ANIMALNET APRIL 25, 2001 Innu group fears British crew will bring foot-and-mouth Japan lifts import ban on pork from 3 nations 30 new cases of foot-and-mouth detected in Kuwait Cattle herds in Oklahoma deemed free of brucellosis Slaughterhouse cruelty Major hog project unveiled: plans for $40-million pork co-op rise from ashes of devastating barn fire Man who skinned dog ordered to read Lassie Quadriplegic man hopes pig cell implants will help him Species at risk -- and ranchers, too AnimalNet is produced by the Centre for Safe Food at the University of Guelph, and is supported by the Ontario Cattlemen's Association, the Canadian Food Information Council, the U.S. National Pork Producers, U.S. National Food Processors Association, Pfizer Animal Health Group, Pioneer Hi-Bred Limited (Canada), Canadian Animal Health Institute, Meat & Livestock Australia, Canadian Pork Council, Ontario Pork, Tyson Foods, Ontario Egg Producers, Ontario Farm Animal Council, U.S. National Cattlemens Beef Association, the Rutgers Food Risk Analysis Initiative, Ag-West Biotech, Land O' Lakes Feed, Capital Health, Animal Industry Foundation, American Feed Industry Assn., the Ontario Soybean Growers Marketing Board, Food Industry Environmental Network, Canadian Poultry and Egg Processors, Chicken Farmers of Canada, MDS Nordion, American Meat Institute, AdCulture, USDA Veterinary Services (Fort Collins) Alberta Farm Animal Council, and the Agricultural Adaptation Council (CanAdapt Program). archived at: http://www.plant.uoguelph.ca/safefood/archives/animalnet-archives.htm LABRADOR: INNU GROUP FEARS BRITISH CREW WILL BRING FOOT-AND-MOUTH April 25, 2001 National Post A7 GOOSE BAY - A group of Innu staged a protest outside of a military airbase in Labrador yesterday over the arrival of Royal Air Force crews from Britain for low-level flight training. The Innu said they fear the British could bring foot-and-mouth disease to the area and devastate caribou herds. JAPAN LIFTS IMPORT BAN ON PORK FROM 3 NATIONS April 25, 2001 Associated Press TOKYO -- The farm ministry was cited as saying that Japan on Wednesday lifted an import suspension of pork and pork products from Denmark, Finland and Sweden as there is little possibility that pork imports from these countries are affected by foot-and-mouth disease. 30 NEW CASES OF FOOT-AND-MOUTH DETECTED IN KUWAIT April 25, 2001 Agence France Presse English KUWAIT CITY - A senior agriculture and fisheries official, Sultan al-Khalaf, was cited as telling the Al-Qabas newspaper Wednesday that.30 new cases of foot-and-mouth disease have been detected in Kuwait, but the incidences were "limited," adding, "The new cases which have appeared in Wafra are still limited. The story says that the new cases were detected in Wafra, a farming region 40 kilometres (25 miles) southwest of Kuwait City. Khalaf said authorities had mobilised to vaccinate animals and were working with the police to restrict the movement of livestock. CATTLE HERDS IN OKLAHOMA DEEMED FREE OF BRUCELLOSIS April 25, 2001 Knight-Ridder Tribune Nicole Nascenzi, OKLAHOMA CITY-- According to this story, the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture held a celebration Tuesday to officially mark the end of its 46-year battle with brucellosis, a highly contagious disease that affects cattle as well as humans. Gov. Frank Keating was quoted as saying, "This helps liberate our economy. Cattle are the cornerstone of Oklahoma's economy." Craig Reed, administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, was cited as presenting a "Brucellosis Free" certificate to Keating. The story explains that the United States began fighting brucellosis in 1934, and it can be a difficult disease to conquer. Reed was further cited as saying that States are designated brucellosis free when no cattle or bison are found to be infected for 12 consecutive months under an active surveillance program. In 1956, there were 124,000 affected herds found by testing nationwide. By 1992 that number had dropped to 700 herds, and by this month there were no affected herds remaining in the entire country, the USDA reported. SLAUGHTERHOUSE CRUELTY April 25, 2001 Washington Post Page A30 http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61330-2001Apr24.html Kathleen Vincent of Staunton writes that Jonathan Javitt's April 15 letter about The Post's informative article on animal mistreatment at slaughterhouses [front page, April 10] stated that a "single knife stroke across the carotid arteries" results in an instant or painless death. But, says Vincent, no matter how "highly trained" the knife-wielder is, bleeding to death takes minutes, even from a wound to the throat, and is terrifying for a conscious creature. The kosher slaughter laws are intended to provide meat as free from the taint of blood as possible. They were not prescribed with the animal's welfare or comfort in mind. MAJOR HOG PROJECT UNVEILED: PLANS FOR $40-MILLION PORK CO-OP RISE FROM ASHES OF DEVASTATING BARN FIRE April 25, 2001 The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon) Murray Lyons According to this story, Ivan Stomp, the largest independent hog producer in Saskatchewan saw his operation hit hard by a major fire Feb. 22 that killed 14,000 pigs in his wood-frame hog barns, putting the company's breeding stock in jeopardy. But Tuesday, Stomp, in a new arrangement with his neighbours, was cited as saying he is back, bigger than ever as he joins forces with 100 other farmers in the Leroy area to form a new generation co-op to build four barns to finish the prolific output of weanlings from the Stomp Pork Farms Ltd. Operation, adding, "In the early days following the fire, it was hard to believe that anything good could come from such a bad situation. Well, it has.'' The story says that in all, Stomp and the new co-op will spend about $40 million to build hog production facilities as well as a feed mill in the Leroy area. The project will create some 50 full-time jobs when it is completed. As well, Stomp is building a feed mill to buy up to three million bushels of wheat and barley produced by members of the new generation co-op. The story adds that the farmers belonging to the new generation co-op represent 32 per cent of the total grain acreage in the Rural Municipality of Leroy, meaning these farmers can sell a large portion of their crop locally rather than having to pay shipping costs to export position. Stomp was further cited as saying his company is building a new 5,500-sow farrow-to-finish barn on the site of the February fire and two 9,600-head nursery barns several miles away. The new Leroy Agra-Pork Co-op Ltd. is responsible for building the four finishing barns in the area. The 100-plus co-op members are putting in capital to build the barns and the co-op is borrowing the rest. MAN WHO SKINNED DOG ORDERED TO READ LASSIE April 25, 2001 The Edmonton Sun A man who pleaded guilty to skinning and beheading a dog was, according to this story, sentenced to three years probation and ordered to read the Lassie books. Jason Vincent Revels, 19, was charged with felony animal cruelty in the November death of his mother's mixed pit bull. He was not eligible for jail time under state sentencing rules. QUADRIPLEGIC MAN HOPES PIG CELL IMPLANTS WILL HELP HIM April 25, 2001 PA News Hugh Dougherty Charles Dederick, a 50-year-old quadriplegic man was cited as telling the Albany Times Union newspaper how he became the first man to have foetal pig cells injected into his spine in a bid to let him walk, adding, "I was willing to try anything." The story says that Dederick lost the use of his limbs when his motorcycle hit an electrical transmission pole. During the procedure, cells from an aborted pig foetus were grafted into the spinal area which snapped in Mr Dederick's accident. Doctors at Albany Medical Centre Hospital in New York were given special permission to carry out the procedure by the American Food and Drug Administration as part of a series of six experiments, three there and three in St Louis. SPECIES AT RISK -- AND RANCHERS, TOO April 24, 2001 National Post A18 Tom Flanagan writes in this op-ed that one of the most significant items on the Canadian Parliamentary agenda is Bill C-5, the Species at Risk Act (SARA), which was introduced at the beginning of February. Flanagan says that one of the most contentious issues was whether to pay compensation to owners whose land might be designated as critical habitat for endangered species. Following the example of the United States Endangered Species Act, the predecessors of SARA did not provide for such compensation. The lack of compensation was based not only on the American example but also on the legal distinction between expropriation and regulation. Anglo-American law has evolved in the direction of requiring compensation at market value for expropriation (i.e., loss of title) but paying no compensation at all for losses caused by regulation. In many situations, says Flanagan, this distinction makes good sense. Regulation of land use is often a way of preventing one landowner from diminishing the value of someone else's land. The cost of complying with regulations such as noise abatement or effluent restriction is justly borne by the landowner rather than by the public Treasury, because the owner should have no right to impose costs on others. Regulation in such cases is part of the state's universal protection of all property rights. Flanagan says that other forms of regulation, however, such as endangered-species legislation, go far beyond protecting general property rights to conscript private property in the service of a politically selected version of the "public interest." In these cases, owners should be compensated for the loss in land value imposed upon them. It is a matter not only of doing justice to individual owners but also of forcing government to recognize the opportunity cost of mobilizing land in a cause such as the preservation of endangered species. David Anderson, the Minister of the Environment, asked the British Columbia resource economist Peter Pearse to study the matter. In a report filed late last year, Dr. Pearse recommended compensating owners of land designated as critical habitat, subject to two conditions: (1) the owner should absorb the first 10% of loss, to avoid uneconomical disputes over small amounts of money; and (2) the owner should be compensated for 50% of the loss beyond the first 10%. Together, these two principles would reimburse owners for a maximum of 45% of their loss. Mr. Anderson has now inserted a vague compensation provision into Bill C-5. The Minister will not commit himself on the details, but he has said he likes the approach recommended by Dr. Pearse. Western ranchers are, says Flanagan, particularly concerned with this issue. They own large amounts of grassland and parkland, much of which is still in a semi-natural condition. They have to be worried that, say, a stream running through their range, furnishing water for their cattle, might be declared critical habitat for an endangered species of minnow or frog or dragon fly. Because of their extensive landholdings, ranchers are perhaps more likely to be affected, but a similar scenario could threaten any landowner. Ranchers and SARA watchers are somewhat encouraged, but still not satisfied, by the government's acceptance of the Pearse approach to compensation. Why, they ask, should they have to swallow 55% of losses that could easily run into many thousands or even millions of dollars? Their question is valid. If we, the Canadian people, want our government to protect plants and animals, we should pay for it as a people, not inflict most of the expense on those who happen to own the land designated as critical habitat for species at risk. Flanagan says that the government deserves credit for accepting the principle of compensation, but it needs to go one step further. One approach would be to pay the landowner 80% or 90% of demonstrable losses for a finite period of time, with a provision for periodic review. Species preservation is a dynamic enterprise. In 10 or 20 years, lots of things can happen. A species may recover its numbers, so that it can be taken off the endangered list; or further research may show it was never endangered in the first place; or all efforts may have failed so the cause has to be declared hopeless. In all those outcomes, the owner's land could be returned to its original use, and compensation could be discontinued. However it is done, landowners deserve a better deal from SARA than they have yet been promised. To subscribe to AnimalNet, send mail to: (subscription is free) listserv@listserv.uoguelph.ca leave subject line blank in the body of the message type: subscribe animalnet-L firstname lastname i.e. subscribe animalnet -L Wendy Powell To unsubscribe to AnimalNet, send mail to: listserv@listserv.uoguelph.ca leave subject line blank in the body of the message type: signoff animalnet-L For more information about the AnimalNet research program, please contact: Dr. Douglas Powell dept. of plant agriculture University of Guelph Guelph, Ont. N1G 2W1 tel: 519-824-4120 x2506 fax: 519-763-8933 dpowell@uoguelph.ca http://www.plant.uoguelph.ca/safefood archived at: http://www.plant.uoguelph.ca/safefood/archives/animalnet-archives.htm