AR-NEWS Digest 397

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Circuses on Hard Copy tonite
     by Anna 
  2) Jeff Watkins needs your help
     by ARAishere@aol.com
  3) (US) Fish As Alternative to Tobacco? 
     by allen schubert 
  4) (CH) WWF to Yemen: End Rhino Horn Trade 
     by allen schubert 
  5) HSUS Urgently Seeks a Summer Intern
     by hsuslab@ix.netcom.com (Tamara Hamilton HSUS Laboratory Animals)
  6) Memorial Service and Demonstration in NH
     by hsuslab@ix.netcom.com (Tamara Hamilton HSUS Laboratory Animals)
  7) Fw: APHIS Press Release USDA Allows the Transit of Pork and Pork Products from Baja
     by "radioactive" 
  8) Fw: APHIS Press Release USDA Proposes Changing Foreign Potato Import Regulations
     by "radioactive" 
  9) Rancher Removes Cattle in NM (US)
     by PrairieD@aol.com
 10) Dog Registry Focus of Federal Probe
     by Lisa Schicker 
 11) (US/Calif) ALERTS: Coho listing, salvage logging, 5/7/97
     by Persephone Moonshadow Howling Womyn 
 12) (US/Calif) UPDATE: Redwood Boycott, etc. 5/7/97
     by Persephone Moonshadow Howling Womyn 
 13) Report On International Codex Meeting Regarding Genetically Engineered Foods and
 Labeling
     by pmligotti@earthlink.net (Peter  M. Ligotti)
 14) ASPCA Legislative Alert - Urgent
     by Beth Caskie 
 15) (US/Calif) Red Abalone harvesting Temporarily Suspended
     by Persephone Moonshadow Howling Womyn 
 16) (US) Agencies Duck Bird-Protection Law 
     by allen schubert 
 17) (US) State bans taking of red abalone   
     by allen schubert 
 18) McLibel - THE BOOK ! !
     by allen schubert 
 19) (US) Conservationists warns North American forests in peril   
     by allen schubert 
Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 03:08:35 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Anna 
To: ar-news 
Subject: Circuses on Hard Copy tonite
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Hi,

I just saw that on tonite's Hard Copy they are going to do a piece on the 
abuse of animals in the circus.  I saw a few clips and they showed lions 
being hit and an elephant.

-Anna

          TORTURING ONE ANIMAL IS CRUELTY.
         TORTURING MANY ANIMALS IS SCIENCE?







Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 06:35:40 -0400 (EDT)
>From: ARAishere@aol.com
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Jeff Watkins needs your help
Message-ID: <970507063538_1356343354@emout17.mail.aol.com>

DO CALL FOR JEFF!!

Jeff called me today, and not only is he on lock-down and not getting
any vegan food, but they have also stopped giving him his mail for the
last three days! The first day in lock-down they also kept him in the
dark.

So when you call or fax demand the following:

1. Immediately removing Jeff from lock-down (solitary confinment) and
return him to the dorms (as well as reinstae his job in the kitchen).
2. Serve him vegan MEALS.
3. Give him his mail.

Jeff goes to "trail" in front of the seargent for his bogus offences --
which amount to him sticking up for an innocent inmate the cops were
going to punish -- on Thursday, so we need to make a lot of calls before
then so the bastards know we're watching and we're angry, and we're not
going to fucking let them abuse our prisoners!!!!

Phone: 315-435-5581
Fax: 435-5596

GRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!

Freeman


Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 08:52:23 -0400
>From: allen schubert 
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) Fish As Alternative to Tobacco? 
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970507085221.006c63b4@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from AP Wire page:
-----------------------------------
05/07/1997 07:59 EST 

 Fish As Alternative to Tobacco? 

 MOUNTAIN CITY, Tenn. (AP) -- High school students in the heart of the
burley belt
 are learning to farm fish as an alternative to growing tobacco. 

 Tennessee's first center to find a replacement for tobacco as a cash crop has
 opened at Johnson County High School. The Aquacenter is part of the school's
 Alternative Farming Center and the beginning of what officials hope will be a
 statewide system developed through vocational education programs. 

 Tobacco has been a traditional moneymaker for Tennessee farmers but many are
 wary about the future, chiefly because of federal efforts to curb
cigarette sales
 because of health concerns. 

 Amanda McCoy, president of the Mountain City school's Future Farmers of
America
 chapter, said students are excited about the prospects of fish as an
alternative
 ``crop.'' 

 ``We're not talking about hard labor in tobacco fields,'' said McCoy, a
senior. 

 Visitors earlier this week crowded around water raceways in a
9,000-square-foot
 greenhouse, straining to see inch-long Tilapia fingerlings, fish native to
Africa and
 the Middle East. 

 About 80,000 pounds of fish will be raised annually at the Aquacenter. One
pound of
 fish can be raised in one gallon of water. The school will get $1.80 per
pound, and
 ship the fish live to markets in the Northeast. The fish retails for about
$6 per pound. 

 Students will be able to tell what the water is like at any time, and can
check it from a
 home computer if they wish. After water is circulated through the
raceways, it will go
 to two ponds outdoors, where hybrid striped bass and crappie will be raised. 

 Tobacco was Tennessee's fourth largest cash crop last year, valued at $224.6
 million. Most of it is the burley tobacco grown in East Tennessee. 

 Tobacco farmers have been reluctant to grow alternatives such as produce.
They say
 they cannot make as much money as they do with tobacco and that the
mountainous
 terrain and climate of East Tennessee are not suited to large-scale produce
 production. Tobacco is much more suitable. 

 Nevertheless, educators say, young people must look ahead. 

 ``We are teaching students agriculture for the next millennium,'' said Harvey
 Burniston Jr., a vocational agriculture instructor at the high school. 

 ``We've had hundreds of calls, a lot of them from people who are serious.
We say,
 `Wait and let us make the mistakes.''' 

 Lettuce, tomatoes and other vegetables also will be grown in the facility. 

 The $500,000 project is funded by the Appalachian Regional Commission and
 corporate grants. Inmates from Northeast Correctional Center helped build the
 facility. 
Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 08:55:38 -0400
>From: allen schubert 
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (CH) WWF to Yemen: End Rhino Horn Trade 
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970507085535.006bf80c@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from AP Wire page:
------------------------------
05/07/1997 03:41 EST 

 WWF to Yemen: End Rhino Horn Trade 

 GLAND, Switzerland (AP) -- The World Wildlife Fund today urged Yemen's
 government to strengthen laws to combat the illegal trade in African
rhinoceros horn.

 Rhino horn is used in Yemen to make highly sought-after handles for
traditional
 daggers. WWF said that since 1970, horns from more than 22,000 rhinos may
have
 been imported to Yemen. 

 ``Some important steps have been taken by the Yemen government, but our
latest
 investigations show that significant smuggling continues and simply not
enough is
 being done to bring it to a halt,'' said Steven Broad of WWF. 

 Broad urged Yemen to cooperate with African nations in fighting the
illegal trade and
 to promote substitute materials for dagger handles. 

 Less than 10,000 rhinos remain in the wild in Africa, compared with 70,000
in 1970. 
Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 09:07:05 -0500 (CDT)
>From: hsuslab@ix.netcom.com (Tamara Hamilton HSUS Laboratory Animals)
To: peta@norfolk.infi.net
Subject: HSUS Urgently Seeks a Summer Intern
Message-ID: <199705071407.JAA08879@dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com>

The Animal Research Issues Section of the Humane Society of the United 
States (HSUS) is seeking a summer intern to help with various projects 
and gain valuable professional experience with animal protection.  This 
paid position lasts three months and is available immediately.  The 
successful applicant will be a college student (high-school graduates 
are eligible) preferably pursuing studies in the life sciences, and 
have demonstrable commitment to animal advocacy.  The work location 
will be the HSUS's operations center located in Gaithersburg, Maryland 
(a suburb of Washington, DC).

Please send, fax or e-mail a cover letter and resume to:

Jonathan Balcombe, Ph.D.
(Associate Director for Education, Animal Research Issues)
The Humane Society of the US
2100 L Street, NW
Washington, DC 20037
Phone: 301-258-3046
Fax: 301-258-3082
E-mail: hsuslab@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 09:49:21 -0500 (CDT)
>From: hsuslab@ix.netcom.com (Tamara Hamilton HSUS Laboratory Animals)
To: ar-news@cygnus.com
Cc: ma.neavs.com!karin@ma.neavs.com
Subject: Memorial Service and Demonstration in NH
Message-ID: <199705071449.JAA29046@dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com>

MEMORIAL SERVICE AND DEMONSTRATION FOR GREYHOUND DOGS


Seabrook Greyhound Park, Seabrook, NH
Saturday, May 17, 1997      Rain or Shine  11:00 AM (promptly)



Arrive Early if You Need To Set Up A Banner

Our Memorial Service Will Be Led By Clergy

Flowers And Crosses Will Be Distributed

Traveling North:  Interstate 95N to first NH Exit #1, Left onto route 
107, 1-1/2 miles on Left

Traveling South:  Interstate 95S to last NH exit #1, Right onto Route 
107, 1-1/2 miles on Left

ORGANIZED BY SAVE THE GREYHOUND DOGS! OF VT AND NH

Speak out for these gentle Dogs!

Information:  (802) 879-8838
Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 11:25:19 -0400
>From: "radioactive" 
To: 
Subject: Fw: APHIS Press Release USDA Allows the Transit of Pork and Pork Products from
Baja
Message-ID: <199705071526.LAA16957@mail.mia.bellsouth.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
     charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


 ----
>From: Questa Glenn 
To: press_releases@info.aphis.usda.gov
Date: Tuesday, May 06, 1997 9:29 PM
Subject: APHIS Press Release USDA Allows the Transit of Pork and Pork
Products from Baja

                                   Dawn Kent     (301) 734-7255
                                              dkent@aphis.usda.gov
                                   Jerry Redding (202) 720-6959
                                                    jredding@usda.gov


USDA ALLOWS THE TRANSIT OF PORK AND PORK PRODUCTS FROM
BAJA

     WASHINGTON, May 6, 1997--The U.S. Department of Agriculture is
allowing fresh, chilled, and frozen pork and pork products from the
Mexican state of Baja California to transit the United States, under
certain
conditions, for export to another country.

     "We believe that shipments of pork and pork products from Baja
California transiting our country pose minimal risk of introducing hog
cholera into our domestic swine herds," said Joan M. Arnoldi, deputy
administrator of veterinary services with the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, a part of USDA's marketing and regulatory programs
mission area. 

     The pork or pork products must be packaged in Baja California in a
leakproof container and sealed with a serially numbered seal approved
by APHIS.  The seal must remain intact at all times while transiting the
United States for export.

     Currently, pork products from the Mexican states of Sonora,
Chihuahua, and Yucatan are allowed to transit the United States for
export.

     Hog cholera is a highly contagious viral disease of swine.  The last
outbreak of this disease in Baja California occurred in March 1985 and
vaccination was discontinued there in 1986.

     The United States has been free of hog cholera since 1978 due to a
16-year eradication effort by the industry and state and federal
governments.

     Notice of this final rule is scheduled to be published in the May 7
Federal Register and is effective upon publication.

                                #

NOTE: USDA news releases, program announcements, and media
advisories are available on the Internet.  Access the APHIS Home Pageby
pointing your Web browser to
http://www.aphis.usda.gov and clicking on "APHIS Press Releases."
Also, anyone with an e-mail address can sign up to receive APHIS press
releases automatically.  Send an e-mail message to
majordomo@info.aphis.usda.gov
and leave the subject blank.  In the message, type
subscribe press_releases



Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 11:25:52 -0400
>From: "radioactive" 
To: 
Subject: Fw: APHIS Press Release USDA Proposes Changing Foreign Potato Import Regulations
Message-ID: <199705071527.LAA17040@mail.mia.bellsouth.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
     charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


 ----
>From: Questa Glenn 
To: press_releases@info.aphis.usda.gov
Date: Tuesday, May 06, 1997 9:30 PM
Subject: APHIS Press Release USDA Proposes Changing Foreign Potato Import
Regulations

                                   H. Nolan Lemon, Jr. (301) 734-3266
                                                    nlemon@aphis.usda.gov
                                   Jerry Redding         (202) 720-6959
                                                            jredding@usda.go
v


USDA PROPOSES CHANGING FOREIGN POTATO IMPORT REGULATIONS

     WASHINGTON, May 6, 1997--The U.S. Department of Agriculture is
proposing to amend its foreign potato importation regulations to simplify
them.

     As a part of reform initiatives, USDA proposes to move its existing
importation restrictions for potatoes into other, more relevant
regulations.

     "This will eliminate the need for the Restricted Entry Order that
currently regulates potatoes," said Alfred S. Elder, acting deputy
administrator of plant protection and quarantine with the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service, a part USDA's marketing and regulatory
programs mission area.  "Under this proposal, restrictions for potatoes
for consumption will be regulated under those for fruit and vegetables,
and potatoes for planting, by those for the importation of propagative
materials."

     There are two minor changes in the rule: the area of British
Columbia,
Canada, that is under quarantine for golden nematode is specifically
outlined; and the entry status for potatoes from Bermuda is removed.
Since there is no apparent trade of potatoes from Bermuda to the United
States, USDA does not expect this action to affect trade.

     "Bermuda's regulations allow for the entry of potatoes from countries
other than the United States and Canada," said Elder.  "We want to close
this potential pathway for potato disease introduction," said Elder.

          The proposed rule is scheduled for publication in the May 7
Federal Register.  For more information, contact James Petit de Mange,
staff officer, Phytosanitary Issues Management Team, PPQ, APHIS, 4700
River Road, Unit 140, Riverdale, Md. 20737-1236, telephone (301)
734-6799 or e-mail him at jpdmange@aphis.usda.gov.

     Consideration will be given to comments received on or before July 7.
Please send an original and three copies of your to Docket No. 97-010-1,
Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Suite 3C03, 4700
River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, Md. 20737-1238.

     Comments may be reviewed at USDA, Room 1141, South Building,
14th Street and Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C., between
8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays.  People
wishing to review comments are requested to call ahead on (202)
690-2817 to facilitate entry into the comment reading room.

                                #

NOTE:  USDA news releases, program announcements, and media
advisories are available on the Internet.  Access the APHIS home page
by pointing your Web browser to
http://www.aphis.usda.gov and clicking on "APHIS Press Releases."
Also, anyone with an e-mail address can sign up to receive APHIS press
releases automatically.  Send an e-mail message to
majordomo@info.aphis.usda.gov
and leave the subject blank.  In the message, type
subscribe press_releases


Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 12:03:09 -0400 (EDT)
>From: PrairieD@aol.com
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Rancher Removes Cattle in NM (US)
Message-ID: <970507120252_68145434@emout12.mail.aol.com>

>From A CLEAR View, Vol 4 No 7, May 6, 1997

>  Rancher Removes Cattle in NM
>
>A month after enviros filed a motion in federal court
>alleging Diamond Bar Ranch in New Mexico and the
>federal government were delaying the removal of cattle
>from the grazing allotments in the Gila National Forest
>Wilderness Area, the herd is now being relocated.
>Rancher Kit Laney has begun removing his cattle from the
>Gila National Forest Wilderness Areas following a federal
>court order.  The event follows two years of lawsuits
>initially filed by the environmental organization Gila
>Watch which claimed Laney was in violation of the
>Wilderness Act in regard to alleged overgrazing in the
>allotment.  Laney had contended that the federal
>government does not own public lands.
>
>Laney contends that he will take his case all the way to the
>Supreme Court if necessary to keep grazing on the public
>lands.  The Forest Service argues that grazing has damaged
>the ranch ranges and U.S. District Judge Howard Bratton
>ruled that the federal government regulates the land.
>(Silver City Daily, 3/6/97; Greenlines #356)
>
>===================================================
>
>CLEAR
>Clearinghouse on Environmental Advocacy and Research
>1718 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 600
>Washington, DC  20009
>tel. 202-667-6982 = fax 202-232-2592 =
>= e-mail: clear@ewg.org = www: http://www.ewg.org
>CLEAR provides grassroots and national
>environmental advocates and organizations with
>information about the vital importance of fair and
>effective environmental policies in protecting
>human health, natural resources, communities and
>private property.  Through publications, research
>and facts, CLEAR helps concerned citizens
>understand and counter misinformation about
>environmental policy and science and the impacts of
>environmental law on the economy and private
>property.
>
>CLEAR depends on grassroots activists to keep us
>informed of any articles, anti-environmental
>events, success or horror stories about local,
>regional and national resource and property rights
>battles.
>
>===================================================

---------------------
Forwarded message:
 >From:clear-view@ewg3.ewg.org (CLEAR View Mailing List)
 Sender:Sara@ewg.org (Sara Savitt)
  To:clear-view@ewg3.ewg.org
Date: 97-05-06 20:09:14 EDT

A CLEAR View
May 6, 1997
Volume 4, Number 7

Attached is the latest issue of _A CLEAR View_, our
periodic bulletin on the 'wise use' movement.

Permission to repost by electronic means (or reproduce in
other media) all or part of the attached report is granted
so long as the information is attributed to CLEAR.

Distribution within environmental organizations and
networks is encouraged.

Feel free to invite friends and colleagues to subscribe to
_A CLEAR View_ by encouraging them to send a message to:
 with the single
word "subscribe" in the subject line or body of the message.

Please visit our new WWW homepage at 
where current and back issues of _A CLEAR View_
can be downloaded.  While you're there, check out CLEAR's
database of "wise use" organizations, individuals and
literature.

As always, send along your news and leads regarding
'wise use'-- you are our eyes and ears!

Please contact CLEAR (at clear@ewg.org) with any
comments or questions.

Thank you.

A CLEAR View
Vol. 4 No. 7
May 6, 1997

Contents:
NOTABLE QUOTE
FEATURE
*1 House Committees Approve ESA Exemptions;
NESARC on the Net

WHAT THE USERS ARE UP TO
*2 Property Rights Law Firm in Hawaii: Pacific Legal
Foundation Opens Hawaii Office
*3 New Chair for PFW!; Kids' Publication on Resources
*4 "Fishing Rights" Takes on Unexpected Meaning to
Wise Use Allies
*5 Rancher Removes Cattle in NM: Diamond Bar
Rancher removes cattle from grazing allotments
*6 NAHB Blueprint Includes Property Rights: Builders'
Association eyes property rights objectives
*7 Chenoweth on the Road:  Rep. Helen Chenoweth (R-
ID) will take to the road for field hearings.
*8 ANWR Drilling Pushed: ANWR a light on "Wise use"
horizon"
*9 Legislation Considered: Recreationists support
amendation of Antiquities Act

RESOURCES
*10 Two New Reports from CLEAR: "Target: Democracy"
and "LaRouche and 'Wise Use': The Fringe of the Anti-
Environmental Movement"
*11 Debate Transcript Available: April 20 debate between
Ron Arnold and Mitch Friedman.
*12 New Corporate Watch Feature Unmasks the Barons of
Bromide
*13 Workshop to Expose Wise Use Tactics
*14 Wise Use Leadership Conference Summary Available Soon

A CLEAR View
Volume 4 Number 7
May 6, 1997

A CLEAR View
Vol. 4 No. 7
May 6, 1997

NOTABLE QUOTE
Adolf Hitler showed us that the end doesn't justify the
means. -- Rep. Barbara Cubin's (R-Wyo.) comment relating
to the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument
designation and how the administration didn't consult
Utah residents and elected officials.  Natural Resource
Committee Hearing, April 29.  (The Washington Post, May
2)

FEATURE
*1 House Committees Approve ESA Exemptions; NESARC
on the Net
It's been a tough week for the insects and rodents Rep.
Richard Pombo blamed for California's extensive flooding
two months ago.  Not one but two House committees
approved legislation to exempt flood-control activities
from ESA provisions during the last week of April.  That's
when the House Resources Committee approved
legislation sponsored by (R-CA) Reps. Pombo and Herger
that would keep ESA exemptions in place until the Army
Corps of Engineers says that 100% of emergency repairs
have been completed, or until the year 2000.

In a similar move, the House Energy and Water
Appropriations Subcommittee approved a rider to the
Flood Supplemental Appropriations bill that would waive
the ESA for "maintenance" activities when there is
"imminent risk" on all flood control activities nationwide.
Enviros say that "these bills would destroy the efforts of
agencies, fishermen, and others to recover imperiled wild
salmon" (Tim Stearns of Save Our Wild Salmon).  The
Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund has said that the ESA
already contains emergency provisions that allow for
replacement and repair of public facilities in Presidentially
declared disaster areas.

Supporting the ESA exemptions is the National
Endangered Species Reform Coalition (NESARC), a
lobbying group located in Washington, D.C.  The industry
coalition is currently looking for "grassroots contacts" to
support Pombo's H.R. 470, the "Flood Prevention and
Family Protection Act".  According to its website
(http://www.nesarc.org/), "contacts" should express
support by faxed letter or phone calls to House
representatives the week of May 5, when the bill has been
scheduled to go to the floor for a vote.  NESARC's website
also provides a detailed summary of the draft Endangered
Species Reauthorization Act of 1997 (ESRA), authored by
Senators Dick Kempthorne (R-ID) and John Chafee (R-RI).
Similarly, the wise use group People for the West!
summarized the bill in their April newsletter.

NESARC was in the news a year ago when Public Citizen
filed a complaint with the Senate Ethics Committee against
Sen. Slade Gorton (R-WA) alleging that Gorton asked
industry lobbyists to draft major revisions to the ESA.
Robert Szabo, the attorney who represents NESARC,
confirmed that NESARC acted at Sen. Gorton's direction:
"Senator Gorton laid out his thoughts to us, he asked our
help and we gave it to him."  (Greenlines #360; Greenwire
4/17; ACV Vol. 2 No. 4)

What the Users Are Up To
*2 Property Rights Law Firm Opens Hawaii Office, Eyes
Florida
To counter what it perceives as increasing pressure on
private property owners by environmental interests, the
Sacramento-based law firm Pacific Legal Foundation (PFL)
has opened an office in Hawaii.  The organization is also
looking for a site in Florida.  According to an article in
Island Business (4/97), the firm cites the PASH (Public
Access Shoreline) decision of the Hawaii Supreme Court
last year as motivation to launch Project Hawaii last
summer.  "Now is the time for PLF to go to Hawaii to
protect private property rights," said attorney Sharon
Browne of the Sacaramento PLF office.  The PASH ruling
requires all land-use decisions to account for the
traditional rights of Hawaiians to hunt and gather.

PLF is a 24-year-old national organization which operates
on a $4 million annual budget.  Funds derive from
corporate and individual donations.  Castle and Cooke
Properties in Hawaii, Boeing, Ford Motor Co., Exxon and
Philip Morris are some of the major corporate
contributors.  To further PLF's presence in Hawaii, it has
added Thomas Leppert, former president and CEO of Castle
and Cooke Properties, to its board of trustees.  Leppert is
now vice chairman of the Bank of Hawaii.  Attorney David
White will handle legal affairs in Hawaii while also
managing matters in Washington state.  A full-time
attorney will be hired in the future. (Island Business, 4/97)

Meanwhile, in Florida, PLF is scouring South Florida to
site its Atlantis Center for Individual and Economic
Liberties, a law office that will promote PLF's property
rights agenda.  PFL president Robert K. Best said the group
targetted the Sunshine State because the courts there are
making precedent setting decisions on property rights
issues.  Largely untested is the Bert J. Harris Private
Property Rights Act enacted in 1995 which allows
compensation to property owners when they can show
regulation has devalued their property.  Largely untested,
the act is seen by PLF as a proving ground of sorts.  PFL
hopes "to push the limits of the law and sharpen its
definition."

To support the venture, PLF has raised $350,000 with the
help of local individuals and groups such as the Sugar
Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida.  For more
information, contact CLEAR.  (The Daily Business Review,
4/11/97)

*3 PFW! News: New Chairman of PFW Board; Kids'
Publication
People for the West! voted in a new chairman to its board.
Elizabeth Arnold will step into the post and former
chairman Bob Quick will step down.  (Quick will remain as
PFW president until his term expires in September.)
Active within the organization for three years as a
grassroots member, Arnold has lectured at PFW! banquets
and has lobbied in Washington. D.C.

PFW!'s April newsletter mentions an educational
newspaper for schoolkids.  "Kids in the West," which
teaches children about natural resources, has been
distributed to students and teachers in schools throughout
Arizona, New Mexico, California, Nevada, and Utah and
in one school each in Texas and Alabama.  The publisher is
Aqua Fria Educational Chapter in Arizona, Humboldt.  If
anyone has an issue of "Kids in the West," please pass it on
to CLEAR.

*4 "Fishing Rights" Takes On Unexpected Meaning to Wise-
Use Allies
New York State's top court recently declared that fishing
rights do exist and can be bought and sold.  The ruling in
Douglaston Manor, Inc. v. George Bahrakis on February 11
has been hailed by various "wise use" groups  as an
affirmation of "property rights".  Others aren't so pleased.

The NYS Court of Appeals ruled that landowners who
specifically "own the riverbed" can indeed regulate fishing
on their property.  Historically, NYS state law has been
interpreted to mean that any navigable waterway was open
to access by the public.

The case began as a trespassing incident but grew into a
major property rights test.  Ten fishing guides and anglers
were arrested at the request of landowner and prominent
central New York lawyer H. Douglas Barclay.  Barclay
sought to eject the boats and waders from his mile long
run of the Douglaston Salmon Run (in Oswego County),
but the fishermen resisted, citing prior interpretation that
navigable waterways were open for public use.  Barclay, a
former Republican state senator, had wanted to charge for
use of the river.

The case revealed potential friction in the alliance between
consumptive users of wildlife and property-rights
adherents.  Usually hunters and property rights groups are
allied in a loose coalition drawn together more by
common "enemies" than by any one unifying ideology.

Court of Appeals Judge Joseph Bellacosa, seemingly more
concerned with maintaining social order than analyzing
the law, stated that recognizing the navigability of a
waterway "would precipitate serious destabilizing effects
on property ownership principles and precedents".  The
other six judges all agreed.  The court upheld the right to
navigate the river but not anchor.

Bellacosa stated that it would be absurd to rule otherwise
since the state, at the behest of the Division of
Environmental Conservation (DEC), has itself been
purchasing the same land rights to open it up for fishing
(despite the fact that NYS residents are advised to avoid
eating fish caught from NYS rivers).  The ruling
overturned an earlier 1995 Appellate decision.

The ruling also means that owners of property can buy the
riverbed if they want to prohibit fishing or control access.
This legal tactic has been used in other states by
Naturist/Nudist groups to regulate access, thereby
avoiding legal entanglements that could lead to a
shutdown.

Though the strength of the "wise use" movement appears
to be a growing danger in NYS, partly as a reaction to the
Adirondack Park plan (which would regulate how private
landowners can develop their property within certain
portions of the Adirondacks) and the wolf reintroduction
effort, the case could indicate that relations between "wise
use" factions are straining. (Sources: Gannett News
Service, West Database NY-CS)
(Contributed by Patrick Fish, New York)

*5 Rancher Removes Cattle in NM
A month after enviros filed a motion in federal court
alleging Diamond Bar Ranch in New Mexico and the
federal government were delaying the removal of cattle
from the grazing allotments in the Gila National Forest
Wilderness Area, the herd is now being relocated.
Rancher Kit Laney has begun removing his cattle from the
Gila National Forest Wilderness Areas following a federal
court order.  The event follows two years of lawsuits
initially filed by the environmental organization Gila
Watch which claimed Laney was in violation of the
Wilderness Act in regard to alleged overgrazing in the
allotment.  Laney had contended that the federal
government does not own public lands.

Laney contends that he will take his case all the way to the
Supreme Court if necessary to keep grazing on the public
lands.  The Forest Service argues that grazing has damaged
the ranch ranges and U.S. District Judge Howard Bratton
ruled that the federal government regulates the land.
(Silver City Daily, 3/6/97; Greenlines #356)

*6 NAHB Blueprint Includes Property Rights
The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB)
pounded the halls of Congress this spring to build support
for it's agenda.  726 builders from 49 states attended
NAHB's Legislative and Leadership Conference in which
attendees met their respective senators and discussed its
"High Priority Objectives for 1997", which includes
promoting legislation to protect private property rights.
The NAHB has been also been a vocal supporter of ESA
exemptions for flood-control activity.

According to the NAHB, the property rights objective is
being met by Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) who has agreed to
sponsor legislation addressing private property rights.  The
builders say the Gallegly Bill is "part of an overall strategy
to ensure that landowners are compensated for the taking
of their land through government regulatory action."  The
bill would direct an affected property owners, who have
tried to resolve problems administratively, to take her or
his claims to court.  The bill would also instruct the courts
that they have jurisdiction over takings claims.  (NAHB
website )

*7 Chenoweth On the Road
The resources committee will go on the road May 31 to
Lewiston, Idaho, to hold a field hearing on a proposal to
draw down a number of reservoirs on the Snake and
Columbia River.  The drawdown is supported by
fishermen and environmentalists but opposed by barge
shippers and electric utilities.  As a committee member,
Helen Chenoweth (R-ID) will attend.  Expect some notable
quotes.  (The Washington Post, 5/2)

*8 ANWR Drilling Pushed
Developing the petroleum resources of the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge has long been one of the twenty-five goals
of the "wise use" movement. outlined in "The Wise Use
Agenda" by Alan Gottlieb.  That's what makes Chevron
and BP Petroleum's announcement last month all the
more ominous:  Jointly, the corporations declared that 100
million barrels of recoverable oil have been discovered less
than half a mile from the pristine ANWR.  Adam Kolton
of the Alaska Wilderness League was quoted in the press as
saying "You're talking about pipelines, roads and drilling
pads within a half-mile of an area that the American
people want to protect as wilderness forever."

But that doesn't seem to bother the self-proclaimed
"Stewards of the Land." According to People for the West!,
Don Young (R-AK) says that the Alaska delegation will
continue to try to open the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge for oil and gas exploration, which would worsen
the already depressing numbers concerning waste and
runoff associated with drilling in Alaska.  An article in The
Nation  (4/7/97) notes that "the 500-plus wells in Arctic
Alaska produce 840,000 gallons of waste each year" and the
contents of more than 250 pits, each filled with 13 million
gallons of toxic pollutants, are pumped onto gravel roads
or the open tundra."  ("Wise Use Agenda," Alan Gottlieb;
Greenlines March 16; Nation, 4/7/97)

*9 Legislation Considered
Off-road vehicle drivers alerted recreationists April 28 to
the House Natural Resources Committee's Sub-Committee
on Parks & Public Lands scheduled consideration of H.R.
1127, legislation that would amend the Antiquities Act to
require an Act of Congress and the concurrence of the
Governor and State legislature for the establishment by the
President of national monuments in excess of 5,000 acres.
The Act is Utah's reaction to President Clinton's declaring
a portion of southern Utah protected as the Grand
Staircase-National Escalante National Monument.

The hearings on April 29 included Secretary of Interior
Bruce Babbitt and Kathleen McGinty of the Council of
Environmental Quality. Enviros were quoted as calling the
hearings "a six hour whine session".

According to press reports, Utah rancher Louis Liston
(Garfield County Commissioner and member of the
Western States Coalition Advisory Board) testified that
enviros are all for people out on the land, but "people are
rather messy animals, they are not like cows that graze on
the land and actually help the land."  Also supporting the
legislation was Chairman James V. Hansen (R-Utah) who
said that "hordes of easterners" would descend on Utah
and mess up the land.

And coal companies are tidy?  The recreationists' alert also
mentioned that the national monument designation was
the result of a "Clinton-Indonesian campaign contribution
conspiracy" that locked up Utah's coal resources,
ultimately giving Indonesia a corner on the market.  The
Indonesia link has been refuted by many, including Utah
State Geologist Lee Allison who says the conspiracy theory
makes no sense.  He has said the coal in monument area
could never threaten Indonesian resources.  "If they
[Indonesia] develop, they would blow Utah coal out of the
water economically."

Incidentally, Andalex Resources, Inc., a Dutch-owned
company which holds a 3,400 acre mining lease in the
National Monument, funds the BlueRibbon Coalition, a
"wise use" group of OHV recreationists.   See ACV Vol 4
No. 3 for more information. (The Washington Post,
5/2/97; Salt Lake Tribune, 12/20/96)


RESOURCES
*10 Two New Reports Available From CLEAR

Violence Report
"Target: Democracy" reports on the effect of anti-
environmental violence on community discourse.  The
report profiles communities in Massachusetts and Florida
to illustrate how harassment has the potential to disrupt
the democratic process.
"LaRouche and 'Wise Use': The Fringe of the Anti-
Environmental Movement
Anti-environmental leaders continue to dodge questions
about their relationship with the far-right political cult of
Lyndon LaRouche, but a new report by the Environmental
Working Group documents the significant role the
LaRouche organization has played in the so-called "Wise
Use" movement."

Both reports are available on the internet at
, or by fax from CLEAR.

*11 Debate Transcript Available
An April 20 debate between Ron Arnold, executive VP of
the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise and Mitch
Friedman, executive director of the Northwestern
Ecosystem Alliance, on the subject of property rights vs.
environmental protection, is available.  The event was
part of the Plymouth Forum at the Plymouth
Congregational Church in Seattle, WA.  An original tape is
available for $2 from Plymouth Herald, Plymouth
Congregational Church, United Church of Christ, 1217
Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA  98101; (206) 622-4865.  A
transcript of the tape is available via email from CLEAR.

*12 New Corporate Watch Feature Unmasks the Barons of
Bromide
Check out Corporate Watch's 
website to see their newly released feature which exposes
the forces behind methyl bromide--a Class I ozone depletor
and Class I acute toxin.

The Feature includes nine original "Rap Sheets" on the
key corporate players, industry associations and elected
officials involved in the issue.  Together these Rap Sheets
reveal how the "Barons of Bromide" have worked
together to keep their deadly product on the market.

Corporate Watch is a joint project of the Transnational
Resource and Action Center and the Institute for Global
Communications 

*13 Workshop to Expose Wise Use Tactics
The Save the Dunes Council is hosting a workshop on
Saturday, May 17, 1997 entitled: "Exposing the Tactics and
Issues of the wise-use movement to Non-Traditional and
Traditional Allies".

They have invited a very interesting panel for the all-day
seminar, including: Local, regional, and national issues
will be addressed, including the Indiana
Wetlands Conservation Plan, Historic Preservation,
Coastal Zone Management, Public Health and Safety,
Labor, Parks and others.   They will also have information
about the well-funded opposition to health, environment,
safety, and historic preservation.

The workshop will discuss ways to recognize and combat
this opposition.  Call save the Dunes at (219/879-3937).
There will be no charge for the workshop, but reservations
are needed.

*14 Report on May 2-4 "Wise Use Leadership Conference"
Available Soon
Check out CLEAR's website in the weeks to come for a
summary of the Reno, NV, conference.




For additional information on anything you've read
in A CLEAR View, please contact CLEAR.

Contributors:
        Sara Savitt, Editor
        Dan Barry, CLEAR Director
        Allison Daly, Grassroots Coordinator
        Mike Shelhamer, Research Assistant
===================================================
CLEAR
Clearinghouse on Environmental Advocacy and Research
1718 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 600
Washington, DC  20009
tel. 202-667-6982 = fax 202-232-2592 =
= e-mail: clear@ewg.org = www: http://www.ewg.org
===================================================
CLEAR provides grassroots and national
environmental advocates and organizations with
information about the vital importance of fair and
effective environmental policies in protecting
human health, natural resources, communities and
private property.  Through publications, research
and facts, CLEAR helps concerned citizens
understand and counter misinformation about
environmental policy and science and the impacts of
environmental law on the economy and private
property.

CLEAR depends on grassroots activists to keep us
informed of any articles, anti-environmental
events, success or horror stories about local,
regional and national resource and property rights
battles.

===================================================
CLEAR is a project of the Environmental Working
Group, a not-for- profit 501(c)(3) environmental
research and publishing organization based in
Washington, D.C.

About the Environmental Working Group

The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit
environmental research organization based in
Washington, D.C. Environmental Working Group is a
project of the Tides Center, a California Public
Benefit Corporation based in San Francisco that
provides administrative and program support
services to nonprofit programs and projects.






Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 09:56:39 -0800
>From: Lisa Schicker 
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Dog Registry Focus of Federal Probe
Message-ID: 

The Philadelphia Inquirer, April 25, 1997 discussing possible illegal
activities of the AKC - American Kennel Club, published the following article:

Dog Registry Focus of Federal Probe

New York State authorities also are investigating possible fraud at the
American Kennel Club. The American Kennel Club, long regarded as the guarantor
of pure bred dogs in the United States, is under investigation by federal and
New York State authorities for possible fraud in its highly touted registry.

Buyers typically pay top dollar for AKC-registered dogs on the assumption that
they are buying purebreds.  But critics, including former AKC employees, have
long contended that the papers certifying pedigrees are often doctored by
breeders and the kennel club has been lax in correcting the record.  The kennel
club earned $35 million last year - 76% of its income - from the registration
fees for more than 1.3 million dogs.

The AKC, which is based in New York, recently acknowledged that it was the
target of the two probes and said both were "without merit".

In an April 10 memo to the AKC's 526 delegates nationwide, president Alfred L.
Cheaure said the AKC"has received a request for certain records from the U.S.
Attorney's Office in New York," adding that he did not know the "complete
nature, scope, or status of this inquiry."

In an earlier memo to AKC delegates, dated March 14, Cheaure wrote that the New
York Attorney General's Office had also requested information.

Cheaure said in his memos that the AKC would cooperate with both agencies, and
concluded by saying that the "AKC is proud of the integrity of its Stud Book."

Mitchell Speed, a spokesman for the U.S. postal Inspection Service in New York,
confirmed that postal inspectors had been investigating the AKC for about a
year and had recently joined forces with the U.S. 
Attorney's Office of the Southern district in Manhattan.  The Postal Inspection
Service has jurisdiction over the AKC registry because the papers documenting
lineage typically are sent by mail.

Spokesman for both the U.S. Attorney and the New York Attorney General declined
to discuss the probe.

In December 1995, The Inquirer published a story in which six former inspectors
for the AKC said that the registry was largely a sham and that the club rarely
removed dogs from the rolls even when investigators found widespread
violations.



Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 11:40:48 -0700
>From: Persephone Moonshadow Howling Womyn 
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
Subject: (US/Calif) ALERTS: Coho listing, salvage logging, 5/7/97
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970507114006.0085caf0@206.86.0.11>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 10:40:56 -0800
>From: Headwaters News 
>Subject: ALERTS: Coho listing, salvage logging, 5/7/97
>
>      May 7, 1997
>      HEADWATERS ACTION ALERTS
>
>____________
>
>      ACTION #1
>      SHAREHOLDER ACTIVISM
>
>The California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) is the
>country's second largest institutional investor in the parent company of
>Pacific Lumber, Maxxam Inc.. On May 19, the CalPERS Board is voting on the
>issue of a shareholder resolution to ask Maxxam to become a willing seller
>of the 60,000-acre Headwaters Forest and to consider a debt-for-nature swap.
>
>We anticipate this vote to be VERY close.
>
>The CA State Teachers' Retirement System recently gave their commitment to
>supporting this resolution. Encourage CalPERS to follow suit! Please send
>CalPERS a message to support the resolution asking Maxxam to become a
>willing seller of the 60,000-acre Headwaters Forest!
>
>James Burton, CEO of CalPERS
>CA Public Employees' Retirement System
>400 "P" Street, Room 3340
>Sacramento CA 95814
>ph 916- 326-3829   |   fax 916-326-3410
>
>Michael Flaherman (PERS Board member)
>BART Economist
>800 Madison St., Rm. 432
>Oakland CA 94607
>ph 510-464-6162   |   fax 510-464-7652
>
>
>____________
>
>      ACTION #2
>      STOP SALVAGE LOGGING IN THE
>      ANCIENT GROVES OF HEADWATERS
>
>If you live in California, we need you to act now to promote an important
>piece of legislation. The California State Assembly will soon be voting on
>Assembly Bill 1313, which would prevent salvage logging in the ancient
>forests of California, including the unprotected ancient redwood groves of
>Headwaters. The "salvage logging" exemption is a loophole Pacific Lumber
>has exploited to log in the Headwaters Forest's ancient groves.
>
>Please write your assemblyperson and ask him/her to support this
>legislation -- the State Assembly will be voting on the bill soon. For more
>information, call the Environmental Protection Information Center at
>707-923-2931.
>
>
>____________
>
>      ACTION #3
>      COHO LISTING
>
>The National Marine Fisheries Service has decided to list the wild coho
>salmon as threatened with extinction under the Endangered Species Act.
>However, the limitations that the listing places on timber and agricultural
>practices won't go into effect for four months, further delaying coho
>protection. Furthermore, the listing does not include the necessary
>science-based standards for coho protection. For more information, call
>Sierra Club's Wild Salmon Forever at 510-654-7847.
>
>Write, call, email or fax William Hogarth of NMFS as well as Douglas Wheeler,
>California Resources Secretary, and demand that they provide for complete
>legislative review of and citizen input into the Memorandum process and the
>guidelines for coho protection.
>
>William Hogarth, Regional Director
>National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Region
>501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200
>Long Beach CA 90802-4213
>ph 562- 980-4000   |   fax 562-980-4018
>william.hogarth@noaa.gov
>
>Douglas Wheeler, Secretary for Resources
>Resources Agency
>1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311
>Sacramento CA 95814
>ph 916- 653-5656   |   fax 916- 653-8102
>doug@resources.ca.gov
>
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________
>---->  Sent by the Headwaters Sanctuary Project and Bay Area Action.
>---->  Repost at will -- Please include all attributions & contact info.
>---->  www.enews.org   |   mayhem@enews.org
>_________________________________________________________
>
>---->  TO SUBSCRIBE
>Send a message to listproc@envirolink.org with only the following in the
body:
>subscribe Headwaters YourFirstName YourLastName CompanyOrOrganization
>Replace the appropriate words with your name and any affiliation.
>Note: You must send from the account at which you wish to receive messages.
>
>---->  TO UNSUBSCRIBE
>Send a message to listproc@envirolink.org with only the following in the
body:
>unsubscribe Headwaters
>Note: You must send from the same account from which you first subscribed.
>
>
>
>
Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 11:40:45 -0700
>From: Persephone Moonshadow Howling Womyn 
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
Subject: (US/Calif) UPDATE: Redwood Boycott, etc. 5/7/97
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970507114028.007e57e0@206.86.0.11>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 10:41:08 -0800
>Reply-To: wfg@designlink.com
>From: Headwaters News 
>Subject: UPDATE: Redwood Boycott, etc. 5/7/97
>X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.0 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
>
>      WEEKLY HEADWATERS FOREST UPDATE
>      May 7, 1997
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>
>"Just think of the trees: they let the birds perch and fly, with no
>intention to call them when they come and no longing for their return when
>they fly away. If people's hearts can be like the trees, they will not be
>off..."
>      - Langya
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>      BOYCOTT UPDATE
>
>The old-growth redwood boycott is continuing to gain momentum. Over 10,000
>concerned citizens and more than 400 building professionals, including
>lumberyards, have pledged to not buy old-growth redwood products.
>
>Several of the top ten national chains have signed on including Hechingers
>and Home Base, and negotiations are underway with Home Depot, Payless,
>Sears/Orchard Supply, 84 Lumber, and Wickes. A full-page New York Times ad
>will be coming out soon to thank the companies and building professionals
>who are supporting the boycott; this list is available online at
>www.baaction.org/cyberforest/boycott/
>
>Celebrities have also signed on to the pledge, including Jane Goodall, Ally
>Sheedy, Woody Harrelson, Bonnie Raitt, Bob Weir, Steven  Segall, and Ed
>Asner.
>
>On the ground, activists have been averaging weekly demonstrations
>throughout major cities in California and are spreading throughout the
>country. Pacific Lumber paid a back-handed compliment to the boycott tactic
>with a recent mass mailing defending its Headwaters record to companies and
>building professionals. Pacific Lumber has also started to ship its "clear
>heart" grade lumber (mostly old-growth) without the Pacific Lumber label.
>For more information, call Rainforest Action Network at 415-398-4404.
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>      HABITAT CLEARCUTTING PLAN
>
>Currently, Pacific Lumber is working with federal agencies to develop a
>Habitat Conservation Plan which would cover Pacific Lumber's 190,000 acres,
>including the majority of the 60,000-acre Headwaters Forest.
>
>Habitat Conservation Plans allow developers to destroy both endangered
>species and their habitat in exchange for the establishment of "substitute"
>habitat. The theory of Habitat Conservation Plans has never undergone
>independent scientific review. Furthermore, the rapidly increasing use of
>Habitat Conservation Plans has resulted in the overall loss of endangered
>species habitat--which is by definition already too scarce.
>Environmentalists are closely watching this process to identify the threats
>it may pose to Headwaters' vulnerable inhabitants, including the marbled
>murrelet and wild coho salmon.
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>      HEADWATERS TRIVIA
>
>The Headwaters Forest is part of the southern extension of an extensive
>temperate rainforest, historically reaching along North America's coast
>from northern California to southern Alaska. This temperate rainforest is
>richly complex -- acre for acre, the ancient redwood forests can contain as
>much as eight times the biomass of a tropical rainforest.
>
>Dead and decaying trees play an important role by providing essential
>habitat and shelter for a number of species. Fallen, decaying trees soak up
>water and become rich soil for future forest giants. When this soil supply
>is removed by logging, forest health and diversity declines. This is why we
>are urging California residents to actively support the Lempert legislation
>which would stop the current salvage logging practices which allow timber
>companies to remove these important trees from ancient coastal redwood
>groves. See the accompanying Alert for details.
>
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________
>---->  Sent by the Headwaters Sanctuary Project and Bay Area Action.
>---->  Repost at will -- Please include all attributions & contact info.
>---->  www.enews.org   |   mayhem@enews.org
>_________________________________________________________
>
>---->  TO SUBSCRIBE
>Send a message to listproc@envirolink.org with only the following in the
body:
>subscribe Headwaters YourFirstName YourLastName CompanyOrOrganization
>Replace the appropriate words with your name and any affiliation.
>Note: You must send from the account at which you wish to receive messages.
>
>---->  TO UNSUBSCRIBE
>Send a message to listproc@envirolink.org with only the following in the
body:
>unsubscribe Headwaters
>Note: You must send from the same account from which you first subscribed.
>
>
>
>
Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 13:14:48 -0700
>From: pmligotti@earthlink.net (Peter  M. Ligotti)
To: veg-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Report On International Codex Meeting Regarding Genetically Engineered Foods and
 Labeling
Message-ID: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>A REPORT ON THE CODEX COMMITTEE ON FOOD LABELING
>by John Fagan, Ph.D. and Richard Wolfson, Ph.D.
>
>The Codex Alimentarius Commission, Committee on Food Labeling (CCFL) met in
>Ottawa from April 15-19, 1997 to discuss issues that affect the entire
>world's food supply.
>
>The Codex Alimentarius Commission, often referred to simply as Codex, is
>designated by the World Trade Organization as the officially recognized
>rule-making body for international trade issues related to food.  Under
>GATT (the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs), Codex decisions have the
>clout of international law.
>
>Officially, the mandate of Codex is to "create a set of international
>standards to guide the world's growing food industry and to protect the
>health of consumers."  However, in practice, Codex is strongly influenced
>by industry and biotech representatives, which often results in decisions
>that benefit profit and production, at the expense of health and nutrition.
>
>Codex has a number of different committees, including the Codex Committee
>on Food Labeling, which meets in Ottawa to discuss labeling issues.  For
>instance, CCFL sets criteria for foods to be certified and labeled
>"organic."  CCFL is also debating the question of whether genetically
>engineered foods and food ingredients need to be labeled.  Other topics
>include labeling of potential allergens, and the range of health and
>nutritional claims allowed on labels.
>
>At the "organic" sessions in April, there was concern expressed that the
>Codex organic guidelines should be stronger, more precise and more
>well-defined.  Consequently, the guidelines did not proceed further up the
>approval process and will be reconsidered at the 1998 CCFL meeting. In 1996
>the organic subcommittee categorically excluded the use of genetically
>engineered seeds and inputs in production of organic foods for
>international trade. Although industry wanted to reopen this issue at this
>year's meeting, this was not allowed.
>
>Regarding the broader category of genetically engineered foods, the
>Executive Committee of Codex presented to the CCFL a discussion paper on
>the labeling of genetically engineered foods that was highly favorable to
>industry and would have forced thousands of genetically engineered foods to
>be allowed on the world market, unlabelled and mixed with other foods. This
>paper was the result of maneuvering by industry during the 1996 CCFL
>meeting that blocked discussion of the topic of labeling of genetically
>engineered food by the labeling committee as a whole (where the welfare of
>consumers would have been taken into serious consideration) and moved the
>discussion to the Executive Committee (where industry concerns hold far
>greater clout).
>
>When this discussion paper was considered on April 16, at the 1997 CCFL
>meeting, it quickly became clear that most of the national delegations were
>quite dissatisfied with the approach taken by the Executive Committee. The
>Executive Committee proposed an approach to genetically engineered foods
>that was based on the principle of substantial equivalence and that would
>have required labeling of only a tiny fraction of the genetically
>engineered foods that will enter the market. Virtually all delegations
>except the USA, Canada, Mexico, France, and the UK expressed either
>outright opposition or strong doubt regarding the Executive Committee's
>discussion paper. Prominent among these were Germany, Norway, Sweden,
>India, the Netherlands, the European Commission, Japan, Switzerland,
>Thailand, Denmark, Iceland, Hungary, and Consumers International.
>
>The basic points raised in the discussion were as follows:
> (1) Most delegations felt that the Executive Committee had attempted to
>manipulate the discussion of this issue by purposely delaying distribution
>of their discussion paper until that last minute.
>(2) All delegations except the five supporting the Executive Committee felt
>that the consumer's right to know necessitated much broader labeling of
>genetically engineered foods than the Executive Committee proposed in its
>discussion paper.
>(3) Several delegations felt that regulations based strictly on the concept
>of substantial equivalence (as proposed by the Executive Committee) were
>inadequate.
>(4) The general consensus was that the Executive Committee's discussion
>paper was not even adequate to use as a starting point for the debate on
>the labeling of genetically engineered foods and that a new paper should be
>prepared before the next meeting.
>(5) The outcome was that it was resolved that an in-depth consideration of
>the issue would take place at the next meeting (Spring 1998) and that in
>the meantime comments on the topic would be accepted from all delegations
>and distributed well before the meeting. It was left open as to whether a
>new discussion paper would be prepared and, if so, by whom. There will be
>quite a lot of behind the scenes maneuvering on this point in the near
>future.
>(6) So, the process, excruciatingly slow as it is, is moving forward in a
>direction that is far better for consumers than it would have seemed last
>year. However, the process has been slowed by involvement of the Executive
>Committee. This benefits the biotech industry, because the continued lack
>of international regulations allows genetically engineered foods to
>continue to enter the international market unlabelled and inadequately
>regarding their long-term effect son human health.
>
>The following is a more detailed review of the discussion that took place
>on April 16:
>
>THE NETHERLANDS
>1.      The Netherlands supported the written comments made by the European
>Union and said that the written comments of the EU expressed the
>coordinated views of the European community as a whole. Through the work of
>the European Union there was now a regulation on novel foods that applies
>throughout the European community.
>2.      The delegation complained regarding the short time available for
>comments, due to the late submission and distribution of the Executive
>Committee's discussion paper.
>3.      They stated that the official position of their government was that
>the discussion paper prepared by the Codex Executive Committee was not
>adequate, and that two points in particular need to be corrected. First,
>they felt that it is important to consider both living modified organisms
>and non-living genetically modified organisms. These should be dealt with
>independently. In the first instance, living organisms should always be
>labeled. In the second case, foods derived from genetically modified
>organisms but not containing living organisms should be labeled if those
>foods were different from the original foods. Second, they emphasized that
>although it is important to consider scientific safety issues, it is
>equally important to give consumers the opportunity to make informed
>choices. If we only label on the basis of safety or health dangers the
>policy will not be adequate. Consumers needed more information.
>
>THE UNITED KINGDOM
>1.      The UK sought clarification on procedures and supported what the
>Netherlands said on all counts.
>2.      The delegation raised the question of whether the issue of
>genetically engineered foods had actually entered into the official "steps"
>procedure of the Codex Food Labeling Committee. The Secretariat then
>explained that this particular initiative was approved as new work by the
>Executive Committee and had been assigned a high priority. The Secretariat
>said that the discussion can at this time lead to appending revisions to
>the document as recommended. The Secretariat suggested that suggested
>changes could be appended to the document and the resultant document could
>be recirculated at what they call "step three" of the Codex process.
>
>NORWAY
>1.      Norway was very indignant over the fact that, due to the late
>distribution of the Executive Committee's discussion paper, there had not
>been enough time for discussion at home.
>2.      The delegation said that this issue involves considerations of a
>broader nature than just food content and safety. They felt that the
>committee should broaden the context of food labeling. This is not just a
>health matter but is very much linked to consumer's right to be properly
>informed especially with regard to issues linked to serious ethical and
>environmental concerns such as genetically engineered foods.
>3.      The delegation said that it was the unanimous view of the Norwegian
>Parliament that this was a broader issue. The Executive Committee's
>discussion document was simply not satisfactory, and should be re-drafted
>before detailed discussion commenced. The delegation said that they would
>have detailed comments at a later time after discussion at home.
>
>EUROPEAN COMMISSION
>1.      The delegation said that they had submitted comments and that there
>were additional points that they wanted to make at present.
>2.      They said that they had discovered the discussion document on the
>WWW only by coincidence about a month ago. Although the document said that
>it was circulated in February it was received only about three weeks ago
>through the official channels. It was very late and they were not prepared
>to comment in detail.
>3.      The delegation said that they felt very strongly that the document
>needed to be revised. It had serious problems. They also pointed out that
>the paper was anonymously authored, which they found to be objectionable.
>4.      The delegation said that this initiative should not go to the "step
>process" now and that they preferred to refrain from making comments on
>this document. They were not happy with the way the Secretariat had
>proceeded and asked not to have discussion today on the issue.
>5.      They said that they had provided the Executive Committee with a
>copy of the European Union Regulations on labeling novel foods and offered
>their help in drafting the text of a new discussion paper to be used for
>the basis of discussion in the next meeting.
>
>UNITED STATES
>1       The United States acknowledged that the draft document was very
>late and therefore that the US comments were only preliminary.
>2.      They said that they were ready to offer preliminary comments at
>this time, and that they wanted the discussion to proceed at this time.
>3.      They felt the Executive Committee's document was good, and was
>generally consistent with US labeling guidelines. It was a good starting
>basis for the Codex regulation process.
>
>JAPAN
>1.      Japan said that they commended the work of the Secretariat but
>found the document very late and that this gave no time for internal
>discussion of the issue back home.
>2.      This issue was becoming more and more important in Japan,
>especially consumers were requesting labeling requirements. On the other
>hand, industry people were worried about the outcome of discussions that
>might lead to labeling. The government was working internally to formulate
>a policy on labeling.
>3.      They then offered their participation to work with other delegates
>to formulate a new discussion paper.
>4.      They said their official position was to reserve comment at this
>time on the Executive Committee's discussion paper and on this issue.
>
>CANADA
>1.      Canada commended the Secretariat on accomplishing such a difficult
>task and then went on to say the paper was a good beginning, thus
>supporting the US delegation's stance.
>2.      They have gone through consultations on this issue since 1993 and
>found significant support for labeling based on health, safety and
>composition changes.
>3.      They complained about the short comment period.
>4.      Based on their consultations with the public much of the draft
>recommendations were acceptable. More was needed in the document and they
>would be happy to participate in the process of reformulating the draft.
>
>CONSUMERS INTERNATIONAL
>1.      Consumers International said that this issue was of fundamental
>concern to consumers.
>2.      They emphasized their concerns as being allergens, safety, and
>processing changes.
>3.       They said that they were even more concerned with the Codex
>process, itself. They accepted the need for internal consultation within
>each nation, but said that there is also a great need to move this issue
>forward quickly.
>3.      They asked for discussion on how to move things forward most
>efficiently and proposed the formulation of a working group that would put
>together a discussion paper before the next meeting. This working group
>would gather the comments that will be coming in during the next few months
>following the meeting. This input would then be included in a new
>discussion paper that would be available well before the next meeting, at
>which detailed discussion would occur.
>
>INDIA
>1.      India's main comment was that they wanted to reiterate the primary
>point of their written comment, which was, that any food of genetically
>engineered origin should be labeled. There should be no exception based on
>the principle of substantial equivalence or any other principle.
>2.      They said that they agreed with the written comments made by the
>International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements and the
>Australian Gene Ethics Network that all genetically engineered foods should
>be labeled.
>
>SWITZERLAND
>1.      Switzerland said that a re-draft of the Secretariat's
>recommendations should be prepared that responded to all concerns expressed
>in the comments submitted before the last meeting, as well as the concerns
>expressed in comments that will be submitted in the next few months. The
>Swiss delegation pointed out that many well thought out comments on this
>issue had been submitted to the Committee before the last meeting when this
>issue first began to be considered. These should be brought into the
>process as they were useful points.
>2.      They said labeling based on substantial equivalence was simply not
>adequate. It did not provide a reliable basis for distinguishing safe from
>risky foods.
>3.      They said a new discussion paper should be drafted and they very
>much wanted to progress on this issue. What was needed was a viable
>discussion paper, implying that the current one was simply not adequate.
>
>UNITED STATES
>The US delegation suggested that people should at least review the paper
>before deciding that a redrafting was needed.
>
>NORWAY
>Norway  said that they favor setting up a drafting group, and emphasized
>the need to have a new draft available well before the next meeting so that
>in depth discussion could occur during the next meeting.
>
>SWEDEN
>1.      Sweden said that many delegations were unhappy with the lateness of
>the document and brevity of time for comments.
>2.      They said that we need to differentiate clearly between labeling
>and safety.
>3.      They said labeling was the only way to gain the confidence of
>consumers. This was clear on the basis of many letters and e-mail messages
>to the Codex delegation from Swedish citizens.
>4.      The delegation said that the discussion document in its present
>form is premature and that Sweden supported the formation of a working
>group that would put together a new discussion paper.
>
>THAILAND
>1.      Thailand said they supported Sweden with regard to organizing a
>working group to draft a new discussion document.
>2.      They felt very strongly that further discussion was needed before
>this initiative entered into the "step" process.
>
>DENMARK
>Denmark said that a working group was needed and that, although the
>Secretariat's work was helpful, the working group should start afresh and
>formulate a new discussion paper on the labeling issue.
>
>CANADA
>Canada said that they were concerned that the paper was so late, but, for
>expediency, why not use the Executive Committee's discussion paper to move
>the issue forward. The delegate also said that normal consultation was
>still needed within each country on this issue, and questioned whether an
>immediate working group was the best way to proceed.
>
>MEXICO
>1.      Mexico said they supported the American stance.
>2.      They wanted comments on the current document before any working
>group was formulated.
>
>FRANCE
>1.      France said they supported Canada and Mexico.
>2.      They said they would like to see comments on the paper as it exists
>now from countries before a working group gets started.
>
>CHAIR OF THE SESSION
>1.      The document was already in the "step" process. Progress here will
>be reported to the Executive Committee. Now comments will be requested from
>all countries and those comments should be arrived at through a transparent
>and open process.
>2.      A working group was not appropriate because it would exclude some
>countries. Alternatively the secretariat proposed to circulate the current
>discussion paper, and to accept comments on that paper from national
>delegations.
>3.      Rapid progress on this issue will require consensus. They doubted
>whether consensus was something that could come out of this.
>
>SWEDEN
>1.      They respected the advice of the Secretariat but felt the need for
>a smaller group to discuss the comments and formulate a new discussion
>paper.
>2.      The expert consultation (of scientists), convened by the Executive
>Committee last fall, only concerned safety. This was not an adequate scope
>for labeling because the genetically engineered food issue involved other
>highly significant concerns such as the environment, the consumer's right
>to know, and ethical issues.
>
>CONSUMER INTERNATIONAL
>Consumer International said that they supported the Swedish stance and the
>Secretariat's point on transparency. However, once comments were gathered
>there would be a great need to set up a working group in which a small
>number of delegates would work together to consolidate comments and
>structure a revised document for the next CCFL meeting.
>
>UNITED KINGDOM
>The United Kingdom said they support the France stance not to have a
>working group. It was essential that the biotech labeling work be in a
>structured debate within the plenary session of the CCFL. They suggested
>that the discussion paper as it exists could serve as the basis of debate
>along with the comments that will come in.
>
>THE NETHERLANDS
>The Netherlands said they supported the UK and France. The whole Committee
>should work together on this issue, not a smaller working group.
>
>NORWAY
>Norway said the main issue was not whether a working group should be formed
>to redraft the paper, but that someone needs to draft such a paper before
>the next session to make sure progress is made in that session.
>
>HUNGARY
>Hungry made the comment that many felt that one of the great weaknesses of
>the current discussion paper was that it did not differentiate between
>traditional and modern biotechnology.
>
>ICELAND
>Iceland  said that they supported Consumers International and Norway. This
>issue needs to be moved forward quickly and a substantial revision should
>be completed before the next session.
>
>THE CHAIR
>The Chair concluded by saying that she perceived a clear desire among
>delegates to complete home consultations. There was also a desire among
>many delegates to redraft the whole paper before the next meeting and a
>desire that a substantial part of the next meeting be devoted to this
>issue. But the chair left completely open who was going to redraft the
>paper before the next meeting and even if such a paper would be put
>together.
>
>
>
>John B. Fagan, Ph.D.
>Professor of Molecular Biology
>Maharishi University of Management
>(Maharishi International University 1971 to 1995)
>1000 North Fourth Street
>Fairfield, Iowa, 52557-1078
>Phone(515) 472-8342
>Fax (515) 472-5725
>email jfagan@mum.edu


Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 13:29:45 +0000
>From: Beth Caskie 
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Cc: government@aspca.org
Subject: ASPCA Legislative Alert - Urgent
Message-ID: <337083C9.DF3@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1


Action Alert
Regarding threat to Pets in Housing Provision/S.462 (Section 123)

Senator Bennett of Utah will soon oppose Section 123 of S.462, which 
protects the rights of residents of most federal and 
federally-assisted housing to keep common household pets.  

The ASPCA asks all California residents to call, fax or email Senator 
Barbara Boxer, who has been a tremendous friend to animals and a 
supporter of this provision, and graciously urge her to oppose any 
revision of Section 123 of S.462.  Please give Senator Boxer ample 
evidence of the strong support Californians have for the pets in 
housing provision.

The Honorable Barbara Boxer
U.S. Senator
Tel:    (202) 224-3553
Email:  senator@boxer.senate.gov
California office:
(415) 403-0100 phone
(415) 956-6701 fax

You can view the entire bill and the Pets in Housing provision on The 
ASPCA¹s Web page at http://www.aspca.org, then click on Legislative 
Agenda.  Thank you!
Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 14:05:06 -0700
>From: Persephone Moonshadow Howling Womyn 
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US/Calif) Red Abalone harvesting Temporarily Suspended
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970507140453.007ff1d0@206.86.0.11>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"


  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
   Wednesday, May 7, 1997 · Page A17     ©1997 San Francisco Chronicle
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  Red Abalone Harvesting Temporarily Suspended
  Panel sets 4-month moratorium

  Glen Martin, Chronicle Staff Writer

         Responding to reports of a collapsing fishery, the
         California Fish and Game Commission issued an emergency
         120-day closure yesterday on the commercial harvesting
         of red abalone, the delectable marine mollusk that
         fetches up to $60 a pound.

         It is the first time since 1907 that a commercial
         closure has been ordered on ``reds,'' the biggest of
         California's numerous abalone species. A large red
         abalone is eight inches long and yields between one and
         two pounds of meat. Some can exceed 12 inches.

         Red abalone were once plastered on rocks along
         California's shallow inshore waters. Their decline has
         been blamed on voracious sea otters and pollution, but
         the major contributing factor appears to be over-
         harvesting.

         After considering testimony from commercial and sport
         divers and Department of Fish and Game biologists, the
         four- person commission voted unanimously to close
         waters from San Francisco to the Mexican border to both
         commercial and sport abalone diving for 120 days. The
         decree will also stop abalone harvesting at the Farallon
         Islands.

         Because commercial diving has been prohibited for many
         years along California's North Coast -- the region from
         Marin to Oregon -- the order will effectively shut down
         the state's commercial red abalone trade, except for a
         small quantity of mollusks raised in aquaculture
         operations.

         The moratorium was opposed by the California Abalone
         Association, which represents some commercial divers and
         abalone processors. Members testified that the
         moratorium was based on faulty science and will
         devastate the abalone industry. Members could not be
         reached for comment.

         The order must be approved by the California Office of
         Administrative Law before it can go into effect, which
         could take several days or more. Though such approval is
         not assured, state officials consider it likely.

         If the order is approved, red abalone may still be taken
         by sport divers along the North Coast.

         The commission stopped commercial harvesting of the
         smaller white, green and pink abalone about two years
         ago. Commercial diving is still allowed for threaded,
         pinto and flat abalone, but harvests are low because
         these species are not naturally abundant.

         ``Red abalone (in the proposed closed area) have been
         declining for more than 20 years,'' said John Duffy,
         senior marine biologist for Fish and Game. ``You can
         still find abalone in deep crevices from Monterey to
         Morro Bay, but in many places (south of Morro Bay),
         they're completely gone -- we can't find any.''

         John Beuttler, the executive director of United Anglers,
         a sport fishing lobbying group, said the order was long
         overdue.

         ``This needed to be done,'' said Beuttler. ``We had
         advised the commission that it was necessary because of
         the incredible depletion of the resource.''

         Abalone have long been considered a delicacy, but prices
         for the succulent marine snails has skyrocketed in
         recent years because of increased demand from Asia.
         Prime fresh abalone steaks can fetch more than $60 a
         pound.

         ``All the abalone stocks have been under intense
         pressure, including those on the North Coast,'' said
         Beuttler. ``Abalone from Marin to Oregon appear to be
         holding their own, but poachers have been hitting them
         hard.''

         Duffy said the closure of the Farallones was significant
         because Fish and Game has long suspected that illegally
         obtained North Coast abalone were being mixed with legal
         catches from the islands.

         It is not clear what will happen after the 120-day
         closure expires.

         ``We're going to be looking at (population) assessments
         during the closure,'' said Duffy. ``I think all the
         interested parties are committed to seeing if there are
         some areas that could be opened to sport or commercial
         diving.''

         But Beuttler is not sure that is such a good idea.

         ``What we need is a comprehensive management plan that
         will allow abalone harvesting on a sustained basis,'' he
         said. ``Once we have that plan in place, once we're sure
         abalone can handle both a commercial and sport harvest,
         then we can open it up on a tightly controlled basis.''

                    © The Chronicle Publishing Company

_________________________________________________________________
 
  ** NOTICE:  In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107,
     material appearing in Antifa Info-Bulletin is distributed
     without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
     in receiving this information for research and educational
     purposes.  Submissions are welcome. **
_________________________________________________________________

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~
        "Life shrinks or expands in| 
           proportion to one's courage."| 
                 -Anais Nin-| http://www.persephone.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~
My PGP Public Key can be found at:  http://www.persephone.org/PGPKEY.shtml/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~
Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 17:15:00 -0400
>From: allen schubert 
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) Agencies Duck Bird-Protection Law 
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970507171457.00687d34@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from AP Wire page:
----------------------------
05/07/1997 14:29 EST 

 Agencies Duck Bird-Protection Law 

 By H. JOSEF HEBERT 
 Associated Press Writer 

 WASHINGTON (AP) -- A new administration policy on protecting birds is
ruffling the
 feathers of environmentalists. 

 Bird lovers are grousing about a government directive exempting federal
agencies
 from an 80-year-old law -- and four international treaties -- that protect
more than 800
 species of migratory birds. Many are considered in serious decline. 

 Passed by Congress in 1918, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act is one of the
country's
 oldest wildlife protection laws and forbids the indiscriminate killing of
migratory
 birds. In some cases the law allows exceptions, but a permit has to be
obtained
 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which closely monitors the
activity. 

 But, according to the new administration view, federal agencies such as
the Forest
 Service, Federal Aviation Administration, the Marine Fisheries Service or
Defense
 Department, need no longer worry about the law. 

 At the behest of the Justice Department, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service told its
 field offices recently that they should consider federal agencies exempt
from the law
 that Congress passed to implement a 1917 bird protection treaty with Canada. 

 ``This represents a sweeping reversal ... overturning a policy that has
been the
 cornerstone of the government's management of migratory birds for 80 years,''
 complained John Ficker, president of the National Audubon Society. 

 Ficker, in a letter this week to Vice President Al Gore, called the
administration's
 position ``a disservice to all those concerned'' about protecting
migratory birds and
 urged the new policy be overturned. 

 ``It makes a mockery of the government's duty to protect migratory
birds,'' added
 William H. Meadows, president of the Wilderness Society. ``It reads like
something
 from `Saturday Night Live.''' 

 Officials at the Fish and Wildlife Service acknowledged that for years it
had been
 taken for granted that federal agencies were subject to the law. It has
given permits,
 for example, to the FAA and the Defense Department, to kill birds near
airports and at
 military training sites, to avoid violating the law. 

 Conservationists said these procedures have allowed for closer monitoring of
 incidental killing of birds. 

 Paul Schmidt, chief of the Fish and Wildlife's migratory bird office,
issued the new
 guidance with clear reluctance. ``I have stalled this as long as I
could,'' he wrote in
 the March 19 memo to field offices, lamenting about ``the potential for this
 government position to harm migratory bird populations.'' 

 In an interview, Schmidt said the memo was written ``at a point of
frustration'' and
 that he now believes that migratory birds will continue to be protected by
federal
 agencies. ``I feel it's going to be positive in the end. ... They (the
agencies) are going
 to do the right thing,'' said Schmidt. 

 But conservationists' anger over the policy change is not aimed as much at
 Schmidt's office as it is at the Justice Department and the Forest
Service, which
 started the whole thing in response to a lawsuit filed more than a year ago. 

 In what appeared to be a major victory for environmentalists, a federal
judge in
 Georgia last spring ordered the Forest Service to halt a timber sale in the
 Chattahoochee National Forest, agreeing with a suit brought by seven
environmental
 groups that logging in the spring would kill 9,000 nesting songbirds. 

 ``The Forest Service had ... a nervous breakdown,'' says Kathleen Rogers, a
 migratory bird specialist at the Audubon Society. Other government and
private
 sources said the Forest Service was concerned the Georgia ruling would
lead to
 severe constraints on government's entire logging program. 

 Reversing decades of government policy, the Justice Department, at the
request of
 the Forest Service, appealed the court ruling, arguing formally for the
first time that
 the bird law never was intended to apply to government agencies. That left
Fish and
 Wildlife Service officials in a quandary for months -- until the March
guidance memo. 

 ``It should be an embarrassment to them,'' says Rogers. ``It sends a terrible
 message.'' 

 Last week, a federal appeals court in Atlanta agreed that the law does not
apply to
 federal agencies, siding with the Justice Department argument.
Environmentalists
 say they're awaiting the outcome of two other cases and eventually may
take the
 issue to the Supreme Court. 
Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 20:20:56 -0400
>From: allen schubert 
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) State bans taking of red abalone   
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970507202053.006c5de0@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from Mercury Center web page:
----------------------------------------------
Posted at 9:21 a.m. PDT Wednesday, May 7, 1997    

State bans taking of red abalone                          

BY JOHN HOWARD
Associated Press

SACRAMENTO -- The state Fish and Game Commission
has ordered a four-month ban on fishing for red
abalone off most of the California coast.

The panel, heeding the arguments Tuesday of
biologists and environmentalists, approved the
120-day moratorium to safeguard dwindling
populations of red abalone from San Francisco to
the Mexican border.

Commercial fishermen said the ban would cripple
their industry.

In some cases, abalone populations have declined by
as much as 75 percent during the last two decades,
biologists said.

The ``(abalone) population has dropped below the
minimum viable level for reproduction'' in some
areas, said Mia Tegner of the Scripps Institution
of Oceanography in La Jolla.

``If we had reduced the fishing pressure (on the
red abalone) in the 1970s, we would not be arguing
over their survival today,'' she told the
commission.

According to testimony, the cost of abalone has
soared in recent years, fetching as much as $85 per
pound retail in Southern California. The economics
of abalone fishing has kept the industry
profitable, but also has contributed to widespread
poaching, experts said.

Opponents to the ban were led by the California
Abalone Association, which said the state's science
was flawed -- in part because more divers harvested
abalone in past years, giving the appearance of
declining numbers in recent years.

``We're asking the commission not to terminate the
abalone industry. We're asking the commission to
proceed with scientific methods,'' said CAA
attorney Ilson New, who said that ``inflammatory,
witchhunt-type newspaper articles'' poisoned debate
on the issue.

``This situation does not qualify as an emergency.
It has developed over a number of years. I don't
think that it qualifies as would a fire, flood or
earthquake,'' New added.

The commission also is considering allowing a
handful of companies to begin setting up cages off
the San Mateo County coast to cultivate millions of
red abalone.

The venture would give the region the largest
concentration of abalone farms in the state. But
commercial fishermen at Pillar Point Harbor, who
say the farms will upset the ecosystem, are crying
foul.

The moratorium would affect both commercial and
sport abalone harvesting from San Francisco to the
Mexican border. Commercial harvesting already is
prohibited north of San Francisco.

The abalone, once plentiful, clings to rocks by day
and at night feeds on plants it scrapes up with its
tongue.

The annual harvest of 5 million pounds in the 1950s
plunged to just 260,000 pounds in 1995. The crash
has been blamed on pollution, over-harvesting,
poachers and hungry sea otters.

Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 21:25:24 -0400
>From: allen schubert 
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: McLibel - THE BOOK ! !
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970507212521.006cc318@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"


from McLibel/McSpotlight e-mail list:
--------------------------------------------------------

You've read the leaflet,
   sat through the trial,
       worn the T'shirt, 
           browsed the website 
              and anticipated the film 

       - now you can get the book.

McLibel: Burger Culture on Trial by John Vidal has been published 
by Macmillans and is available in bookshops now at the cost of £15.99 

It can also be ordered from Veggies by mail order for cover price £15.99 
(including postage within the UK).  Overseas readers should contact
Veggies to check overseas postage costs. veggies@innotts.co.uk
Veggies, 180 Mansfield Rd, Nottingham NG1 3HW, UK. Tel +44-115 958 5666,

*** BUT - GUESS WHAT? ***

 McSpotlight has obtained twenty copies of the book,
 and is giving away five copies each week for a month !!!

  Try your luck and test your knowledge of the trial and the 
  issues at it's heart on our online competition. 

   http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/books/competition.html



About the book..

- MACMILLAN PRESS RELEASE - 

The McLibel Trial, the longest case in English legal history, is an 
unlikely morality tale of our times. In 1990, McDonald's slapped writs 
on five London activists for allegedly libelling them in a leaflet 
entitled "What's Wrong With McDonald's?". They successfully silenced 
three. But the international giant had not banked on the dogged 
determination of Helen Steel and Dave Morris, who refused to apologise. 

Denied a jury trial and ineligible for legal aid, they were forced to 
defend themselves. Pitted against some of the top libel lawyers in the 
country, this unlikely duo became the symbol of a burgeoning protest 
movement against the globalisation represented by corporations such as 
McDonald's. For two years, the trial ground through issues from 
employment, advertising, recycling and litter, to nutrition, animal 
rights and deforestation, pitting opposing philosophies against each 
other. The McLibel Support Campaign grew around them - lawyers, 
nutritionists, ex-McDonald's workers, mothers, teenagers - all 
weighed-in with financial or other aid. A site was created on           
the Internet - McSPOTLIGHT - publicising the trial and giving millions 
access to  what McDonald's had tried to suppress. A very different side 
of McDonald's to that portrayed in their $2 billion annual advertising 
budget has been exposed. A company this size has never before been so 
carefully or publicly examined. The tables turned and the corporation 
found itself on trial. 

The conclusion of the trial offers the first opportunity to measure the 
lasting impact - and the very real political and legal significance - of 
the case. McLIBEL, the book, tells the gripping inside story of this 
epic clash of cultures and allows the public, denied the chance to be 
the jury, to judge for themselves. 

John Vidal has been Environment Editor of the Guardian for 6 years. 
Helen Steel and Dave Morris, the McLibel Defendants, live near each 
other in North London. Helen is a bar worker and former gardener. Dave 
is a single parent and ex-postman. Both have for years been actively 
involved in a wide range of grassroots movements concerning the 
environment, workers' rights, food issues, anti-fascism, housing and  
animal rights. 

- END OF MACMILLAN PRESS RELEASE -

Note: There are also many press reviews of the book on McSpotlight.
      http://www.mcspotlight.org/press/midweek_21apr97.html
      http://www.mcspotlight.org/press/guardian_22apr97.html
      http://www.mcspotlight.org/press/telegraph_27apr97.html
      http://www.mcspotlight.org/press/mail_26apr97.html
      http://www.mcspotlight.org/press/observer_13apr97.html
      http://www.mcspotlight.org/press/suntimes_13apr97.html


McSpotlight = McDonald's, Mclibel, Multinationals 
= http://www.mcspotlight.org/

P.S. UK readers may be interested in the following.
     A TV reconstruction drama of the McLibel Trial has been made for 
     UK Channel 4 and is planned to be shown in two parts (lasting over 
     3 hours) on 17th & 18th May 1997 (check TV guide for details).
     Full details available on McSpotlight soon and we may also 
     circulate a press release about the drama.


Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 21:34:24 -0400
>From: allen schubert 
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: (US) Conservationists warns North American forests in peril   
Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970507213422.006c9020@clark.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from Mercury Center web page:
-----------------------------------------------
Posted at 5:51 p.m. PDT Wednesday, May 7, 1997 

Conservationists warns North American forests in peril
                         

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) -- Only 5 percent of U.S.
and Canadian forests are protected from logging and
mining, and three-quarters of the region's forests
are threatened with extinction, the World Wildlife
Fund said Wednesday.

Releasing a new study that raised the alarm about
North America's forests, the conservation group
urged the U.S. and Canadian governments to at least
double the amount of forest protected by national
parks and wilderness areas by 2000.

``The Earth Summit Two is coming up in June, and we
are asking both our governments to make a
commitment to the global community in protecting
these areas,'' Dominick DellaSala, director of
forest ecology with the World Wildlife Fund in the
United States, told a news conference.

World leaders are due to meet at the United Nations
in New York next month for a conference marking the
fifth anniversary of a landmark Rio de Janeiro
environmental summit.

The World Wildlife Fund said North America's
forests were among the most spectacular on earth
but were ``disappearing at an alarming rate''
because of logging and other human activities.

The study -- released before the World Wildlife
Fund's ``Forests for Life'' conference in San
Francisco this week -- found that one third of 52
forest regions in the United States and Canada had
numbers of species and habitats that were
``globally outstanding.''

The outstanding forests ranged from northern
California's Klamath-Siskiyous, which had more
conifer species and rare plants and animals than
any similar forest in the world, to southern and
central Appalachia's temperate forests, one of two
such regions on Earth with more than 2,500 plant
species.

``You don't need to fly to Amazonia to witness some
extraordinary forests. We've got some right here in
our home,'' DellaSala said.

But the fund said three-quarters of North America's
forests were at risk of becoming extinct or so
degraded they could not maintain a rich variety of
plant and animal species.

Arlin Hackman, an official with the World Wildlife
Fund in Canada, said Canada had a big
responsibility in managing forests on a global
scale since it had about 10 percent of the earth's
forests within its borders. ``We're cutting about
2.5 million acres a year in our country,'' he said.

The World Wildlife Fund urged the U.S. and Canadian
governments to double the amount of protected
forest by 2000 and to make sure protected forests
represented a broad variety of habitat types and
species.

It also encouraged timber companies in the United
States and Canada to have their forests certified
as well-managed and environmentally friendly under
the principles of the Forest Stewardship Council,
an independent body founded in 1993.

Some timber companies use certification as a
marketing tool to sell to environmentally-aware
consumers.

About 1.6 million acres of forest are currently
certified in the United States but none are
certified in Canada, the World Wildlife Fund said.

``We would like to see a tripling of certification
in the United States and Canada by 1998,''
DellaSala said.




ARRS Tools  |  News  |  Orgs  |  Search  |  Support  |  About the ARRS  |  Contact ARRS

THIS SITE UNDERWRITTEN IN PART BY:
Go Organic

The views and opinions expressed within this page are not necessarily those of the
EnviroLink Network nor the Underwriters. The views are those of the authors of the work.