Advocates for Animals
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Advocates for Animals, formerly known as the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Vivisection, is an animal rights organization which campaigns against all animal use including farming, the fur trade, bloodsports, captive and performing animals, and the use of animals in research.[1]
Contents |
[edit] Origins
Based in Edinburgh, Scotland, Advocates for Animals in its current form was established in 1989. The organisation was previously known as the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Vivisection, which was founded in 1912 by Nina Douglas-Hamilton, wife of the 13th Duke of Hamilton. The current, 15th Duke and Duchess remain active in the organisation. [2] The group's president is Jane Goodall, though it is run by successive directors, Les Ward and, currently, Ross Minett. [3]
[edit] Activism
Advocates for Animals "promotes the protection of animals through investigations, high profile [news media] campaigns, political lobbying and public education."[3] They maintain a large media database of animal-related images and videos, provide spokespeople for comments and quotes on animal-related issues, aim to be a research hub for issues surrounding animal welfare, and promote animal-friendly lifestyle choices, such as vegetarianism. [4]
In 2006 the group criticised the Scottish Executive for "putting out a mixed message" on livestock management techniques. A spokesperson for Adocates for Animals described techniques such as castration, branding and declawing as "painful mutilations" and urged the Executive to review whether these should be permitted. [5] Earlier that month, Advocates for Animals had called for the Duke of Argyll and Chivas Regal to end their involvement with the annual World Elephant Polo Tournament, a sport they described as "exploiting animals." Chivas defended their sponsorship of the event, arguing the elephants "are well treated and have responsible owners." [6]
[edit] Moderate stance
Advocates for Animals adopts a pragmatic stance on animal welfare issues, choosing to engage with legislators and those involved in animal experimentation to further their cause. They were one of a few anti-vivisection groups to contribute to the formation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. Former director, Lew Ward described it as "one of the better laws" in comparison to other countries' legislation, while acknowledging that "most scientists in the UK, were they not to have the protection of the 1986 Act, would find themselves in a court of law for cruelty to animals." [7] Ward also served on the Animal Procedures Committee, a statutory requirement of the act.
In 1991 the group released a critique of primate experiments in the UK, leading to the laboratories mentioned in the report being firebombed by extreme animal liberationists. In response the group restricted the release of a follow up report in 1992, urging editors to use "discretion by not identifying the laboratories or scientists concerned." [8]
In 1992, after a television debate, Advocates for Animals' director Les Ward and Colin Blakemore, a strong advocate of animal experimentation, formed the Boyd Group a bipartisan forum to discuss issues relating to animal experimentation. [9] Advocates for Animals claims this approach led to a joint effort by the scientific and animal welfare communities to ban the testing of cosmetics of animals. [7]
The group's moderate stance has drawn criticism from within the animal rights community. The National Anti-Vivisection Society described the Boyd Group as a "public relations exercise" [10] and British Anti-Vivisection Association described Ward's engagement with Blakemore as "trading the very premise by which the genuine [anti-vivisection] movement exists, in return for an end to cosmetic testing." [11]
[edit] Publications
Advocates for Animals have published papers on a wide variety of animal-related topics, [12] including:
- Sheep welfare in Scotland (2004)
- An inquiry into the welfare of ducks and geese kept for the production of foie gras (2000)
- A report on the use of electric shock collars for dogs (2006)
- A report examining pedigree breeding (2006)
- A report which summarises the scientific evidence on the tail docking of dogs and supports Advocates for Animals' call for legislation to end this practice in Scotland (2005)
- An investigation into Glasgow Zoo (2002)
- A report that looks at a wide range of scientific research about cephalopods and decapod crustaceans' potential to experience pain and suffering (2005)
[edit] References
- ^ Intute Health and Life Sciences. Retrieved 14 December, 2006.
- ^ Catherine Lyst. A noble fight for animal rights. BBC News, 23 January, 2006. Retrieved 14 December, 2006.
- ^ a b Advocates for Animals:About Us. Retrieved 14 December, 2006.
- ^ Advocates for Animals:Press Office. Retrieved 14 December, 2006.
- ^ Fordyce Maxwell. Mutilation or just management? The Scotsman, 7 December, 2006. Retrieved 14 December, 2006.
- ^ Call to end elephant polo links. BBC News, 2 December, 2006. Retrieved 14 December, 2006.
- ^ a b Minutes of Evidence, Question 1384. Select Committee on Animals In Scientific Procedures, March 12, 2002. Retrieved December 12, 2006.
- ^ Animal campaigners pinpoint 'trivial experiments'. New Scientist, Issue 1807, Feruary 8, 1992. Retrieved December 12, 2006.
- ^ Kenneth Boyd. Bringing both sides together. Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 1999; 8:43-5. PMID 9924617
- ^ Minutes of Evidence, Question 1362. Select Committee on Animals In Scientific Procedures, March 12, 2002. Retrieved December 12, 2006.
- ^ The Enemy Within. The New Abolitionist, Summer 1997, No. 11. Retrieved December 12, 2006.
- ^ Articles Database. Retrieved 14 December, 2006.
