
eaten for years would give a small number of
regular customers ``the very real risk of heart
disease.''
The defendants also defamed McDonald's by saying
its meals were likely to cause food poisoning and
by claiming the company lied about how much
recycled packaging it uses, the judge said.
But Bell found McDonald's ``culpable'' in cruel
treatment of some animals, including laying hens
kept in small cages and other chickens that are
conscious when their throats are cut.
He also agreed that McDonald's runs advertisements
that encourage children to pester their parents
into going to the fast-food outlets.
Legal experts had predicted McDonald's would win
most of the ruling, but they also said the case
would be perceived as a big mismatch.
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 00:55:51 -0400
From: allen schubert
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (UK) McDonald's wins British libel case
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970620005549.006f9628@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
from Mercury Center web page:
---------------------------------------------------
Posted at 12:31 p.m. PDT Thursday, June 19, 1997
McDonald's wins British libel case
BY DIRK BEVERIDGE
Associated Press
LONDON (AP) -- In England's longest trial ever,
McDonald's won a libel case today against two
vegetarian activists who said the
multibillion-dollar giant promoted an unhealthy
diet and abused animals and workers.
But it was a hollow victory for the fast-food
Goliath, which reportedly spent up to $16 million
and nearly three years in court fighting an
unemployed mailman and a part-time barmaid.
The judge awarded McDonald's only $188,000 for its
trouble -- and even agreed with some of the
defendants' criticisms.
``Some are true -- some are not,'' Justice Roger
Bell said during a two-hour hearing in the ruling.
The courtroom was packed with McDonald's executives
in suits on one side and the defendants and their
supporters dressed in anti-McDonald's T-shirts on
the other.
Former postman Dave Morris and bar worker Helen
Steel had called McDonald's a multinational
corporate menace that abused animals, workers and
the environment and promoted an unhealthy diet.
McDonald's called the attacks false and defamatory
and took Morris, 43, and Steel, 31, to court.
After 40,000 pages of documents, 130 witnesses and
28 pretrial hearings, Bell found the defendants
libeled McDonald's in most but not all of the
statements in a pamphlet they handed outside its
fast-food outlets in Britain. The leaflet was
titled ``What's wrong with McDonald's? Everything
they don't want you to know.''
Steel and Morris were greeted with cheers and war
whoops by dozens of supporters as they walked out
of the court today. Morris stood outside handing
out copies of the now-famous pamphlet and vowing to
appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.
They then marched down the street behind a big red
anti-McDonald's banner surrounded by activists who
chanted ``No justice! Just us!''
The judge made separate damage awards of $94,000 to
the Oak Brook, Ill.-based McDonald's Corp. and to
its British subsidiary.
McDonald's U.K. president Paul Preston did not say
whether it would try to collect. But a company
spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity, said
today ``We're not going to bankrupt them.''
The company has refused to comment on reports the
battle cost it $16 million, but said repeatedly its
reputation was worth defending.
``We're satisfied with the judgment. We're
concerned about the length of time it took,''
Preston said today.
It has been almost seven years since McDonald's
sued Morris and Steel, and the case took a record
314 days in court. The trial began on June 28,
1994, and Bell took six months to render his
verdict.
The judge said McDonald's was wrongly defamed when
the defendants accused it of destroying rain
forests and moving small farmers off their land in
Third World countries to make way for massive
cattle farming.
The judge also said the defendants defamed
McDonald's by calling its food unhealthy -- even
though he admitted that too much McDonald's food
eaten for years would give a small number of
regular customers ``the very real risk of heart
disease.''
The defendants also defamed McDonald's by saying
its meals were likely to cause food poisoning and
by claiming the company lied about how much
recycled packaging it uses, the judge said.
But Bell found McDonald's ``culpable'' in cruel
treatment of some animals, including laying hens
kept in small cages and other chickens that are
conscious as their throats are cut.
He also agreed that McDonald's runs advertisements
that encourage children to pester their parents
into going to the fast-food outlets.
And while he said McDonald's restaurants in Britain
do pay low wages and sometimes treat young workers
unfairly by sending them home early when business
is slow -- a practice that lowers their pay -- the
judge did not find that the overall working
conditions at McDonald's were bad.
He said although McDonald's managers don't like
unions, it was unfair for the activists to claim
the company had an anti-union policy.
Preston said he was ``puzzled'' that Bell found
McDonald's was cruel to some chickens and pigs. He
sidestepped the other issues.
Legal experts had predicted McDonald's would win
most of the ruling, but they also said the case
would be perceived as a big mismatch.
Morris and Steel have insisted all along they were
the big winners, because the case drew much
international attention to their criticism of the
company's business practices.
The case did attract widespread interest, giving
birth to an anti-McDonald's Internet site, numerous
news articles and broadcast reports, a book and a
recent British television miniseries.
Morris and Steel, who belong to the left-wing group
London Greenpeace -- not related to the well-known
Greenpeace International -- say the leaflets will
continue to be handed out by the thousands.
Protests are planned outside hundreds of McDonald's
restaurants in Britain on Saturday.
=
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 01:10:05 -0400
From: allen schubert
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) Group Seeks Wild Horse Protections
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970620011003.006f751c@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
from AP Wire page:
-------------------------------------
06/19/1997 20:38 EST
Group Seeks Wild Horse Protections
By SANDRA CHEREB
Associated Press Writer
RENO, Nev. (AP) -- Two animal rights' groups asked a federal court on
Thursday to tighten the reins on the Bureau of Land Management's wild
horse adoption program so that slaughter of the federally protected
animals will stop.
The motion, filed by The Fund for Animals and Animal Protection
Institute, claims the BLM has routinely violated a 1987 court order and
allowed countless numbers of horses to be sold for slaughter.
The original order, issued by U.S. District Judge Howard McKibben in Reno
and upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, prohibits the BLM
from issuing a title to an animal if the agency knows the person trying
to adopt intends to use the animal for commercial purposes.
In Thursday's court filing, the animal rights groups maintain that the
BLM has skirted the restriction by not asking the question.
``They haven't been asking. Even when they've known the people had ill
intentions, they nonetheless have transferred title,'' said Howard
Crystal, a Washington, D.C., attorney for The Fund For Animals.
The group's return to court comes six months after an investigation by
The Associated Press detailed abuses in the program, which is designed to
find homes for the animals. Court papers cite the AP's reports.
The AP reported that the $16 million-a-year program allowed thousands of
wild horses and burros to be slaughtered and that BLM employees were
profiting.
The BLM disputed the AP's findings.
``If there's evidence that that's happening, show us the evidence because
we're not seeing it,'' said BLM spokesman Bob Johns in Washington, D.C.
Johns said his agency's review showed only about 350 horses considered
wild at one time ended up in slaughterhouses in an average year.
The adoption program requires that potential adopters care for their
animal for one year before they can obtain a title. The BLM maintains
that the federal government loses responsibility for the animals once a
title is issued.
But animal rights groups argue federal law prohibits selling an adopted
horse for slaughter even after that point.
The motion seeks to modify the previous court order and require all
potential adopters to sign a statement attesting to their intended use of
the animal before receiving title.
``Much of the ongoing abuse in the adopt-a-horse program stems from the
BLM's unwillingness to acquire this knowledge by making even the most
obvious, rudimentary inquiry into an adopter's post-titling intentions,''
the motion said.
If a horse adopter ultimately sold the animal, ``They'd be on the hook,''
Crystal said, and could face prosecution for making a false statement.
Additionally, the motion seeks:
-- To prohibit BLM employees who adopt horses from being able to sell the
animals later on;
-- Court oversight of the program with annual, detailed accountings;
-- A prohibition on mass adoptions.
Johns said the agency stopped mass adoptions several years ago, but in
rare instances allows large numbers of horses to be used for private
breeding purposes.
``Those horses are inspected monthly and their condition is extremely
monitored,'' he said.
New guidelines outlined in April to increase home visits of adopters and
improve the agency's tracking system also are intended to help ensure
that no untitled wild horse or burro is slaughtered and processed for
human consumption, he said.
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 01:14:41 -0400
From: allen schubert
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) 2 Arrested in Reptile-Smuggle Ring
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970620011439.00688a64@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
from AP Wire page:
------------------------------
06/19/1997 18:57 EST
2 Arrested in Reptile-Smuggle Ring
By MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- With leads obtained from an undercover U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service investigation, German authorities have arrested two men
for their roles in an international reptile-smuggling ring, the Justice
Department announced Thursday.
Frank H. Lehmeyer, 34, of Speyer, Germany, charged in a U.S. indictment
as the smuggling ringleader, and a second German citizen were arrested
Wednesday by German law enforcement agents, the department said.
Justice spokesman Bill Brooks said the second man was arrested on German
charges and, under German law, his identity was not released. He has not
been charged in the United States.
The Fish and Wildlife investigation revealed that the ring has smuggled
hundreds of rare and endangered tortoises and snakes out of Madagascar,
an island nation in the Indian Ocean off Africa, to Germany and then to
the United States and Canada, the Justice Department said.
The animals, with a commercial value of more than $250,000, were sold to
wildlife dealers and private collectors.
The animals smuggled during the multiyear conspiracy included more than
120 Madagascan tree boas, 25 spider tortoises, 50 radiated tortoises and
six Madagascan ground boas. The radiated tortoise is listed as endangered
under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. All the species are protected by
an international treaty, the Convention on International Trade in
Engandered Species of Wild Fauna.
In August 1996, a federal grand jury in Orlando, Fla., returned an
18-count indictment against six individuals, including Lehmeyer, for
their roles in the smuggling.
Two of the six were arrested and prosecuted last fall in the United
States and another is being held by Canadian authorities.
Two other German citizens named in the indictment are still at large.
Using information gathered by the Fish and Wildlife Service, Germany set
up a task force of police and customs agents to round up the smugglers.
They found German as well as U.S. violations, the Justice Department
said.
The United States is seeking the extradition from Canada of Enrico J.
Truant, 31, of Windsor, Ontario, who was indicted in Orlando. Canadian
authorities arrested Truant on June 4 and he is awaiting an extradition
hearing.
Wolfgang M. Kloe, 33, of Rauenberg, Germany, and Simon David Harris, 25,
of Blairgowrie, South Africa, pleaded guilty in Orlando last October.
Kloe was sentenced to three years and 10 months in prison and fined
$10,000 for his role in the conspiracy.
Harris was sentenced to three years probation for his role in smuggling
61 Madagascan tree boas and four spider tortoises that he had concealed
in a suitcase on a flight from Frankfurt, Germany, to Orlando on Aug. 13,
1996.
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 22:24:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: civillib@cwnet.com
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: SUBSTANTIAL & SIGNIFICANT PARTS OF THE McLIBEL CASE WON BY THE
DEFENDANTS >
Message-ID: <199706200524.WAA05646@borg.cwnet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>From: mclibel@globalnet.co.uk (McLibel Support Campaign)
>Subject: SUBSTANTIAL & SIGNIFICANT PARTS OF THE McLIBEL CASE WON BY
THE
DEFENDANTS
>
>McLibel Support Campaign
>5 Caledonian Road, London N1 9DX, UK. Tel/Fax +44-(0)171 713 1269
>For independent information on the case and McDonald's:
>http://www.McSpotlight.org/
>
>Press Release
>20th June 1997
>
>SUBSTANTIAL & SIGNIFICANT PARTS OF THE McLIBEL CASE WON BY THE
DEFENDANTS
>
>Judge finds it to be a fact that McDonald's 'exploit children' through their
>advertising and promotions, that McDonald's promotion of its food as
>nutritious is deceptive, that McDonald's is 'culpably responsible' for
>cruelty to animals, that McDonald's pays low wages to its workers in the
>UK and is anti-union.
>
> -------------------------------------
>
>Mr Justice Bell yesterday ruled, in his personal verdict in the McLibel
>Trial delivered at Britain's High Court, that substantial and significant
>parts of the London Greenpeace Factsheet criticising the company have been
>proved to be true by the evidence brought by the McLibel Defendants, Helen
>Steel & Dave Morris.
>
>There follows extracts from the official Summary of the Judgment by Mr
>Justice Bell in the McLibel Trial which was yesterday read out in a
>courtroom packed with journalists, supporters of the McLibel Defendants, and
>McDonald's top executives and their lawyers. The full Summary (running to
>45 pages) is available on the McSpotlight Internet site
>(www.mcspotlight.org) and the full judgment (approx 1000 pages) will be
>uploaded onto the site soon. The McLibel Support Campaign will be issuing a
>Press Release on Monday 23rd June analysing in detail the judge's full
>judgment, and reporting on Saturday's UK and global protests against the
>company.
>
>
>ADVERTISING (p 26)
>
>[The criticism in] the leaflet to the effect that [McDonald's] exploit
>children by using them, as more susceptible subjects of advertising, to
>pressurise their parents into going to McDonald's is justified. It is true.
>
>In my judgment McDonald's advertising and marketing makes considerable use
>of susceptible young children to bring in custom, both their own and that of
>their parents who must accompany them, by pestering their parents.
>
>
>McDONALD'S FOOD (pp 21 & 23)
>
>At the material time of publication of the leaflet between September 1987,
>and September 1990, McDonald's food was high in fat (including saturated
>fat) and salt (sodium) and animal products and it has continued to be so.
>
>I..find that various of [McDonald's] advertisements, promotions and booklets
>have pretended to a postive nutritional benefit which McDonald's food, high
>in fat and saturated fat and animal products and sodium, and at one time low
>in fibre, did not match.
>
>
>THE REARING AND SLAUGHTER OF ANIMALS (p 29)
>
>[The criticism that McDonald's] are culpably responsible for cruel practices
>in the rearing and slaughter of some of the animals which are used to
>produce their food is justified, true in substance and in fact.
>
>
>EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES (pp 33 & 37)
>
>[McDonald's UK] does pay its workers low wages, thereby helping to depress
>wages for workers in the catering trade in Britain.
>
>[McDonald's] are stongly antipathetic to any idea of unionisation of crew in
>their restaurants.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>The Defendants were cheered by hundreds of people as they came out of court.
>They believe that their stance in fighting the case has been vindicated;
>that evidence in the trial has backed up all the criticisms made of
>McDonald's over the promotion of unhealthy food, and exploitation of people,
>animals and the environment; and that the campaign has become unstoppable.
>
>
>
>- ENDS -
>
>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 22:24:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: civillib@cwnet.com
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: McLIBEL VERDICT HANDED DOWN AFTER LONGEST EVER ENGLISH TRIAL
Message-ID: <199706200524.WAA05650@borg.cwnet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>From: mclibel@globalnet.co.uk (McLibel Support Campaign)
>>Subject: McLIBEL VERDICT HANDED DOWN AFTER LONGEST EVER ENGLISH
TRIAL
>>
>>McLibel Support Campaign
>>5 Caledonian Road, London N1 9DX, UK. Tel/Fax 0171 713 1269
>>For independent information on the case and McDonald's:
>>http://www.McSpotlight.org/
>>
>>Press Release 19th June, 1997
>>
>>
>>McLIBEL VERDICT HANDED DOWN AFTER LONGEST EVER ENGLISH TRIAL
>>
>>CAMPAIGN UNSTOPPABLE
>>
>>'Victory Day Of Action' this Saturday at 500+ McDonald's UK stores, and
>>worldwide
>>
>>
>>Today Mr Justice Bell delivered his verdict in the McLibel Trial (at 314
>>days in court, the longest trial in English history, and 3 times the length
>>of the previous longest libel trial) at the Royal Courts of Justice in
>>London. He read out a summary of his personal judgment (having denied the
>>Defendants their right to a jury trial) lasting approx two hours. The full
>>judgment, around 1,000 pages long, was handed down to McDonald's and Steel &
>>Morris. (Summary and full judgment accessible on the Internet:
>>www.mcspotlight.org).
>>
>>The Defendants believe that their stance in fighting the case has been
>>vindicated; that evidence (see over) in the trial has backed up all the
>>criticisms made of McDonald's over the promotion of unhealthy food, and
>>exploitation of people, animals and the environment; and that the campaign
>>has become unstoppable.
>>
>>The Corporation called its big guns into the witness box - US and UK
>>executives, departmental heads and consultants etc. As the trial wore on
>>they were forced under lengthy cross examination to make damaging admissions
>>and concessions on all the issues. In fact, McDonald's basic case on each
>>major issue having collapsed, the only REAL bones of contention by the end
>>of the trial were legal technicalities and arcane arguments over
>>interpretation of the exact meaning of the text and the accompanying
>>satirical banner headlines and cartoons in the 1986 London Greenpeace
>>Factsheet (which was out of print before the writs were served in 1990).
>>
>>Pre-trial publication by McDonald's of 300,000 leaflets and press releases,
>>attacking criticisms of the Corporation as 'lies', sparked a counterclaim by
>>the Defendants for libel. The company was unable to bring a single piece of
>>evidence to substantiate its defamatory assertion.
>>
>>The case has been described by the media as the biggest Corporate PR
>>disaster in history and things look like getting worse for McDonald's. This
>>Saturday campaigners are holding an International VICTORY DAY OF ACTION and
>>will be leafleting outside McDonald's stores around the world to demonstrate
>>McDonald's failure to silence its critics. Over 500 of the company's 750 UK
>>stores will be leafleted in a display of solidarity with the McLibel
>>Defendants and show of conviction that all the criticisms in the "What's
>>Wrong With McDonald's?" leaflets are true. As the Defendants have been
>>denied a jury trial, the public are in effect the wider jury and campaigners
>>are committed to continuing to provide the public with the facts they need
>>to judge for themselves. (The Corporation, after all, spends $2 billion
>>every year on its global advertising and propaganda.) A week of action is
>>also planned for Oct 11-18th, around Oct 16th UN World Food Day / World
>>Anti-McDonald's Day.
>>
>>During the verdict, supporters of the McLibel Defendants held a picket
>>outside the court and distributed "What's Wrong With McDonald's?" leaflets
>>to passersby. 2 million of these leaflets have already been handed out in
>>the UK since the writs were served on the Defendants. On leaving the court,
>>the Defendants joined in distributing these leaflets.
>>
>>Please note: On Monday 21st June, the McLibel Campaign plans to issue a
>>Press Release analysing the judge's full judgment, and reporting on
>>Saturday's UK and global protests.
>>
>>A Press Conference was held by the McLibel Defendants shortly after the
>>judgment was given. The chair, Michael Mansfield QC, believes that McLibel
>>was the 'trial of the century' because of the vital importance of the issues
>>to people's everyday lives. Defence witnesses from the trial were also on
>>the panel, including Charles Secrett (Executive Director of Friends of the
>>Earth), Tim Lobstein (co-director of the Food Commission), Iain Whittle
>>(former McDonald's crew member), and Frances Tiller (former private
>>investigator hired by McDonald's to infiltrate London Greenpeace). Also
>>speaking were Maureen & John Hopkins (the parents of Mark Hopkins, who was
>>fatally electrocuted while working at a McDonald's store in Manchester).
>>
>>Legal controversies are set to continue - Having been denied Legal Aid and a
>>jury trial, and up against complex libel laws stacked in favour of
>>plaintiffs, the Defendants are now preparing to take the British government
>>to the European Court of Human Rights to overturn the UK's unfair and
>>oppressive libel laws and to continue the fight to defend the public's right
>>to criticise multinational corporations. The Corporation would not have
>>been allowed to bring this case in the USA.
>>
>>
>>EVIDENCE from McDonald's witnesses' own mouths and from their own documents
>>backing up the statements in the London Greenpeace factsheet.
>>
>>DIET AND ILL HEALTH - Asked his view of the statement contained in the
>>London Greenpeace factsheet "A diet high in fat, sugar, animal products and
>>salt and low in fibre, vitamins and minerals is linked with cancer of the
>>breast and bowel and heart disease", McDonald's cancer expert replied: "If
>>it is being directed to the public then I would say it is a very reasonable
>>thing to say." (Day 22, p32, line 19). McDonald's expert witness Professor
>>Verner Wheelock admitted that a typical McDonald's meal was high in fat,
>>saturated fat and sodium content (Day 21, pp29-31). Paul Preston
>>(McDonald's UK President) admitted that McDonald's products were low in
>>fibre (Day 5, p22, line 7).
>>
>>UNETHICAL ADVERTISING - The corporation's official and confidential
>>'Operations Manual' was read out in court: "Ronald loves McDonald's and
>>McDonald's food. And so do children, because they love Ronald. Remember,
>>children exert a phenomenal influence when it comes to restaurant selection.
>>This means you should do everything you can to appeal to children's love for
>>Ronald and McDonald's." (Day 42, p62, line 32)
>>
>>FOOD POISONING - McDonald's have admitted that they were responsible for an
>>outbreak of E.Coli 0157 food poisoning in the USA in 1982, and in Preston
>>(UK) in 1991, in which people suffered serious kidney failure. (Day 294
>>p17, Day 125 p10, & Day 66 p20)
>>
>>ANIMAL SUFFERING - David Walker of McKey Foods (sole hamburger supplier to
>>McDonald's UK) admitted that "as a result of the meat industry, the
>>suffering of animals is inevitable". (Day 78 p63 line 48)
>>
>>LOW PAY AND HOSTILITY TO TRADE UNIONS - Richard Rampton QC questioning
Lynne
>>Meade, McDonald's regional Human Resources Manager for London and the South,
>>asked "The question I have is, given this overall -- one can pick nits but
>>that is not my habit -- it looks as though the basic McDonald's starting
>>rate is below the general averages for that kind of work in the country at
>>large; would you agree with that?". Answer: "Yes" (Day 133, p37). Sid
>>Nicholson, McDonald's UK, Vice President and former Head of Personnel said
>>employees "would not be allowed to carry out any overt union activity on
>>McDonald's premises" (Day 120, p5, line 27).
>>
>>RAINFORESTS - McDonald's admitted in their opening speech that they had used
>>beef in Costa Rica from cattle reared on former rainforest land (Day 1,
>>p50). The company also admitted importing Brazilian beef into the UK in the
>>1980's (Day 78, p21). Some of their current declared supplies to their 250
>>Brazilian stores emanate from areas of Goias State defined by Defence
>>experts as former rainforest areas destroyed to make way for cattle ranches
>>(Day 251, pp18-23).
>>
>>PACKAGING - Ed Oakley, Vice President of McDonald's UK admitted that the
>>polystyrene packaging collected during a nationally-publicised UK scheme
>>"for recycling into such things as plant pots" was in fact "dumped" (Day 59,
>>p64). He also admitted that in the UK all McDonald's packaging (barring a
>>small pilot scheme) ends up as litter or in landfill sites. (Day 61, page
>>33, line 47).
>>
>>LITTER - "When one considers that McDonald's each day is serving food and
>>drink to approximately three-quarters of a million people in the UK, it does
>>not take a genius to conclude that our packaging will be prevalent on the
>>streets whilst littering continues." - McDonald's Local Store Marketing
>>news-sheet May 1990 (Day 6 p53).
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>McLibel Support Campaign
>>5 Caledonian Road, London N1 9DX, UK. Tel/Fax +44-(0)171 713 1269
>>For independent information on the case and McDonald's:
>>http://www.McSpotlight.org/
>>
>>
>>McLIBEL VERDICT BACKGROUNDER
>>19th June, 1997
>>
>>
>>The McLibel Trial began on 28th June 1994 and lasted 313 days in court (314
>>including verdict) spanning 30 months. Closing speeches were completed on
>>13th December 1996. It is the longest trial in English history and is also
>>over three times as long as any previous UK libel trial (the previous
>>longest being a mere 101 days!).
>>
>>The case was brought by the $30 billion a year McDonald's Corporation
>>against two supporters of London Greenpeace - Helen Steel (bar worker, 31)
>>and Dave Morris (single parent and ex-postman, 43) - who have between them
>>an annual income of less than 7,500 pounds. McDonald's sued Steel & Morris
>>for alleged libel over a 6-sided factsheet produced by London Greenpeace,
>>prophetically entitled "What's Wrong With McDonald's? Everything they don't
>>want you to know", which McDonald's alleged they distributed in 1989/90.
>>(London Greenpeace was the original Greenpeace group in Europe - set up in
>>1971. It is independent of Greenpeace UK.)
>>
>>The factsheet criticised McDonald's and other multinationals for promoting
>>unhealthy food; damage to the environment through mountains of unnecessary
>>packaging and the effects of cattle ranching; exploiting workers through low
>>pay and hostility to Trade Unions; causing suffering of animals; and
>>exploiting children through advertising.
>>
>>130 witnesses from the UK and around the world gave evidence in court,
>>including environmental and nutritional experts, trade unionists, animal
>>welfare experts, McDonald's employees, top executives, and five infiltrators
>>employed by McDonald's. Other witnesses submitted evidence in writing.
>>
>>The main reason that the case took so long is because McDonald's alleged
>>that every criticism in the Factsheet was libellous. Those criticisms are
>>common sense views on matters of great public interest, not just directed at
>>McDonald's but at the food industry and multinationals in general.
>>Defending such views made the case very wide-ranging. Often, McDonald's
>>forced Steel & Morris to prove the obvious - for example, that much of its
>>packaging ends up as litter, that diet is linked to ill-health, that
>>advertising to children gets them to pester their parents to take them to
>>McDonald's, and that McDonald's pays low wages to its workers.
>>
>>Mike Mansfield, a leading UK QC, stated recently: "The 'McLibel' case is
>>the trial of the century as it concerns the most important issues that any
>>of us have to face living our ordinary lives. This David and Goliath battle
>>has it all."
>>
>>The Corporation called its big guns into the witness box - US and UK
>>executives, departmental heads and consultants etc. As the trial wore on,
>>they were forced under lengthy cross examination to make damaging admissions
>>and concessions on all the issues. In fact, McDonald's basic case on each
>>major issue having collapsed, the only REAL bones of contention by the end
>>of the trial were legal technicalities and arcane arguments over
>>interpretation of the exact meaning of the text and the accompanying
>>satirical banner headlines and cartoons in the 1986 London Greenpeace
>>Factsheet (which was out of print before the writs were served in 1990).
>>
>>Steel & Morris were denied their right to a jury trial and, with no right to
>>Legal Aid, have been forced to conduct their own defence against McDonald's
>>team of top libel lawyers. The denial of a jury caused Marcel Berlins, a
>>leading legal commentator, to remark "I cannot think of a case in which the
>>legal cards have been so spectacularly stacked against one party".
>>
>>After McDonald's issued 300,000 leaflets nationwide on the eve of the trial
>>calling their critics liars, the Defendants took out a counterclaim for
>>libel against McDonald's which ran concurrently with McDonald's libel action.
>>
>>At the time of the first anniversary of the Trial (June 1995), it was widely
>>reported that McDonald's had initiated secret settlement negotiations with
>>Steel & Morris. They twice flew members of their US Board of Directors to
>>London to meet with the Defendants to seek ways of ending the case.
>>McDonald's were, and still are, clearly very worried about the way the case
>>has gone for them and the bad publicity they are receiving.
>>
>>A confidential internal memo from McDonald's in Australia (leaked to and
>>broadcast widely by the media during the trial) revealed the Corporation's
>>dilemma around the world with media coverage of the case: "Contain it as a
>>UK issue". "We could worsen the controversy by adding our opinion". "We
>>want to keep it at arms length - not become guilty by association". "This
>>will not be a positive story for McDonald's Australia". The aim is to
>>"minimise any further negative publicity".
>>
>>It is clear that McDonald's aim of suppressing the "What's Wrong With
>>McDonald's?" leaflets has totally backfired. Over 2 million leaflets have
>>been handed out to the public in the UK alone since the writs were served
>>and thousands of people have pledged to continue circulating the leaflets
>>whatever the verdict. Protests and campaigns against McDonald's continue to
>>grow in over 24 countries.
>>
>>Additionally the 'McSpotlight' Internet site, an on-line library and
>>campaigning tool, was launched in February 1996. It makes available across
>>the globe over 10,000 separate files containing everything that McDonald's
>>don't want the public to know, and includes full transcripts of the McLibel
>>Trial (http://www.mcspotlight.org/). McSpotlight has been accessed over 13
>>million times since its launch.
>>
>>
>>
>>- ENDS -
>>
>>
>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 01:24:58 -0400
From: allen schubert
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (UK) McLibel Activists Share Beliefs
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970620012456.00694c40@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
from AP Wire page:
-------------------------------------
06/19/1997 15:31 EST
McLibel Activists Share Beliefs
By DIRK BEVERIDGE
AP Business Writer
LONDON (AP) -- Similar left-wing convictions mixed with pure chance to
bring together the two vegetarian activists who slugged it out with
McDonald's Corp. for seven years.
Dave Morris, a single father and unemployed former postman, and Helen
Steel, a part-time bar worker, were members of a little-known
environmental group that began an anti-McDonald's campaign in the late
1980s.
McDonald's hired corporate spies to infiltrate London Greenpeace --
unrelated to Greenpeace International -- and find out who was handing out
leaflets accusing the world's biggest hamburger company of being an
exploitative corporate menace.
The infiltrators were able to identify just five people in the loose-knit
group, including Morris, who is now 43, and Steel, now 31.
McDonald's sued Sept. 20, 1990, likely expecting easy victory.
The five defendants met with lawyers who told them they would be crushed
in court because British libel law would not provide them public
defenders and they would be up against the best legal team McDonald's
could buy.
Three defendants agreed to settle the case, apologizing to McDonald's.
Steel and Morris had met through previous anti-establishment campaigns,
and although they did not know one another well, they began talking about
their mutual disgust at the idea of apologizing to McDonald's.
Each agreed to hang in and fight as long as the other would. The
``McLibel Two'' first counted on a battle that might last a few months.
But the case so consumed their lives that Steel had to move back to
London from the Yorkshire farm where she would much rather be living.
Eventually, their case became England's longest trial, outdoing the
291-day case of a Londoner who impersonated a nobleman in the 19th
century.
Even after their inevitable defeat arrived on day 314, they said the
fight will continue in appeals court.
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 01:27:43 -0400
From: allen schubert
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) Judge's Ruling in McLibel Case
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970620012741.0070105c@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
from AP Wire page:
-----------------------------------
06/19/1997 14:35 EST
Judge's Ruling in McLibel Case
By The Associated Press
Justice Roger Bell's key findings in the libel case brought by McDonald's
Corp. against vegetarian activists Dave Morris and Helen Steel for claims
made in leaflets:
------
RAINFOREST DESTRUCTION: Defendants wrongly claimed McDonald's was
responsible for tearing down rainforests to farm cattle for hamburgers.
There also is ``no evidence that any rainforest timber has ever been used
to make McDonald's paper or paperboard packaging.''
------
THIRD WORLD STARVATION: Activists wrongly claimed McDonald's helped push
small farmers off land in developing countries to make way for big cattle
farms.
------
RECYCLED PAPER: Defendants libeled McDonald's by saying the company
``fooled'' people by claiming to use recycled paper. At time of the
leaflets, McDonald's used ``a small but significant portion of recycled
fiber.''
------
HEALTHY FOOD: Defendants libeled McDonald's by saying its food is ``very
unhealthy.'' However, ``the small proportion of McDonald's customers who
eat McDonald's food several times a week will take the very real risk of
heart disease if they continue to do so throughout their lives,
encouraged by the plaintiffs' advertising.''
------
ADVERTISING: Judge sided with activists by finding that McDonald's ad
campaigns ``exploit children by using them, as more susceptible subjects
of advertising,'' to pressure their parents.
Defendants did not defame McDonald's by claiming ads used ``gimmicks,''
or by disparaging food as ``low-quality'' or ``at best mediocre.'' Saying
company executives used ``gimmicks to cover up the true quality of their
food'' was, however, defamatory.
------
ANIMAL CRUELTY: Lack of open air and sunshine was not cruel to animals
later made into McDonald's food. However, McDonald's is ``culpably
responsible'' for animal cruelty for keeping laying hens in small cages
all their lives, putting some broiler chickens and pigs in small cages
for parts of their lives and cutting some conscious chickens' throats.
------
FOOD POISONING: Defendants wrongly suggested a big risk of food
poisoning. ``From time to time people will no doubt get food poisoning
from eating McDonald's food, but the risk is very small indeed.''
------
EMPLOYMENT: McDonald's pays low wages in Britain, ``thereby helping to
depress wages for workers in the catering trade.'' But defendants libeled
McDonald's by claiming this leads to exploitation of women and black
employees.
Workplace is not unsafe, though McDonald's tries to save money by
pressuring some hourly workers to leave early when business is slow and
some young employees are forced to work illegal hours.
------
UNIONS: McDonald's executives don't like unions, but defendants' wrongly
claimed McDonald's has an anti-union policy.
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 01:31:45 -0400
From: allen schubert
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) Opposition to Genetics Blocks Trade
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970620013143.006f49bc@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
more on genetically engineered food
from AP Wire page:
-----------------------------------
06/19/1997 09:23 EST
Opposition to Genetics Blocks Trade
By CURT ANDERSON
AP Farm Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Use of genetics technology for farming and food,
common in the United States, is viewed with suspicion in Europe and has
become one of the Clinton administration's thorniest trade obstacles.
The standoff escalated again Wednesday when the European Union approved
rules requiring companies seeking approval of gene-modified products to
identify them as such on ``a label or accompanying document.'' All 15
member nations must comply by July 31.
Ritt Bjerregaard, the EU environment chief, said the labels would provide
``valuable information for the consumer'' and were not intended to scare
the public away from genetically altered products.
But Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman told the Senate Agriculture
Committee earlier in the day that Europeans have deep-seated fears that
the products aren't safe, even if science proves otherwise.
``It's based on ideology, culture, religion,'' Glickman said. ``The
attitude is, it's not what God intended.''
Although American officials expected the EU move, U.S. Trade
Representative Charlene Barshefsky told the Senate panel that labeling or
segregation of genetically altered products may violate world trade rules
and could trigger a U.S. complaint.
``That can't be tolerated, especially when segregation is done based on
purely political goals, and not based on science at all,'' Barshefsky
said.
She said American farmers stand to lose up to $5 billion in European
exports if sales of genetically-altered products lag because of these EU
rules.
The fight is over use of genetic engineering for a wide range of farm
purposes, including making plants tougher against pests and fattening
cattle for market. The United States insists these practices are
perfectly safe.
Glickman planned to stress the subject today in a speech in London to the
International Grains Council, a private industry organization the United
States hopes will help change European attitudes toward genetic
modifications.
``Truth is truth. Science is science. We've got to keep pushing that,''
Glickman told the Senate panel on Wednesday.
Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind., chairman of the Agriculture Committee, said
Agriculture Department statistics show that by 2000, one-third of U.S.
farm products will be sold overseas and that agriculture production
worldwide must increase to meet a growing population.
``Without the biotechnology changes, we're not going to get there,''
Lugar said. ``We cannot yield on that. They (the EU) are going to have to
get out of their funk.''
The United States recently won a preliminary victory when a panel of the
World Trade Organization ruled that the EU's ban on use of hormones in
beef was unjustified because it was not based on science. Hormones are
used in 90 percent of U.S. beef.
The Europeans are expected to appeal that ruling after it is finalized,
and they remain opposed to other U.S. goods and commodities that have
been modified genetically.
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 02:04:55 -0400
From: millerd1@sunyit.edu (David Lee Winston Miller)
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Claims Surrounding Mountain Goat Shooting Proposal to be Reviewed
Message-ID: <199706200602.CAA17709@envirolink.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
----Interior To Appoint Scientists To Review M. Goat Research----
Claims surrounding the mountain goat shooting proposal are to be reviewed by INTERIOR
APPOINTED professionals according to a page (dated 06-16-97) on the Olympic National Park
web site (http://www.nps.gov/olym/goatpr.txt). (Note that the Department of the Interior's
Olympic National Park has always supported killing ALL of the mountain goats in the Park.)
For a quick summary on the issue, please see:
http://sunyit.edu/~millerd1/GOATS.HTM
("UPDATE" section contains letter-writing info.)
The Olympic National Park news release:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
Secretary Of The Interior To Appoint Scientists To Review
Mountain Goat Research
The Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the
Secretary's science advisor and appropriate professional
societies, will appoint a number of recognized experts to review
existing scientific information about mountain goats in Olympic
National Park, announced park superintendent
David Morris today.
"Review of the science is a key element in responding to
concerns raised by Congressman Norm Dicks and others about
the park's proposed goat management program", said Morris.
Up to 12 independent scientists, who are yet to be named by
the Secretary, will examine all mountain goat research done to
date, including history of goats on the Olympic Peninsula and
the effects of goats on soils, vegetation and natural processes.
They are expected to present their findings to the Secretary of
the Interior within 18 months. The public will have an
opportunity to review and comment on these findings.
Other actions to be taken during this time include censusing the
population of goats in the park and monitoring effects on
vegetation. The current environmental impact statement
process will be suspended until completion of the scientific
review.
We appreciate the Congressman's interest in the mountain goat
issue, said Morris. This strategy provides for another very
careful look at this difficult situation. At the end of this
review, the Secretary will have the best possible record to
determine what if any actions are warranted, prudent and
feasible with respect to mountain goats in Olympic National
Park.
# # # #
prepared June 16, 1997
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
David Lee Winston Miller (a.k.a. "Winston Miller")
millerd1@sunyit.edu http://www.sunyit.edu/~millerd1
- - - - - - - - - - - -(end)- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 20:10:36 +0800 (SST)
From: Vadivu Govind
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (TW) No pork exports within 3 years
Message-ID: <199706201210.UAA31011@eastgate.cyberway.com.sg>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>CNA Daily English News Wire
NO PORK EXPORTS WITHIN 3 YEARS: COA
Kaohsiung, June 17 (CNA) Due to the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD)
in March,
which has resulted in the slaughter of tens of thousand of hogs, Taiwan will
not be able to export
pork for three years, the island's top agricultural official said.
Peng Chuo-kui, chairman of the Council of Agriculture (COA), made the
remarks at a conference
on new developments in Taiwan agriculture attended by leaders of farmers
associations in Tainan,
Kaohsiung and Pingtung, southern Taiwan.
He revealed porks from local hog farmers can only be sold on the island in
the next few years,
during which the COA is going to make efforts to upgrade Taiwan's
hog-raising industry.
The COA official said his council is formulating new hog-raising policies in
order to enhance
hog-raising efficiency, strengthen quarantine measures and improve sanitation.
On the other hand, the agricultural official noted that the COA is also
mapping out new hog-raising
measures for the recovery of that industry here. The FMD epidemic has forced
most hog farms on
the island to close down.
Peng pointed out that the farmers may resume hog-raising as soon as they
conform to measures that
require every hog farm to have a contract with a veterinarian and be
equipped with waste-water and
waste-disposal devices. (By Elizabeth Hsu)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 20:11:12 +0800 (SST)
From: Vadivu Govind
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (TW) Hog raisers to resume operations
Message-ID: <199706201211.UAA25681@eastgate.cyberway.com.sg>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
CNA Daily English News Wire
Taipei, June 18 (CNA) Council of Agriculture (COA) Chairman Peng Tso-kuei
said on Wednesday
that hog raisers affected by the recent epidemic of foot and mouth disease
(FMD) will be allowed to
resume their operations in August.
Peng said hog farmers can apply to the government in July to resume
operations in August. He went
on to say that more than four million infected pigs at over 6,000 farms had
been slaughtered since
the FMD breakout in late March.
Peng said the COA had decided to permit the resumption of operations since
the epidemic has
stopped spreading.
He noted, however, that farmers wishing to resume hog raising must meet
government requirements
for environmental protection, hygiene standards and land-use. They also must
sign a letter of
guarantee promising to prove the pedigree of their stud pigs and that pigs
infected by any epidemic in
the future must be killed immediately at site.
Peng said the new government requirements mean that the COA needs to discuss
with the
Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) whether to allow the
approximately 2,000 pig farms
located within the water reservation region of the Kaoping River to resume
operations, because of
EPA concerns over protection of water resources.
Should hog raising be prohibited in that area, the COA will help affected
farmers switch to other
professions, he added.
There are currently about six million pigs being raised islandwide, which
Peng said will be sufficient
to meet domestic demand.
As pork exports will not be allowed for another three years, he urged all
hog farmers to reduce their
stock levels.
Meanwhile, Peng also announced that the government will release a NT$100
million (about US$3.6
million) relief fund to help farmers replant arable land devastated by the
recent flooding caused by
torrential rains over the past two weeks. The natural disaster has caused
estimated losses of
NT$1.57 billion to the agricultural sector.
Fruit and vegetable prices in central Taiwan have increased noticeably,
while retail prices in some
Taipei markets have doubled, according to COA officials, who added that
vegetable and fruit
supplies are expected to return to normal in three weeks. (By Flor Wang)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 20:12:38 +0800 (SST)
From: Vadivu Govind
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (HK) Global ivory trading 'will see elephant holocaust'
Message-ID: <199706201212.UAA31550@eastgate.cyberway.com.sg>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>South China Morning Post
20 June 97
Global ivory trading 'will see elephant holocaust'
FIONA HOLLAND
Conservationists have warned that the resumption of international ivory
trading will lead to an "elephant holocaust" and open the floodgates to
smuggling of stockpiles from Hong Kong.
Members of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
of Wild Flora and Fauna yesterday voted in Harare to allow Zimbabwe,
Namibia and Bostwana to resume trading in ivory.
The controversial move downlists elephants in the three African
countries from the convention's top "endangered" category to appendix two,
which permits controlled trade.
In 18 months, if strict monitoring controls have been implemented, an
initial 62 tonnes of stockpiled ivory will be sold to Japan, where it is in
demand for signature chops.
But the director of the International Fund for Animal Welfare China,
Jill Robinson, said: "It is a tragic day for elephants. It just makes one
incredibly nervous to have trade reopened anywhere in the world.
"If the trade in ivory is reopened we will see an elephant holocaust."
The decision does not alter the status of ivory in Hong Kong, where 286
tonnes are legally stockpiled by traders, but can only be sold within the
territory.
Before the 1989 trade ban, Hong Kong was the centre of the world ivory
market, trading huge volumes of "white gold".
Ms Robinson said it would "open the floodgates" for Hong Kong's ivory
stockpile to be smuggled to Japan.
Conservation officer for World Wide Fund for Nature Hong Kong, Alex Yau
Shuk-kan, said research showed Japan's trade controls were lax.
"Everyone is concerned about the impact on African elephant populations
in terms of illegal trade and poaching," Mr Yau said.
"The downlisting is acceptable in terms of elephants' biological status, but
we are . . . against reopening trade at the moment."
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:56:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pat Fish
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: McD's Web Site Trial Blackout?
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Despite McDonald's claims to have "won" the McLibel case, their online
press-release page remains suspiciously quiet about the outcome, unlike
their adversaries' McSpotlight web site (www.mcspotlight.org).
See for yourself: http://www.mcdonalds.com/a_system/press_release/
Thanks to sharp-eyed Winston Miller for the tip!
Pat Fish
Computer Professionals for Earth & Animals
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:02:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Debbie Leahy
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Land O'Lorin Under Investigation
Message-ID: <01IKAMJRBKGI94EWDR@delphi.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
LAND O'LORIN ATTEMPTS TO MAKE DEAL WITH USDA
Land O'Lorin, a pitiful, poorly-run roadside zoo located 40 miles
west of Chicago in Batavia, Illinois is attempting to make a deal
with the USDA to avoid paying penalties or losing its license.
This facility, owned by Lorin Womack, has been plagued with charges
of severe neglect for its animals by USDA-APHIS inspectors, former
workers, and visitors. He has about 100 animals (including lions,
tigers, leopards, bears, primates, wolves, foxes, camels, llamas,
goats, aoudads, watusi, otters, and raccoons) on ten acres.
Last August, Land O'Lorin was shut down for one month and fined
$20,000 by the USDA for violations of the Animal Welfare Act which
included failure to provide adequate veterinary care, shelter,
space, and protection from predators. The facility is still under
investigation by the USDA for not giving the animals sufficient
food and water, unsanitary conditions, and poorly maintained cages.
Many of the animals are kept in small, barren cages on concrete
slabs. The big cats, wolves, and fox pace incessantly and his
bears pound on and bite at the bars of their cage.
Other serious problems:
- Womack knowingly and willfully transported a Japanese snow
macaque across state lines without a health certificate.
- Two tiger cubs were used in public display at a pet show 3/95.
One was very sick, dehydrated, vomiting, and had diarrhea. Two
days later the tiger cub died. A baboon on display had raw,
irritated skin around her waste from a heavy chain she was forced
to wear.
- He has two primates, a baboon and snow macaque, who are each kept
in solitary cages and his own vet states Womack has not adhered to
the environmental enhancement program.
- Animals have been found dead and dying.
Womack complains frequently of lack of funding as an excuse for his
sub-standard conditions, yet intentionally breeds animals and
acquires new animals at exotic animal auctions.
It's possible a settlement could be reached within the next two
weeks. Please contact the USDA as soon as possible and ask that NO
DEALS be made with Lorin Womack and that his Class C license #33-C-
095 be revoked. He's been a chronic violator of the Animal Welfare
Act for nearly a decade and animals continue to languish and die in
miserable conditions. It's time for the USDA to put an end to these
pathetic exhibits that habitually fail to comply with the minimum
guidelines of the Animal Welfare Act. Contact:
Dr. Elizabeth Goldentyre, Sector Supervisor
USDA-APHIS-AC
2568-A Riva Road, Suite 302
Annapolis, MD 21401
Phone) 410/571-8692
Fax) 410/571-6279
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:06:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: MINKLIB@aol.com
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (Den) ALF Strikes Danish Mink Farm
Message-ID: <970620120626_-1093786912@emout11.mail.aol.com>
The underground Animal Liberation Front has taken credit for a raid on a
Danish mink farm in which 30 mink were liberated, hundreds of breeding cards
destroyed, the perimeter fence broken down, and sand put in a tractors oil
tank. This action took place on June 14th at a farm in north Jylland,
Denmark.
In a communique sent to sympathetic animal rights groups the ALF said that
they would have done more damage, but the mink farmer interupted the action,
and they had to spend the rest of the night evading police.
This is the first mink liberation in Denmark, which produces 1/3 of the
worlds ranch raised mink. Now every Scandinavian country has had at least
one fur farm liberation, as have Austria, Germany, England, the US, and
Canada.
54% of the worlds mink and 80% of the worlds fox is produced in the
Scandinavian countries of Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and Norway. Sweden has
seen 10 fur farm raids this year alone, and Finland has been a hot bed of
activity as well. Norway has seen anti fur farm action too.
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:58:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Snugglezzz@aol.com
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Pollution Settlement Expected
Message-ID: <970620125830_240275719@emout20.mail.aol.com>
Grove, OK, USA: The Oklahoma Wildlife Dept. is expected to accept a
settlement from Simmons Foods, Inc. for wildlife damage claims as a result of
poultry waste pollution affecting the Grand Lake watershed, Grove citizens
were told Thursday.
The settlement would be paid to the Department of Wildlife Conservation and
would most likely relieve the company of any lawsuit by the department, said
Assistant Attorney General Jeannine Hale. The amount of the settlement will
be announced soon, officials said.
A settlement would not prevent the state of Oklahoma from filing a civil suit
against the company for damage to the water, as Missouri has, she said. The
Wildlife Department's settlement would only concern damage to aquatic and
other wildlife.
Simmons Foods operates a poultry processing plant in Southwest City, Mo.,
just east of the Oklahoma state line.
Simmons has a history of violating discharge limits into the stream and not
being properly permitted at times.
David Williams, owner of Grove Sport Center, said the pollution is serious.
He said the natural clam beds in Honey Creek and around Shangri-La resort are
ruined.
"I had divers recently try to harvest clams on Honey Creek, and 90 percent
are dead and the other 10 percent are sick. And around Shangri-La, 75 percent
of the clams are dead," he said.
In May, Missouri's attorney general filed a civil lawsuit against Simmons for
25 alleged water pollution violations.
The plant processes about 1.4 million chickens a week and discharges its
treated wastewater directly into Cave Springs Branch.
-- Sherrill
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:58:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Snugglezzz@aol.com
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Deadly Bug Eludes Rigorous Testing
Message-ID: <970620125825_-462064249@emout16.mail.aol.com>
Atlanta, GA (USA): A stubborn type of bacteria that can escape detection
despite rigorous screening of the blood supply has killed at least 12 people
through tainted transfusions since 1985, the government said Thursday.
The bacteria, yersinia enterocolitica, thrive when stored in lab
refrigerators, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said.
"You may have a case where the tests weren't able to detect but a small
amount of it, not enough to make a person sick," said Dr. Matt Kuehnert, a
CDC epidemiolo-
gist. "As it sits in the refrigerator, it can actually grow."
Yersinia is found in unpasteurized cheese or undercooked meat. People who
receive transfusions tainted with it can suffer fever, chills and breathing
trouble and eventually die.
-- Sherrill
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:58:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: Snugglezzz@aol.com
To: Ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Stolen animals in OK (USA)
Message-ID: <970620125824_1209214471@emout15.mail.aol.com>
A Bristow, OK woman let her female Golden Retriever out of the house for a
few minutes and the dog vanished. Similar stories are told in surrounding
towns, too. The lost and found ads reflect a rush of missing animals. Patti
Gorman of Sapulpa, OK suspects that the influx of missing animal reports are
because of organized animal thievery. B-dealers could be working in the area.
Another possibility is that animals are being stolen for puppy mill breeders.
She said that "sweepers" will actually take up residence in a community to
gather what animals they can and move on before authorities get wise to their
scheme. Gorman said animal owners should be on the lookout. If they suspect
an animal has been stolen, they can call 1-800-stolenpet.
- Sherrill
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:08:03 -0400
From: Wyandotte Animal Group
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (MI) Keep pets from research lab!
Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970620170803.2a3f4b7a@mail.heritage.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====================_866851683==_"
(postcard mailing we did to residents living in these two cities)
YOUR HELP IS NEEDED TO KEEP PETS FROM GOING TO RESEARCH!
The City of Taylor currently sells their unclaimed pound animals to a USDA-Class B dealer who
then sells them to various animal experimentation labs. The City of Riverview, without their own
animal pound, sends their animals to the Taylor pound and they end up with the same animal
dealer as Taylor animals. There is no way of knowing if an animal brought to a pound is
someone's lost pet. Pounds are required to hold animals for only a few days and many caretakers
cannot find their pets in time to reclaim them. Pounds that do not enjoy the public's confidence
cannot do an efficient and cost-effective job of animal control. People will not willingly bring
stray or unwanted pets to them. Thus, fewer lost pets are returned and fewer unwanted pets are
adopted. Pound release robs pets of a second chance at life. The assumption that these animals
are doomed to die anyway callously disregards our moral responsibility. The choice becomes
painless euthanasia verses laboratory !
experimentation, which may produce pain, induce disease, require a long, suffering death and
may not benefit the public. The contract with the animal dealer is up for renewal at the end of
June. Please write or call the following people TODAY and urge them to end this barbaric
practice and instead use your tax dollars on public education regarding proper pet care and
spaying and neutering. Only until we begin to lower the number of animals born will there be a
lift in the amount of animals brought to pounds each year.
Taylor residentsRiverview residents
Mayor Greg PitoniakMayor Tim Durand
23555 Goddard14100 Civic Park Drive
Taylor MI 48180Riverview MI 48182
(313) 374-1450(313) 281-4201
Jack HaydonKathy Thiede
City Council ChairpersonCity Council Chairperson
(313) 374-1320 (same address)(same address and phone)
Be sure to ask the City Council Chairperson to share your thoughts at the council meeting and be
read aloud on the record. If you have any questions or want to get more involved, please call
Jason Alley at
(313) 676-7793.
Jason Alley
Wyandotte Animal Group
wag@heritage.com
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 15:08:06 -0700
From: Persephone Moonshadow Howling Womyn
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US-Calif) Ex-Timber Faller Sues PL
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970620150804.0082a6f0@206.184.139.138>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:55:08 +0100
>From: Environmental Protection Information Center
>Reply-To: epic@igc.org
>Sender: owner-epic-saves-forests@igc.apc.org
>Subject: Ex-Timber Faller Sues PL
>To: epic-saves-forests@igc.org
>
>Here is yet another example of PL/Maxxam's flagrant disregard for worker
>safety and the law. EPIC wishes Stan Chandler and his attorneys the
>best of luck in this suit.
>
>
>PACIFIC LUMBER/MAXXAM CORPORATION SUED FOR ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES
>
> On Thursday, June 19, 1997, Pacific Lumber Company and its
>parent corporation, Maxxam Corporation, were sued in U.S. District
>Court in San Francisco by Stan Chandler, who for many years was
>Pacific Lumber's number one old growth redwood timber faller and is a
>third generation PL employee.
>
> The suit alleges that, following the junk bond takeover by
>corporate financier Charles Hurwitz and the Maxxam Corporation,
>management put profit ahead of worker safety, exposing their
>employees to unsafe and dangerous working conditions. Mr. Chandler
>was fired for speaking up against those new management policies which
>placed the safety of Pacific Lumber employees in jeopardy.
>
> The complaint includes claims that the Maxxam-controlled company
>engaged in unfair business practices by violating state and federal
>environmental laws, including cutting down virgin old growth forest
>during clandestine operations not authorized by law. For example,
>employees were directed to cut down old growth trees which were
>protected by state and federal agencies for marbled murrelet and
>spotted owl habitat. Furthermore, the company required employees to
>engage in activities designed to obstruct and prevent law enforcement
>agencies discovery of these operations. A videotape showing the
>illegal removal of old growth trees was filed as an exhibit to the
>complaint.*
>
> "Charles Hurwitz and Maxxam do not care about their employees or
>the environment -- all they care about it short-term profit. Pacific
>Lumber cannot put profit before worker safety, or punish an employee
>who speaks out against unsafe practices." said Kirk Boyd, one of Mr.
>Chandler's attorneys.
>
> The suit seeks damages for the wrongful discharge of Mr.
>Chandler. The suit also seeks an order from the court requiring
>Pacific Lumber and Maxxam to pay back to the public the value of the
>trees illegally removed.
>
>
>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 15:29:16 -0700
From: angst@cdsnet.net
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US)Coyote Bounty Offered in Oregon
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970620152855.007b4b50@mail.cdsnet.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Please write letters to the editor immediately:
fax (541) 776 4376
email letters@mailtribune.com)
snail mail (box 1108 Medford 97501).
Any ideas on how to respond to this appropriately???-
Sarah Wilson
-----------------------------------------------------------
Medford Mail-Tribune 6/20
Coyote ears can yield big bucks
Mark Freeman
Here's the scenario: you're out deer hunting on the Dead Indian Plateau,
and all you've seen today is the same cluster of does. You're leaning
against a tree hoping a big buck follows those does down the trail.
Instead, yo spy a coyote stalking the does and yearlings. so what do yo
do? You know it;s open season on coyotes, and yo know their appetites are
largely blamed for harming the fur and fowl you can't seem to find while
hunting anymore. Do yo shoot the coyote and spoil you chance at a buck?
Probably not. But for an extra $10?..."I'd have to admit I would for $10",
says hunter duane dungannon. "thats's the price of a deer tag. It may be
worth popping a coyote and coming back another day to get my deer,
particularly if the coyotes are hurting my deer population", he says.
A belief that coyotes are hurting deer and a need to entice people to do
something about that is precisely why dungagnnon and other rogue valley
members of the Oregon hunters association are starting what amounts to a
bounty on local coyotes. The chapter is offering $10 for every pair of
coyote ears brought to monthly oha meetings in medford. the chapter has
set aside $5,000 to buy the first 500 sets of coyote ears, and organizers
will then look at whether to continue the program. The cash-for-ears idea
started 19 months ago with the oha's redmond chapter which so far has paid
out almost $50,000. The rogue valley chapter is trying this approach as a
way of adding to the region's wildlife habitat for everything from age
grouse to wild turkeys to blacktail deer and roosevelt elk by subtracting
on of their most numerous predators. "we're always trying to fix up the
habitat for these animals, but what could be better than getting the guy
trying to eat them?" says bill kirk, oha chapter board member from medford.
Coyote populations are on the rise throughout oregon, so eliminating as
many as 500 more coyotes from the region won't put much of a dent in the
population, but might keep growth in check. "we're just trying to restore
a balance," dungannon says. "no one's trying to obliterate coyotes -- and
yo couldn't do it if you wanted to." and lord knows there's been plenty of
hunters who pray for something like a timely outbreak of parvo to knock
back the coyote population.
this is a classic case of desirable wildlife populations versus
undesirable. grouse, deer, and elk here, as well as deer, elk , game birds
and antelope in eastern oregon are critters managed for sustainable
populations than can afford to be hunted. dozens of hunters' groups work to
propagate these species, and specific seasons and tag restrictions help
ensure they're not over hunted. in other words, they're desired. coyotes
are considered the bane of deer and ranchers alike. They eat anything they
can catch, from sage rats to blacktail fawns and whole clutches of canada
geese. they are largely responsible for antelope fawn mortality on hart
mountain as well as the complete failure of redlegged partridge releases in
jackson county during the late 1980's. and it's open season on coyotes
year-round, with no bag limit. You don't even need a hunting license if yo
shoot coyotes on your own ranch. in other words, they're undesirable.
In redmond, the feeling of coyotes as undesirables has hit a fevered pitch,
leading to the creation of the ears-for-cash idea. "we figure guys go out,
drive around public lands on the weekends" says mike gangstead, an oha
member in bend who runs the eastern oregon coyote ears program. "if they
see a coyote, they might take it for $10 and pay for their gas." the
redmond chapter has a coyote hotline (503 383 1099) (ps. the number didn't
work for me) and has been flooded with positive calls and not one single
complaint or criticism, gangstead says. "basically,"gangstead says, "money
talks."
Oha guys here like what they hear in that talk, leading to the creation of
their own cash kitty earmarked for rogue valley coyotes. though it's
similar to an illegal bounty, the program is legal because it falls under
the licensed buying of fur. "technically" dungannon says, "we're buying
ears. we're paying for pelts, but just the upper pelt." the program may
be more gimmick than game management tool because there are more coyotes
preying on wildlife than there are .22 caliber shells on the shelves of the
black bird store. "my feeling about bounties is that they don't accomplish
much," says Al Polentz, an oregon odfw supervisor in bend. polentz is
convinced coyotes are a major detriment to eastern oregon wildlife, but
believes the problem can't be solved by simply shooting them for cash. "it
won't create any measurable effects" polentz says "but 5,000 coyotes is
alot of coyotes".
and one coyote can be $10 for hunters who follow some simple directions.
to qualify, shoot the coyote legally and cut off the ears. Take them to
the oha's rogue valley chapter meetings each second tuesday of every month
at jj north's grand buffet in medford. "we'll have someone at the meeting
with a pocket full of !
$10 bills," kirk says. "just leave the ears in the car. don't bring them
in." it's open to oha and non-oha members. so far, only a half dozen have
been brought in. but a flurry of activity is expected. "here's an
opportunity to make a few extra bucks in a fun and sporting way," dungannon
says. "it isn't the money as much as doing something for wildlife".
mark freeman covers the outdoors for the mail tribune. he can be reached
at 541- 776 4470.
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 19:45:34 -0400
From: Jun1022@cybernex.net (Student Abolitionist League)
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Anti McDonald's Action in NYC
Message-ID:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Student Abolitionist League will be sponsoring a demonstration at
MCDonald's at 46th Street and Broadway on Saturday, tomorrow, at NOON. The
demonstration comes in response to the verdict in the McLibel hearing,
where a British judge ruled against the activists.
This will be a very important demo because:
*This will be part of an INTERNATIONAL day of action
* NYC is a major center of both national and international media
*Video and photos collected at our NYC demo can be used worldwide as
representative of the actions taking place, as happened when the Vivia
Veggie Society demo'd against the premier of the Arch Deluxe in NYC.
*The judge acknowledged McDeath's cruelty to animal, we must get this out
tothe public
*We must show McMurder that the activst campaign against them is
unstoppable, no matter how many lawsuits they win
Meat is Murder
DAIRY IS RAPE!!!
For more info call Adam Weissman at (201) 930-9026 or email Jun1022@cybernex.net
Student Abolitionist League: A Networking Organization and Resource Center
for Student Animal Rights Groups
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 10:29:43 +0800 (SST)
From: Vadivu Govind
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (HK) Local ivory traders angry at release of African stockpile
Message-ID: <199706210229.KAA24337@eastgate.cyberway.com.sg>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>South China Morning Post
Saturday June 21 1997
Local ivory traders angry at release of African
stockpile
FIONA HOLLAND and SHIRLEY KWOK
Ivory traders will call on the Government to lobby the international
community and allow Hong Kong to trade its massive stockpiles with Japan.
The move comes after the relaxation of the seven-year international
trade ban which will allow controlled trade by Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe.
A trial 62 tonnes of stockpiled ivory from the three African countries will
be sold to Japan in 1999, subject to both parties implementing stringent
monitoring controls.
The decision by the 138 member states of the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna has
increased frustration among local traders, who are sitting on a stockpile
of 286 tonnes of ivory.
The controversial decision does not change the legal status of the
ivory stockpiled in Hong Kong, which was imported before the 1989 ban and
can only be sold within the territory.
Cat Street trader Wong Fat-kwan, of Pivot Trading Company, said it was
unfair and traders should lobby the Government.
But vice-chairman of the Hong Kong and Kowloon Ivory Manufacturers'
Association Lee Chat said: "I am not optimistic. We have been negotiating
with the Hong Kong Government for a long time. But they just turned a deaf
ear."
Sheung Wan trader Leung Shue-woo said prices in Hong Kong would tumble
now that Japan had found a legal source.
For the sake of the elephants, Hong Kong's ivory, and not stockpiles in
Africa, should be sold to Japan, Mr Leung said.
"All the ivory here has labels to prove it is legal. It would not cause
any hunting of elephants in Africa."
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 10:31:09 +0800 (SST)
From: Vadivu Govind
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (JP) Japanese buyers welcome ivory ban's end
Message-ID: <199706210231.KAA21216@eastgate.cyberway.com.sg>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>South China Morning Post
Saturday June 21 1997
Japanese buyers welcome ban's end
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE in Tokyo
Japan's environment agency has welcomed a resumption of ivory trade,
ratified at the conference of the Convention of International Trade in
Endangered Species.
Delegates, meeting in Harare, agreed on Thursday to a proposal from
Zimbabwe, Namibia and Botswana to lift the eight-year ivory-trade ban. But
only Japan will be allowed to buy from the three nations.
An official from the environment agency's wildlife division said the trade
would help the conservation of African elephants and combat smuggling.
The three African nations agreed the revenue from their sales would be
put into conservation trusts to be used by boards of trustees in each country.
The money would be directed at "enhanced conservation, monitoring,
capacity building and local community-based programmes" in these
countries, which had witnessed near-decimation of their elephant herds.
All their stocks - a total of nearly 60 tonnes - will be sold to one
buyer only, Japan, and sales cannot take place for the next 18 months while
controls are put in place to ensure poached ivory does not find its way on
to the market.
The Japanese official said Japan would create a new management system for
the trade in ivory.
Environmentalists, however, expressed concern.
"The resumption helps a breeding ground of poachers worsen," said
Makoto Hoshino, a Japanese representative for the World Wide Fund for Nature.
Greenpeace said in a statement the decision was "a frightening message
to poachers and ivory traders that it is profitable to kill elephants again".
Japan has a long history of ivory use, in particular for personal name
stamps, or chops, as signatures have little legal value.
One representative of an Osaka-based ivory association welcomed the
decision, telling the Mainich Shimbun: "The ivory business has been on the
brink of bankruptcy since the international ban on ivory."
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 23:36:19 -0400
From: allen schubert
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Cc: David Rolsky
Subject: Admin Note...HTML
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970620233616.006feff8@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
(This will probably *become* a routine posting..........)
Do not post Embedded HTML files to AR-News! Either copy/paste as text in
e-mail or save the file in text (.txt) format then edit it in your word
processor, then copy/paste into e-mail as text.
Embedded HTML, such as:
.c The Associated Press
Cause some problems with Digest versions of AR-News, more so with the
"archived" version on the web. After such HTML, all text/posts thereafter
become one, massive paragraph (unless first edited out)!
Many subscribers do not have sophisticated software and hardware to handle
such e-mail. For many subscribers, this creates e-mail with HTML
throughout the e-mail, forcing them to "read around" the HTML tags. This
is even more of a problem for those on the Digest version of AR-News, as
this slows downloading time.
Remember--just because your computer can handle it, doesn't mean that
everyone else's computer can do so. Many people are still using "shell"
programs to access the internet.
|
|