Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Two more troops' dogs coming home

More than $6,000 was donated in the drive to help Army Staff Sgt. Steven Radloff of Waukegan to send his dog from Afghanistan to the United States.
The dog, Bear, was rescued from a bird cage by Radloff and his unit while they were on a mission in Kandahar.

Interest in Bear's saga, which spiked after a picture of the black lab mix ran with a story in The News-Sun, led to donations that will not only fund Bear's trip to the U.S., but will also fund the rescue of two other military pets as well, according to Orphans of the Storm spokeswoman Jackie Borchew.

A Washington Post correspondent in Afghanistan, Pamela Constable, who has helped stray dogs and cats in Kabul find shelter and adoptive homes, will be the guest speaker at the Orphans of the Storm annual benefit dinner next month.

Constable, with the help of the Riverwoods-based Orphans animal shelter, helped Radloff arrange his transport back to the U.S. for his dog. Constable, founder and president of The Afghan Stray Animal League, helped in Afghanistan with the effort to send Bear to Fort Bragg, N.C., where Radloff's unit is expected to return soon.

For the past two years, Constable has provided shelter, veterinary care and adoptive homes for stray dogs and cats in Kabul through a project she founded called Tigger House.
At the Orphans of the Storm benefit, she will discuss her work helping strays in a city and country torn by war, isolation and cultural taboos about animals.

Constable was assigned to Kabul after the fall of the Taliban in early 2002. In 2004, she found an old house in the city and converted it into a small private shelter and clinic.
When soldiers, aid workers, diplomats and others find strays they want to help and adopt, Tigger House, helps arrange shipment overseas.
"Our philosophy is to help one animal at a time, and approach one person at a time, because otherwise we would become overwhelmed by the enormity of what we cannot do," Constable said.

Constable is also the founder and president of The Afghan Stray Animal League, a tax-exempt non-profit public charity which she operates out of her home in Virginia. The organization exists solely to support the Kabul project.

Monday, March 26, 2007

Bill making circus safer for elephants a big flop on prime issue

New Haven Register, Mar 21,2007

RECENTLY, lawmakers in our state proposed a bill "to eliminate the mistreatment of captive elephants." Given the name of the group I lead, Friends of Animals, one might think I support the proposal. I don’t. The bill lacks the essential understanding that captivity is mistreatment.
As a lifelong Connecticut resident, a mother and an advocate for our planet and its residents, I have come to believe elephants weren’t put here to entertain us.
It took time to reach this conclusion. In childhood, it didn’t occur to me to find anything amiss with those bright, cheery posters that would appear in town heralding the arrival of the circus, and especially these wondrous, 3-ton animals with their huge trunks and marvelous, flapping ears.
I thought the elephants’ trunks were there to grab tails of other elephants as they marched about the ring in formation. I didn’t know that elephants have trunks so they might carefully pick up a marble-sized morsel of fruit, or grasp the highest leaves, or use them for warning, greeting and caressing one another.
I didn’t know those tremendous ears weren’t made to delight me and other children, but to disperse the heat of the elephants’ savanna homelands, and to detect the low frequency sounds elephants use to communicate with others in their groups from a mile or more away.
I have had the good fortune to observe African elephants in their territories. Today, this experience is available to all our children, from a respectful distance, through the Internet. Once we know what elephants’ real lives are like, it’s not hard to feel that the time has long passed for circuses to free them. If we respect them, we will let them experience their lives fully. We could never gaze at them in a circus ring without sensing their profound loss.
Ringling Bros. now rears a herd of captive elephants. Some people say this has to do with preserving the species. But, the young will be taken away from their parents, and will never learn the ways of their species. They will never know freedom — even males, virtually always deemed too dangerous for circuses.
Daphne Sheldrick, who has over 50 years experience with elephants and in 2005 was named by the Smithsonian Magazine as one of 35 people worldwide who have made a difference in wildlife conservation, has stated, "I can categorically say that elephants should not be confined in captivity, no matter how attractive the facilities may appear to us humans." Understanding the merits of such views, Britain recently committed to ban the custom of using elephants in circuses. We are witnessing a gradual, international phase-out of a much-debated practice, one that began with the roving menageries of the late 18th century and the elephant street processions of the 19th and 20th centuries.
In our country, such processions still go on. Connecticut doesn’t have to be a part of that. When Ringling Bros. came to Bridgeport last October, a coalition of advocates, including Friends of Animals, watched the elephants beside the arena as they swayed back and forth

I didn’t know those tremendous ears weren’t made to delight me and other children, but to disperse the heat of the elephants’ savanna homelands, and to detect the low frequency sounds elephants use to communicate with others in their groups from a mile or more away.
I have had the good fortune to observe African elephants in their territories. Today, this experience is available to all our children, from a respectful distance, through the Internet. Once we know what elephants’ real lives are like, it’s not hard to feel that the time has long passed for circuses to free them. If we respect them, we will let them experience their lives fully. We could never gaze at them in a circus ring without sensing their profound loss.
Ringling Bros. now rears a herd of captive elephants. Some people say this has to do with preserving the species. But, the young will be taken away from their parents, and will never learn the ways of their species.
They will never know freedom — even males, virtually always deemed too dangerous for circuses.
Daphne Sheldrick, who has over 50 years experience with elephants and in 2005 was named by the Smithsonian Magazine as one of 35 people worldwide who have made a difference in wildlife conservation, has stated, "I can categorically say that elephants should not be confined in captivity, no matter how attractive the facilities may appear to us humans."
Understanding the merits of such views, Britain recently committed to ban the custom of using elephants in circuses. We are witnessing a gradual, international phase-out of a much-debated practice, one that began with the roving menageries of the late 18th century and the elephant street processions of the 19th and 20th centuries.
In our country, such processions still go on. Connecticut doesn’t have to be a part of that.
When Ringling Bros. came to Bridgeport last October, a coalition of advocates, including Friends of Animals, watched the elephants beside the arena as they swayed back and forth. One elephant repeatedly lifted and dropped the chain on her leg. And as people began to arrive for the show, we asked them to do something different in the future: Choose entertainment offered by willing, human participants. The options are many: dancing, concerts, kite-making and flying festivals — or acrobatic circuses such as Cirque du Soleil.
From alligators to zebras, lions and tigers and bears, countless animals have been removed from their habitats for circuses. The disrespect we’ve shown these animals over the centuries surely correlates with the loss of their habitats. We have valued them primarily for their parts, such as ivory, or for the pleasure they bring to us in zoos and circuses. Preserving the areas in which they could live freely has not been foremost in our decisions, because we’ve seen them on our terms, not theirs. I ask Connecticut residents who care about the well-being of animals to reject allowances for breeding them into captivity and using them in circuses, no matter what improvements are suggested for the conditions of those circuses, or which instruments and techniques are legally allowed to keep them in place or train them. For those elephants already living, who can never enjoy the savannas and the forests of their homelands, the best we can do is to move them into respectful, private sanctuaries and support the dedicated people who look after them.
Meanwhile, the best thing for our lawmakers to do is to invite only animal-free circuses to town. Let us not try to make the captivity and use of elephants palatable by banning certain kinds of hooks or certain lengths of chains.

Let’s just say no.

Priscilla Feral
President

Friends of Animals

Saturday, March 24, 2007

ajude com os seus impostos

Nos termos do art. 32.º n.º 6 da Lei n.º 16/2001 de 22 de Junho, os sujeitos passivos de IRS têm a possibilidade de consignar 0,5% do imposto, liquidado com base nas declarações anuais, a uma pessoa colectiva de utilidade pública de fins de beneficência ou de assistência ou humanitários ou de uma instituição particular de solidariedade social

Neste sentido, a Impostos Press decidiu divulgar uma lista de entidades às quais pode o contribuinte consignar 0,5% do seu IRS.

Para tal, basta que, ao preencher a declaração de IRS anual, o contribuinte coloque no Anexo H, no Quadro 9 (que se encontra no seu verso), no Campo 901 o número de identificação da entidade à qual pretende doar 0,5% do seu IRS

De sublinhar no entanto que a lista aqui apresentada não assegura que as entidades nela incluídas reúnam todas as condições para que efectivamente lhes seja consignado o imposto, ao abrigo da referida lei, pelo que, em caso de dúvida deverá o contribuinte contactar a respectiva entidade.
A PRAVI ESTÁ CONTEMPLADA NESTA LISTA!

Monday, March 12, 2007

A Tita - ADOPTADA


Tuesday, March 06, 2007

Peles ... mais uma vez


Ya que lamentablemente la industria peletera siempre se "reinventa", ahora las pieles de animales pueden venderse en todo tipo de artículos, no sólo en los abrigos o chaquetas clásicas de piel. Aquí, algunos datos para reconocer las pieles naturales de las artificiales, para pensárselo dos o tres veces antes de decidir adquirir una prenda llena de sufrimiento animal.
La industria peletera no sólo vende sus sangrientas pieles como abrigos: cinturones, accesorios, marroquinería, ribetes de prendas, gorros, bolsos, bolsillos e incluso zapatos son ahora los que van hechos de pieles de animales. Es más, ahora llega al mercado europeo y americano un tipo de piel cuyo origen es especialmente cruel y que raya en la ilegalidad: el comercio de
pieles de perro y gato de China.

Pero ¿cómo podemos reconocer una piel natural de una artificial?
Existen cuatro formas básicas de "testear" la piel para saber si es natural o artificial:
· Ponderarla al tacto
Para ello, tenemos que tomar la piel y hacerla un rollito entre los dedos pulgar e índice. Con esta prueba, la piel natural se siente lisa y suave, y se desliza entre los dedos sin resistencia. Cuando la piel es artificial, se siente gruesa y tiesa.

· Ponderarla con la vista
Tomar un trozo de la piel y soplarla para que los pelos se dividan. Cuando la piel es natural, tiene varias capas de pelos más finos que forman una base densa que sostiene a los pelos más largos (los que sobresalen hacia fuera). Además la base es de cuero (piel, epidermis) natural. Cuando la piel es falsa, su estructura es más simple por lo que todos los pelos son de un largo y color similares.

· Pincharla con un alfiler
Tomar un alfiler y hundirlo hasta la base de la piel: cuando la piel es natural el cuero se resiste a ser agujereado y es difícil de traspasar. Cuando la piel es artificial el alfiler pasa fácilmente hacia el otro lado.

· Quemar algunos pelos
Tomar delicadamente algunos pelos de la piel y ponerlos en una llama de mechero. Si la piel es natural, se chamuscará y despedirá un olor similar al de pelo humano quemado. Si la piel es artificial, se derretirá y olerá como plástico quemado. Además formará pequeñas bolitas que se sienten duras al tacto.
Con estas cuatro simples pruebas, tú como consumidor responsable, podrás decidir si seguir fomentando la cruel y sangrienta industria peletera o si por el contrario, decidirás por otro tipo de tejidos artificiales "animal friendly".
Aunque no está de más decir que si bien los tejidos artificiales no están exentos de problemas (pues provienen del tratamiento de combustibles fósiles), podemos alegar en su favor que al menos no producen más sufrimiento y muerte que el que produce cruelmente todos los años la industria peletera.
(retirado do site Anima Naturalis)

Labels: ,

Saturday, March 03, 2007

bom fds cat people



Sign the Pledge Against Animal Testing