MASSACRE IN MOROCCO
From December 2015 to March 2016 Moroccan governmental officials within the city of Ksar el-Kebir have slaughtered many thousands of stray dogs with single or multiple shots to the head and body using live rounds. Some media and press reports have stated that the slaughter only went on for one day during December 2016, others state two days.
Fortunately International Animal Rescue Foundation Africa hosts a total of eighteen environmental activists within the African country, all of which have confirmed the slaughter has been ongoing from December 2015 and, is still ongoing today September 2016. However for now the cull is mostly over.
The nighttime killings have decreased significantly since the media began publishing on the mass culling of stray dogs and cats, and partially due to many street dogs now wiped clean off the streets of Ksar el-Kebir and within other Moroccan cities such as the Medina quarter - until next year of course.
Image: One of many dogs killed by men gunmen.
International Animal Rescue Foundation Africa has learnt that the French Government in Europe are partially supporting the annual culling operation identified as ‘Street Animal Welfare’, although there doesn’t seem to be much in the way of welfare practiced here.
Sources have explained to us that most if not all of the local street dogs were shot using live rounds by inexperienced gunmen on the back of jeeps or 4×4’s. Moreover sources within the Moroccan capital of Rabat stated that poisons had been laid down to kill street dogs and cats too. The deaths were reported as horrific and nowhere near humane!
Image: Moroccan teenager showing love and compassion to a stray dog.
From December to date most of the killings have occurred at night which is when the vast majority of street dogs are active. (I.A.R.F.A) learnt that the Moroccan Government ordered the killings due to concerns of ‘rabies’ within the country, and because of an influx of tourists this year too. The Rabat capital ordered dog wardens to pin posters up relating to rabies, as well as hand them out to the locals (as can be seen below).
Image: Rabies info in French and Arabic.
The Ksar El Kebir Government ordered this years killings on the 22nd March 2016, although there is much evidence to show the killings began in December 2015. Nonetheless many dogs were slaughtered this year prompting the global population of animal lovers to kick up a wild frenzy, and why should’t they? Morocco isn’t learning here from its mistakes, instead every year they order inexperienced gunmen at nighttime to shoot hundreds of dogs a night (during the dated culling period).
Image: Dead dogs dumped onto the back of a 4×4 in Morocco.
Local authorities, in an ironic attempt to curb the number of starving canines, are sought to kill dogs, adults and puppies alike. These actions are as inhuman as they are expensive for the taxpayers. What’s more, there are numerous studies and expert assessments available from the best international specialists in public health, which demonstrate that this approach is totally inefficient. However despite the best efforts of everyone trying to halt this massacre - the bloody slaughter continued.
Its been estimated that in the Moroccan town of Casablanca, some 15,000+ street dogs are killed every-year. So one would kind of think that instead of killing stray dogs the authorities would at least try to humanly control the increasing stray dog population and, slow any rabies virus from emerging, seemingly not, every year more and more dogs are massacred in the most brutal and barbaric manners you could think of.
Morocco is a predominantly French Muslim/Muslim/Islamic African country of which the Holy Quran states the following in relation to animals that share the same quarters as us, socialize with us, and roam with us (Etc.):
“There is not an animal (that lives) on the Earth, nor a being that flies on its wings, but (forms part of) communities, like you.” (Sura 13 Aya 15).
Furthermore another interesting quote from the Holy Quran is that about ‘mistreatment of animals’. The Holy Quran states the following:
“It is related from Jabir that the Messenger of Allah, once saw a donkey which had been branded on its face and he said, “May Allah curse the one who branded it.” (Muslim)”
While I’m not going to become embroiled within some religious debate, I do find it grossly contradictory that so called ‘Muslims that follow the holy scriptures of the Quran would then violate that holy book or anyone of the alleged recited peaceful verses’?
Image: Hundreds of dogs shot dead violating the Quran’s scripture.
The majority of the killings took place in Ksar-el-kebir of which some 110,000 people inhabit. Furthermore about 160km’s away from ksar-el-kebir in Rabut public workers took to the streets killing more dogs.
Further, in Marrakech, local city authorities opted for the poisoning as procedure. Same for Salé, Skhirat Kenitra [Rabat-Salé-Kenitra] and Nador [Oriental Region] says Loubna El Mourabite Kettani, a militant of the animal cause, adding that poisoning can affect even the dogs that have owners, as the poisoned bait is scattered randomly in neighborhoods.
International Animal Rescue Foundation Africa, The World Health Organisation, International Fund for Animal Welfare, and the International Alliance for Rabies Control ‘strictly advises’ local authorities worldwide to sterilize and vaccinate dogs in order to reduce their population and combat rabies. However as you can see every year throughout various Moroccan cites and towns the local authorities opt for killing dogs at point blank range, with live rounds or just poison baits, however things may be on the turn (please keep reading).
Image: Muslim’s do love dogs, sadly ‘a minority don’t’.
Zineb Bouchikhi, ONSSA’s communications officer, said that: “stray dogs that do not have owners, given the danger they pose to public health, are eliminated by local authorities as part of the national strategy against rabies. Dogs which have owners, in turn, are vaccinated annually by ONSSA officers in rural and peri-urban areas. In urban areas, private veterinarians are in charge of this operation.”
In the period from 2010 to 2015, an average of 90 000 owned dogs were vaccinated by the veterinary services of ONSSA in different regions of Morocco. However, there are no statistics on stray dogs slaughtered by local authorities each year. (How coincidental is that?).
International Animal Rescue Foundation Africa, local and international charitable organisations believe in capture, vaccinate, sterilize, de-worm and relax in the area of origin, is the best scientific, ethical and sustainable approach to preserve human and animal health. Shooting dogs though is not controlling the problem which is clear to see due to annual shootings every year.
Furthermore the cost of shooting dogs will heavily outweigh the cost of vaccination. Concerning-ly due to the press and media picking up on these mass and brutally horrific culls it will only bring a bad name to Morocco thus reducing tourism, finance, increasing poverty, unemployment and crime.
Trap: (Trap, neuter and release) is practiced in India, Turkey, America and Canada and has enabled eradication of rabies in a few years. In Morocco, including Essaouira and Taghazout, similar experiments were carried out. These are examples to generalize nationally. So if (TNR) works why are the local authorities still shooting dogs dead at some 15,000-25,000 a year annually?
Half of the domestic dogs and strays stay in residential areas, close to the forest or the sea. Meanwhile they rule the streets in the night finding food near the garbage containers or outside houses in the suburbs. In the early morning they leave to find a more calm place to sleep, usually in the forest. Strays mostly shy away from humans who use to throw stones at them as a protection.
Image: A watch dog in Sekkala.
Concluding I can state now: An initiative has been launched as of [Wed 30 Mar 2016] in Rabat jointly by RAPAD and Adan association in collaboration with municipal councilors of Rabat for the creation of a pilot project for the benefit of canine and feline stray populations. The associations of the capital [Rabat] aspire to make it a successful alternative experience to convince both the state government departments and elected officials to abandon slaughter.
For now though I’ll leave you with this video as a shocking reminder to the ongoing crisis in the African country of Morocco. We (the organisation) hope to never see such a sickening image of barbaric brutality again.
Dr Jose Carlos Depre
Chief Executive Officer | Director
Endangered Species Monday | Brachylophus fasciatus
This Monday’s (ESP) Endangered Species Watch Post report I document on a rather “undocumented species” of iguana identified back in the 1800’s. (Photographer unknown)
Identified back the 1800’s, and listed as [endangered] the species was originally identified by French Dr Alexandre Brongniart (5 February 1770 – 7 October 1847) who was a French chemist, mineralogist, and zoologist, who collaborated with Georges Cuvier on a study of the geology of the region around Paris.
Dr Alexandre Brongniart was born in Paris, the son of the architect Alexandre-Théodore Brongniart and father of the botanist Adolphe-Théodore Brongniart. He was an instructor at the École de Mines (Mining School) in Paris and appointed in 1800 by Napoleon’s minister of the interior Lucien Bonaparte director of the revitalized porcelain manufactory at Sèvres, holding this role until death.
The young man took to the position a combination of his training as a scientist— especially as a mining engineer relevant to the chemistry of ceramics— his managerial talents and financial acumen and his cultivated understanding of neoclassical esthetic. He remained in charge of Sèvres, through regime changes, for 47 years.
Commonly known as the Fiji Banded Iguana, Lau Banded Iguana, South Pacific Banded Iguana, or Tongan Banded Iguana the species is unfortunately endangered and nearing extinction within the wild. A reptilian, and member of the iguana family the species has been placed within the order of (Squamata).
Within the past TWO DECADES the species has undergone a decline of some 50% throughout its range. Furthermore species declines are still ongoing with no apparent let up neither, (threats have been noted as significantly severe and widespread).
Without conservation intervention, the degradation observed during the last 20 years is predicted to cause further declines over the next 20 years that approaches 80% and potentially will be found to be even higher with further population analysis. Basically unless conservation efforts are improved or continue then we will lose the species very quickly.
Image: Fiji Banded Iguana (Credits: Robin Carter)
Now to some humans this may not seem much to worry about. However let me ask you this. Have you experienced a rather large number of flies bothering you, mosquitoes, insects, and general bugs wreaking havoc with your everyday life? If the answer is “yes”, then maybe you need to be paying attention to my articles. Reptiles loves flies, and without reptiles there will be more flies.
Endemic to Fiji, the species has recently been introduced to Tonga. Among all the islands surveyed for the presence of Lau Banded Iguana, only on the two Aiwa Islands were enough lizards found to estimate a population size, this was estimated to number less than 8,000. That population size is concerning (especially when we take into consideration life span, gestation, and threats). 8,000 can soon turn into 1000 in under five years.
Although there is no official “population size estimates”, its believed from census reports (which I myself do question), within the past 35-40 years the species has undergone (as explained above) a decline of 50%. Discussions with island residents indicate that on most islands the iguanas are now more rare than they had been in the recent past.
Most islands in the region are now inhabited and iguanas were generally found in degraded forests or remnant forest patches, but not in proximity to villages or gardens. Surprisingly, among the uninhabited islands surveyed only one was found to have iguanas present, but this is likely due to the abundance of cats present on the iguana-free islands. It is known that local residents intentionally translocate kittens to these uninhabited islands for rat control.
In summary, a total of 52 islands in the Lau Group and Yasayasa Islands were visited between 2007 and 2011 and iguanas were detected or reported from only 11 islands, with an additional report from one island that was not visited. The sheer fact we only have on ELEVEN ISLANDS instead of FIFTY TWO Fiji Banded Iguanas, just goes to show we have serious problems here that need addressing before its to late.
Iguanas were abundant on only three islands, the two neighbouring Aiwa Islands and Vuaqava, all of which are uninhabited. Goats have recently populated all three of these islands and Vuaqava has a seemingly large cat population (which could be a threat). Most of these 53 islands should have had resident iguana populations. For example, two islands with historic populations, Moce and Oneata, were described by the Whitney Expedition and have since been extirpated. Given these results, it appears that iguanas could be remaining on about 20% of the islands in the region and are abundant on only 5%.
“SO WHAT ARE THE THREATS?”
The current band at which the Fiji Banded Iguana sits in (in regards to known population levels) is 8,000 120,000 mature individuals. Now that doesn’t mean we have 8,000 or 120,000 mature individuals. The current band basically means what we have “assumed the population” based on very sketchy and rough census estimates. What we do know, is that from the last census conducted only 8,000 were eye balled (meaning that 8,000 were physically witnessed). Further census counts are underway.
Lau Banded Iguanas are sometimes locally kept as pets, and this was observed on three different islands during surveys in 2011. Historically, these iguanas would have been a local food source, similar to the larger extinct species (Lapitaiguana and B. gibbonsi) in the region, but there are no recent records of human consumption. The black market trade in Brachylophus does not include this species and is unlikely to be a threat in the future as its remaining localities are very remote.
Black Rats (Rattus rattus) and feral cats (Felis catus) are the main mammalian predators threatening the persistence of iguanas and are capable of causing local extinctions in a relatively short time period. Fortunately, mongoose has not been introduced to the Lau Group yet, and maintaining it free of them is an important biosecurity issue. On a few islands, free-roaming domestic pigs (Sus scrofa) were observed to cause major disturbance in small forest patches, turning large areas to bare mud that is no longer suitable for iguana nesting.
Even in the absence of goat herding, forest burning is widespread and is increasingly one of the biggest threats to iguana habitat and their persistence. Continued deforestation on the small islands where Lau Banded Iguanas remain is predicted to cause additional local extinctions over the next 40 years. In particular, on the large islands of Lakeba and Vanua Balavu where iguanas should have been numerous, there has been significant forest loss through deforestation, burning, and fragmentation.
Image: Fiji Banded Iguana (Photographer unknown).
Additional threats to the native forests include further development of urban and village areas, plantation agriculture, and logging. In particular, harvesting Vesi Tree (Intsia bijuga) for use in traditional carving on several islands (for example, Kabara) has significantly reduced the native forest. Forest conversion to Caribbean Pine plantations is also significant, especially on Lakeba.
Proposed development of tourism resorts, on the smaller islands in particular, has significant impacts on these habitats, possibly leading to losses of entire iguana populations as has been observed elsewhere in Fiji. Finally, proposed new cruise ship routes to the remote Lau islands will require construction of new infrastructure and is likely to be a source of invasive species from Viti Levu unless strict biosecurity measures are enforced.
The impact of the recent introduction and spread of the invasive alien Common Green Iguana (Iguana iguana) in Fiji are not yet known for this species but have been shown to have significant detrimental effects everywhere they have been introduced. Eradication for this invasive now appears unlikely, and it is possible the Green Iguana will continue to spread to other well-forested islands despite eradication efforts. Green Iguanas are vastly more fecund and aggressive than native iguanas and may have significant effects on remnant small island populations.
At minimum, this introduction has caused considerable confusion in the local education programmes aimed at protection of Banded Iguanas versus eradication of the Green Iguanas, since juveniles of the latter appear superficially similar. The northern Lau Islands are very close to Qamea where the Green Iguana was first introduced and are at high risk of invasion.
Irruptions of invasive alien Yellow Crazy Ants (Anoplolepis gracilipes) are known to occur on many of the southern Lau islands. Even though these ants were introduced to Fiji over 100 years ago, it is not understood what causes populations to periodically irrupt in huge numbers on some islands. When Crazy Ants irrupt, the entire ground surface, shrubs, and trees are entirely covered with ants and it has been observed that native skink and gecko abundance drops greatly during this time.
The impact of aggressive ant irruptions on iguana reproduction and recruitment is not known, but is likely to suffer similarly to other lizards. Lau Banded Iguanas are sometimes locally kept as pets, and this was observed on three different islands during surveys in 2011 (as explained above).
Historically, these iguanas would have been a local food source, similar to the larger extinct species (Lapitaiguana and B. gibbonsi) in the region, but there are no recent records of human consumption. The black market trade in Brachylophus does not include this species and is unlikely to be a threat in the future as its remaining localities are very remote.
Listed as endangered, the current future is not as yet known. However what we do know is that the Fiji Banded Iguana does not inhabit the ground it once did. Threats are wide, and the species has undergone a large population decline.
Thank you for reading.
Dr Jose C. Depre PhD. MEnvSc. BSc(Hons) Botany, PhD(NeuroSci) D.V.M.
Environmental, Botanical and Human Science.
Image: Becky Francis, Sheffield, Great Britain.
RSPCA FAILS AGAIN: BECKY FRANCIS EXPOSED
February 4th of 2016 a young teenage woman identified as Miss Tiegan Oates from Sheffield, Great Britain recorded a savage act of animal abuse on her mobile cell phone. The woman in that video (seen below) is identified as Miss Becky Francis who now goes under the alias online as (Becky Abbott). The video which is quite upsetting to watch depicts now 17 year old Becky Francis beating, kicking, stamping, dragging and whipping her pet lurcher. The lurcher in the video is clearly seen cowering and flinching from Becky Francis’s onslaught.
Miss Tiegan Oates from Sheffield, Great Britain originally reported the case to the RSPCA Barnsley & District of which its ‘believed’ that the Barnsley & District RSPCA then passed that evidence (seen in the video above), onto the main Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals, (Animal Cruelty Investigations Unit).
READ MORE HERE: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3474874/Shocking-video-shows-woman-beating-kicking-lurcher-street-takes-walk.html
Unfortunately despite the video evidence being passed on, the RSPCA didn’t look into this case, and completely ignored the fact an innocent lurcher had been seriously abused. On the 3rd March 2016 International Animal Rescue Foundation England was sent the video with a plea of help from another member of the public unrelated to the original video recorder as the RSPCA still hadn’t taken action.
The Environmental Crimes Investigation Unit from the International Animal Rescue Foundation England then published the video onto their main company site page here on Facebook, as well as Twitter. After a near 1.3 million views in under three days, and with a very public complaint to the RSPCA’s main animal abuse investigations branch, the RSPCA eventually decided to take some degree of action.
On the 3rd March at 17:28hrs the RSPCA Barnsley & District finally made public (on Facebook) after we had aired the video of Becky Francis to over 8 million supporters, that the Police had seized a lurcher and staffordshire cross bull terrier. Both dogs were handed over to the Police voluntarily, however the RSPCA for some peculiar reason didn’t go with the Police to pick the animals up which is unusual bearing in mind the RSPCA do host a Special Investigations Unit with the main branch.
Then some twenty four hours later the RSPCA Barnsley & District again on the 4th March 2016 at 11:39am ‘confirmed to the public (on Facebook)’, Police had seized two dogs being that of the dog in the (February 2016 video above), and a further canine which was identified as a staffordshire cross bull terrier. So it took from February 4th 2016 to March 3rd 2016 to eventually seize two dogs, and check the health of the lurcher of which during that time the lurcher (had it been seriously injured) could have succumbed to its injuries resulting in a painful and agonizing death.
That is just not good enough especially when the RSPCA knew whom the woman was, and her address. The video itself was firm enough evidence that proved an abusive assault had taken place, not forgetting Miss Becky Francis admission to beating the dog that was posted onto her (now closed down Facebook profile seen below). Becky Francis didn’t though just admit to beating the dog, she bragged about beating the dog. So in all due respect the RSPCA and Police had ample evidence to prosecute.
Image: Becky Francis bashes the main reporter.
Since March when the RSPCA eventually done their job correctly, everything seems to have quietened down, Becky Francis removed her main Facebook profile and created a new one under the name of (Becky Abbott), and after repeated requests for information from International Animal Rescue Foundation and the general public, have fallen on deaf ears. We have had a rather gut wrenching suspicion that Becky Francis was handed both dogs back. However we had to prove that before any further action (if any could be taken against Miss Francis and the RSPCA legally).
Since March we haven’t forgotten about the case and have continued to keep our ears and eyes to the ground, so too have individuals from the Sheffield. Then on Tuesday at 16:10hrs a tip off came through from an anonymous member of the public, they have asked for their details to remain strictly anonymous due to continued harassment in the area from a hardcore group of Becky Francis supporters.
The message has been copied and pasted hereto, however has been altered with our own words added in places, the message still reads the same. This is how scared and/or intimated people are in the area it seems. So worried in case of reprisals they don’t want anything relating to them known to this vile animal abuser. The message reads:
“Hi, this evening, just to let you know, Becky Francis was spotted walking a dog that was identical to that of the lurcher the Police seized. I do not live in the same town, however visit when shopping, and to catch up with friends. The dog was very similar. It looks as if the RSPCA didn’t do a single thing to protect that poor animal. I wish to remain anonymous!”
We were going to include the original email (with details removed) from the sender, however it would seem, and very much so that intimidation and scare tactics to silence people are obviously at play here. We have protected the original sender and will not under any circumstances reveal that senders details.
Investigators that same day left a message with the RSPCA [main branch] however they didn’t respond, nor did the main RSPCA Barnsley & District. So we decided to go for another tactic, in the hope that it would eventually bring the repulsive mouthed and immature brat of an animal abuser to us, and it worked. Not only do we now hold from the “horses mouth her own admissions” we also hold further damning evidence that the RSPCA simply don’t care, nor did they do their job professionally.
While Becky Francis in the emails below didn’t exactly admit she’d been handed back the lurcher, or even the staffordshire cross bull terrier, she did admit in her own words that the RSPCA found no wrongdoing, and all NINE DOGS were doing just fine (NINE DOGS NOW?) and two children?. In fact her own admissions under her new alias of Becky Abbott exposed some very worrying concerns, and she (Becky Francis aka Abbott) had no qualms whatsoever in bragging about them. Like taking candy from a baby, meanwhile we will be pressing to lodge a complaint against the RSPCA, and we hope you the reader does too.
The first messages of the day that came through Wednesday, June 1st at 10:06am and go on for some hour.
Image: Message 1/2 Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: 2/2 Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
The investigators name has been removed (for security reasons) and he is speaking in the (black bubble) while Becky is speaking in the (blue bubble), and we expect that someone else is also at play here too. However for now we’ll leave that second party out of this article as they are not involved in influencing Becky Francis, but more involved in constant online harassment aimed at the organisation in general. That individual continues to be ignored and will not form any part of this ongoing investigation.
Image: Message 1/2 Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message 2/2 Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis, aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Francis and Investigator 1/2
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
“My dogs are brilliant, not that you would know”
Since March we have kindly asked the RSPCA main investigations branch to please provide an update relating to the two dogs in question that they “allegedly seized”. Please scroll to the top of this page and refresh yourself with what I wrote relating to the seizure of the two dogs. I stated that it was rather odd that the RSPCA not only submitted two responses onto their main Facebook page (as if they were not sure). But also stated in the March 4th final update that “Police had seized the dogs”.
Yet we all know (or I do hope so) that the Police would have to have had a specialized dog warden, RSPCA officer and transport van in the event that one of the dogs required immediate medical attention, or the other may have attacked. I don’t know of any Police unit that simply seizes two dogs without the correct transport, or RSPCA/Warden with them. However the RSPCA Barnsley & District categorically stated they never seized the dogs, the Police did. Were they scared of the family, is that why it took from February to March to eventually take action, or did they really seize the dogs? One thing is really bothering me though, why did the RSPCA Barnsley & District and RSPCA central place two public messages - as if they were not sure?, most likely nothing to worry about I expect!
We are going on the belief that the RSPCA did ask the Police to take both dogs, however we have strong reason to believe that the RSPCA and this family (Francis) aka (Abbott) have background; I.e there is a possibility the RSPCA have been hounded by the family (possibly due to past abuse reports), of which has left them no other option but to call the Police in. The RSPCA aren’t allowed to just seize domestically owned dogs neither, they need permission and must attend with the Police. Normally a warrant is granted, or everything goes ahead voluntarily. Please do keep reading the following messages and then ask yourself just what is going on here?:
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Becky Francis quotes in her own words: “My dog’s all 9 get fed a pound of mince each mixed in with pasta”.
If this is indeed true then the RSPCA have failed dismally, this is a 17 year old teenager that claims to be pregnant, of which has in the heat of the conversation admitted to owning NINE DOGS. Not only though does she admit to owning NINE dogs, she seems to know some pretty good professionally sound feeding practices that are normally only provided to ‘working dogs’ I.e dogs that hunt, or possibly fighting dogs.
While these admissions are just from herself it does spark very deep concerns as to weather the RSPCA/Police did take the two dogs in question, or if they only two were surrendered, leaving seven dogs behind? Either way its not looking good, and the conversation does state in the final closure that she does have control of the other two dogs, although does not categorically state the lurcher or staffy cross. Was Becky just joking and larking about, or was she really being serious? We’ve had three people now all non-related in the Sheffield area confirming they have witnessed Becky Francis walking one lurcher. Why would all three individuals make such a story up?
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Becky Francis quotes: “Don’t tell me they need rabbit. They get a full one every two nights each, my dogs are better looked after than yours”….
So yet again we have another admission, although this time we have a rather more detailed description in relation to the feed these dogs are being provided. Who supplies “cooked rabbits” at that level (and where is a single mother obtaining the money from for that), or are we being led to believe that these dogs are being provided with rabbits from lamping that her boyfriend has been “alleged to practice”, a sport of “type” of which lurcher style dogs hunt hare and rabbits. We’d like to see just where these “cooked rabbits actually come from”. Furthermore Becky (if you are reading) I don’t own a single dog. I only stated I did in the hope it would encourage you to run your mouth, and didn’t you just?. Foolish little brat!
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Investigator to Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Investigator to Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott).
Then finally after some hour and a half of laborious messaging I am able to obtain the admission which I’ve been awaiting from the RSPCA. The RSPCA gave both dogs back to Becky Francis, they were allegedly checked and seen as fine. And this is what the public provides donations to? A filthy corrupt charity that gives back a beaten dog[s] to an animal abuser, yet on the other hand in the case of identical animal abusers, they have their dogs removed, are fined, placed on a curfew, and banned from keeping animals for 4-5 years? Where is the justice in that?
Image: Message, Becky Francis, aka (Abbott) admits her dogs were given the okay.
Image: Message, Becky Francis aka (Abbott) final message.
So there you have it in a nut shell, Miss Becky Francis never admitted to being given the dogs back that were removed, but then never stated that she didn’t. Eventually though in her own words she did slip up of which I let her run her mouth dry. I am frustrated as will the public be, some 1.3 million people in the UK and overseas watched as she beat, dragged, stamped and kicked her pet lurcher. Yet the RSPCA have given the dogs back. This would explain why the RSPCA have been so very quiet and are refusing to reply to their emails. They (the RSPCA) rely on funding, and admissions such as this are not going to make things any better for them.
Becky Francis obviously done a little research on myself of which that research is not old news, all written by people like her that despise me exposing their lies, crimes, animal abuse and for closing down their environmental criminal networks. The fact this immature brat has a child, and from what she has stated (another on the way) still living with her deranged mother, and with nine dogs is more than concerning. In fact why Social Services, RSPCA and the Police have failed in their duties to do a single thing amazes me.
My own conclusion on dealing with sadists such as Becky is this. She and/or her partner will commit another crime, another animal or even a child will be harmed, possibly killed. She mentions an already “born child” of which I suspect may not be living with her, as from images she doesn’t appear to be “motherly”. So for now I’m not going to bother, the warning is here, and within the video, my hands are washed on this pathetic justice system. Should a child or an animal fall prey to abuse and or death. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.
Over and out.
Environmental Crimes and Animal Abuse Investigator.
International Animal Rescue Foundation
Formal Public Apology addressed to: World Protection for Dogs and Cats in the Meat Trade Charity Registration No: 1154524.
Addressed to: (WPDCMT UK)
MR DAVID MERRILL
MME JULIA DE CADENET
MR Robert DONKER’S
Addressed to: (WPDCMT USA)
MME FIA PERERA
MME LORI ALLEN
Dear Mme Julia de Cadenet (CEO).
March (2013) our organisations investigations department the [E.A.D] and (CEO) Dr Depre was alerted to ‘allegations of possible fraud, deception, and misconduct relating to the misuse of public donations’. Once alerted we then conducted a tedious, and at times, quite frustrating investigation, within the public domain, and behind the scenes. From (2013-2016) we (the organisation) was provided with countless reams of data, emails dating back from 2013-2014, and alleged misconduct, (relating to deception and fraud).
From 2013-2016 the organisation then set about to investigate these alleged claims. At no point from 2013-2016 did we or third parties locate a single scrap of evidence that backed these claims up. The reasons for our own independent investigation was due to the gargantuan public backlash of which was bringing other (unrelated organisations into disrepute directly and indirectly). The public backlash has derived from what we can only locate 6-9 individuals online that are related directly or indirectly. Most of the names involved have been withheld.
The following data listed below has proven to be false from 2013-2016, which we (the organisation) apologize profusely, because at times we were led to believe that fraud, and deception was ongoing, regarding the communications that were posted online. These communications in the way of (screenshots and copied and pasted emails), pushed us briefly out of conservationism investigations, and into civil actions, which we believed at the best of times, that these allegations were indeed factual. A meeting that was held in relation to the work that we conduct annually bought up the alleged allegations and how we could either prove them to be true or false via ‘professional investigatory work’. From this point, allegations; he said this; she said that; (Etc) were then pushed aside. A meeting was then arranged with the Charity Commission (2015 September), and the Institute of Fundraising, with a further meeting (2016 and communications via telephone)..
1… When founded the charity allegedly illegally harvested donations from street pots without a license. (This allegation has been proven to be false, and the council involved have confirmed that a licence was indeed sent to the fundraiser).
2. Refunds were not awarded to a handful of individuals that purchased clothing from the charity website. (Emails from 2013-2014 have proven this to be false, receipts and PayPal data has also proven these allegations to be false).
3. 2014-2015 charity 1154524 ‘allegedly stole donations via a Total Giving platform donation link’. The allegations stated that charity 1154524, hadn’t given all incoming donations on a restricted UK fundraiser to the Philippines ‘non-registered charity Dogs Mountain’. Total Giving was in fact to blame here, for not closing down the fundraiser which they have confirmed. The reason why charity 1154524 were not made aware of incoming money was because PayPal does not state where that income is coming from. PayPal only confirms that an ‘amount has been delivered in the PayPal account, and who from, but doesn’t confirm which ‘titled platform’. Allegation is false.
4. The British charity allegedly didn’t provide all funding raised to the Romanian charity identified as: Adapostul de caini din Baia Mare. PayPal data has proven this allegation to be false. The charity provided the relevant funding, however ‘didn’t continue with their promises of providing blankets, food, cover Etc or a visit’. Charity 1154524 couldn’t keep their promise back in (2014) because other shelters were in need too. Furthermore the charity had exceeded their (2014) expenditure totaling £9,066. Charity 1154524 did not commit an illegal activity. See link here: http://forms.charitycommission.gov.uk/find-charities/
5. 2013 an image of actor Peter Egan was posted onto the main charities webpage and Facebook page. This allegation is factual. However the ‘allegations that stated the image was posted to harvest donations was false’. Mr Egan demanded a ‘trial by Twitter of which the charity refused to answer questions. This allegation is factual. However Mr Egan was asked to phone and/or email - which Mr Egan refused to do. Mr Egan an no point explained why he was at the charities demonstration, nor did he understand that the photos belonging to the charity could be posted. Traces online do actually show Mr Egan’s images being used to raise funds - see link hereto: http://www.ourdisappearingplanet.com/ the link is also advertised on Mr Egans site hereto http://www.peter-egan.co.uk/page_2157999.html
6. An allegation was made that Mme Brown, the then director of charity 1154524 hadn’t visited South Korea. The visit was confirmed. Donations raised for this visit were all legitimate. Skype records prove Mme Brown did visit, and the allegations that Mme Brown didn’t visit are in fact false
Points 1-6 have been extensively investigated and verified by all parties, councils, the charity, registered charities, non-registered charities, and individuals. Furthermore we have proof to back these claims up. Proof of where the communications derived from, telephone records, emails and communications from the Total Giving and PayPal platform.
From 2015-2016 we was then sent allegations that charity 1154524 stole donations totaling $80,000 GBP that was raised for the individual identified as Mrs Yang Xiaoyun, of China, Tianjin. The following data below is factual.
1. June 2015 Ms Ling opened and created a Total Giving fundraiser for Mrs Yang Xiaoyun. Ms Ling placed into that platform Mrs Yang Xiaoyun’s images, with brief description of ongoing problems. Data confirms that Ms Ling implemented the images into that platform. (fact).
2. August 2015 charity 1154524 then began receiving large amounts of donations of which was primarily due to various (unidentified individuals) sharing the platform link, during the June, Chinese YuLin festival. (fact).
3. After contacting trustees it has emerged that the charity was only going on Ms Lings say so, her own concerns, and why she believed setting the fundraiser up was necessary. (fact).
4. Ms Ling then retired from the charity at some time during October 2015 after ‘alleged re-naming of the fundraiser. Communications broke down between Ms Ling and the British charity resulting in the charity being left with no direct communication to Mrs Yang Xiaoyun. (fact).
5. Donations continued to roll in from June to December 2015. the charity stated that they would try to send to Mrs Yang Xiaoyun, food, veterinary help, and donations. Despite the fact they were working with little information on and about Mrs Yang Xiaoyun due to Ms Ling retiring from the charity. (fact).
6. Mrs Yang Xiaoyun was then visited by the charity and trustee (Aug-Sep 2015). Mrs Yang Xiaoyun was handed a years rent for an undisclosed address. Further to this Mrs Yang Xiaoyun was handed via various transactions public donations before and after the visit totaling £12.000GBP. (fact). However it’s been alleged that a total of £15,000 was given.
7. When charity 1154524 visited Mrs Yang Xiaoyun a catalog of abuse, neglect and hoarding was witnessed. (fact).
8. The charity then reported their findings back to the Charity Commission as instructed (fact).
9. The Charity Commission then ‘strictly advised’ that Mrs Yang Xiaoyun set up a banking account for the fund of £80.000 to be deposited, Mrs Yang still hasn’t complied with this polite offer instructed by the Charities Commission. (fact).
10. Unfortunately due to the reams of data coming in from unrelated Chinese rescuers, and what the charity themselves witnessed - the fund was ‘allegedly frozen’ (factual to some degree).
The video above is allegedly all innocent within those calling allegations. Translated into (real Mandarin) which will be within article no 1-5 it shows and proves exactly what happened that day. The images in the video also show evidence of (abuse, neglect, hoarding, poor animal husbandry, and dead, diseased animals laying on the premises.
1. Following the events that relate to Mrs Yang Xiaoyun, Mr Andrew Penman of the Daily Mirror was asked by Mr Peter Egan and Dr Daniel Allen to conduct an investigation into ‘fraud’. The reporter then published the following article (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/dog-charity-cash-mystery-animal-6941593) - of which doesn’t prove under any circumstances that the charity 1154524 defrauded Mrs Yang Xiaoyun out of any money whatsoever, or anyone for that matter. (fact).
2. Mr Andrew Penman and Dr Allen then stated that the Charities Commission were investigating the British charity 1154524 for alleged fraud. On contacting the Charities Commission back in September and December 2015, as well as communicating and telephoning the commission. No investigation has been confirmed as going ahead whatsoever. (fact).
3. British charity 1154524 offered Mrs Yang Xiaoyun food vouchers, instead of money. This seems to have either 1. been ignored, 2. not communicated properly to Mrs Yang Xiaoyun, or refused by Mrs Yang Xiaoyun. (fact).
4. The Charity Commission have categorically stated (February 2016), “in the interests of public transparency, and the findings relating to Mrs Yang Xiaoyun’s yard. Its in public’s and charities interests to ensure that any-money raised, is provided for the reasons it was raised for”. The Commission confirmed the charities concerns being; the number of animals that were allegedly rescued (not on the premises), no cats that were allegedly rescued from the YuLin festival; hoarding; neglect; abuse Etc. (fact).
5. The Charities Commission have ‘confirmed’ that all funds raised (for Mrs Yang Xiaoyun) remain in the charities bank. Funds will not under-any-circumstances be administered to Mrs Yang Xiaoyun until she establishes a banking account herself, and proves to the charity where the animals that she rescued from YuLin are, which is what the public provided funding for.
The following data above focuses on the ‘alleged allegation of fraud, deception and misuse of public funding’s’, and nothing else.
Conclusion: The Charities Commission, ourselves, requests via the FOIA, and communications to various Chinese agencies have proven that no fraud, or deception is ongoing. Until proven otherwise we (International Animal Rescue Foundation) wish to make a public and frank apology to charity 1154524 for insinuating and agreeing that fraud/deception Etc was ongoing. I.A.R.F does not under any circumstances have any relation to the charity 1154524 nor do we want relations either now or in the future.
Members of the public that want these claims verified can contact the agencies above for further clarification (or the charity themselves). Furthermore a visit to the charity in London to view bookkeeping which is a term set out under the HMRC has located no wrong doing. British charity No To Dog Meat (WPDCMT) are fully registered as seen hereto: http://forms.charitycommission.gov.uk/find-charities/
The following five part (informal article) has been printed due to the mass online campaign that is being run by various individuals from the United Kingdom, United States, Holland, France and Eastern Europe. The online campaign has in the past 3-4 weeks been asked by ourselves to provide (proof of their allegations). When asking for proof to try and bring the public fact or false information we and the main (CEO) was insulted, blocked, threatened, intimated, individuals not related to us were threatened, and intimidated, and images were stolen, defaced, subsequently being named as ‘frauds ourselves’. The only question that was asked was listed below highlighted for your information. Does this question sound unreasonable to you?
“Please would you be most kind to show proof of your allegations, or evidence to back your claims up that prove the charity in question has committed an act of fraud, historically or to-date”?
To date not a single individual that has plastered all over Twitter, and Facebook have shown a scrap of evidence. the only data they show is “maybes, if’s, buts, well’s, or allegations”. When we confronted the individuals calling fowl here, they stated that they had the evidence and was keeping it for the Charities Commission. However when one goes over their postings on Twitter, it clearly shows that regardless of whether they have evidence or not, they’ll still post whatever they like.
Peter Egan has been asked over 17 times to produce evidence relating to his allegation that the British charity above are defrauding the public. We’ll not post all 17 screenshots but do ask that you stay tuned to the actual site to see if any response is ever given.
Image: 17 times this question has been asked, still no answer?
Board of Directors
International Animal Rescue Foundation (Int)
EMBASSY DAY: 17TH SEPTEMBER 2015 WWW.SAYNOTODOGMEAT.NET
Did you know on the 17th September 2015 from 11:00am the Australian organisation www.saynotodogmeat.net, registration 49 860 343 527 will be hosting peaceful demonstrations around the globe within nine major cities? Embassy Day forms the first (governmental) lobbying in relation to #OperationUnite 2016. Embassy Day will be the organisations second largest demo since April 4th 2015. Back in April Say No To Dog Meat made history by hosting the worlds largest anti pet meat demo in over twenty five countries.
On the 4th April 2015 the Say No To Dog Meat family hit the streets internationally in their thousands marching for dogs and cats in the horrific pet meat trade. The main April protests were non-governmental, however was a reminder that should the (eight governments) the organisation are lobbying not respond to the polite requests from the Aussie organisation. The next step would be Embassy Day, September 2015. Finally after Embassy Day, the organisation will then begin gearing up for phase two of Operation Unite 2016 that will be held October 2nd and 3rd 2016. Followed up with #OperationUnite comes the new #lovefamily campaign too.
Image: (SNTDM) supporter, #lovefamily campaign.
September 17th 2015 will see demonstrators lobbying South Korean embassies within Los Angeles, United States and Ottawa, Canada. Then in New York the Indonesian embassy, followed up with the Cambodian embassy in Seattle, United States will be demonstrated. Meanwhile within the United Kingdom the Vietnamese embassy will be peacefully protested in London, followed up with the Indian consulate in Belfast, Northern Ireland. The Nigerian embassy in Johannesburg, South Africa will follow soon after. The Thailand consulate within Perth and Philippines consulate in Brisbane, Australia will be peacefully lobbied too.
Donna Armes, campaign manager and director confirmed that all embassy consulate generals and ambassadors had been sent communications months before Embassy Day was planned. Furthermore the campaign manager stated a second electronic communication had been sent and received by embassy staff informing them about the peaceful protests, and why the organisation has been forced to lobby all nine embassies. Embassy staff, consulates and ambassadors have failed to acknowledge the Aussie organisations peaceful plans which is a little frustrating but then the organisation didn’t expect a reply anyway.
Say No To Dog Meat volunteers and directors will begin the ‘peaceful demonstrations’ with an up to date speech on current and past issues in relation to both ‘Asian and African’ dog and cat meat trade outside of each embassy. After the main speech the public can stay or depart of which the organisations volunteers and directors will then be handing into the embassies all data and petitions.
Image: Nigeria, woman prepares dog carcass for [404 joint delicacy, peppered dog soup].
Each petition contains from 10,000 to 200,000 signatures. Statistics on pet meat consumption death rates, virus and disease, regulations and violations of current standing law, predictive model data research, food hygiene violations will be handed into the consulate generals and ambassadors too. Presidential letters will also feature within the pack of which each government has a set six to eight months to respond. The organisation is not expecting an immediate or even positive response, of which OPERATION UNITE will continue to go ahead come October 2016.
For the very first time in history the Indian and Nigerian embassies will be lobbied by the organisation in relation to the Indian, Nagaland and Nigerian pet meat trades. Nigeria is the largest dog meat consuming country on the continent of Africa and third largest on the planet. Furthermore deaths from consumption of diseased or rabies infested pet meat has skyrocketed this year alone with some eighty people dead already. Meanwhile the Indian Nagaland state loses on average an estimated forty people a year via the direct consumption of rabies infested dog meat. Rabies is also on the rise in both pet meat consuming zones. India is where 85% of all human rabies deaths occurred between 1995 and 2004. Over this period there were 21404 rabies deaths a year there. Death rates for 2014 are yet to be seen.
“About 3.5 million dog bites are registered every year in India. The Government cannot give vaccine free of cost to all people. From 2006, the price of vaccine has increased…”
Despite many protests against the South Korean Bok Nal pet meat trade that began in June and ended in the first week of August. The South Korean government took no notice of expert knowledge, scientific data or petitions handed to them. Instead they allowed traders to continue the horrific disease riddled trade, and took little notice of their own laws and guidelines implemented to protect dogs and cats in meat trade. Dare we ask what the point is in introducing animal protection laws, just to allow native citizens to continue violating them?
From 2013-2015 Say No To Dog Meat has vainly lobbied the Viet Nam health minister and president Trương Tấn Sang to bring an end to the pet meat trade. On the 19th August 2014 reports issued by the (World Health Organisation) confirmed that deaths rates had increased slightly to forty (per year), however its estimated that some one hundred people die annually from rabies infection.
Despite the Aussie organisation sending more than enough scientific evidence to the Vietnamese health minister and president the trade continues. From 1995-2004 the then death rate from rabies in Viet Nam stood at some 1,550. Since 2004 the Vietnamese pet meat trade has increased. Death rates continue to increase within the country from the direct consumption of diseased pet meat, statistics from 2014 showed many of these deaths were infant related either bitten by dogs on private land or from consuming rabied infected dog and cat meat.
March 16th 2009 the Vietnamese government were handed third party data from; National Institute of Infectious and Tropical Diseases and the National Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology in Hanoi, Viet Nam that stated; “Most Rabies deaths in Vietnam were from the direct Butchering and eating of either dog or cat meat”.
Vietnamese researchers confirmed;
“In Viet Nam, dogs with rabies have been detected in dog slaughterhouses and workers at dog slaughterhouses are vaccinated against rabies as part of the national programme for rabies control and prevention. However, the private slaughter of dogs is relatively common in the country which increases rabies infection rates”
“Vietnamese doctors already consider dog slaughtering to be a risk factor for rabies transmission, but it is important that other health care workers and policy makers, both in- and outside Vietnam, are aware of this risk factor”
Dog and cat meat trade is now finally illegal within Thailand, unfortunately this doesn’t stop traffickers from snatching dogs and transporting from Thailand into the Viet Nam. Yes the trade may indeed be illegal, but again our own investigative journalists have located street traders openly selling and smuggling unhygienic meat in rural communities.
Back in 2013 [Life With Dogs] stated; “In the past week, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam have signed a deal with the intention of ending the importation and sale of dogs to be used as food. This move was initiated by their governments because of the involvement of animal welfare group Asia Canine Protection Alliance. The ACPA is comprised of four notable animal groups: Animals Asia, Change for Animals Foundation, Humane Society International and Soi Dog Foundation.
We are now in 2015 and as yet [SpeakupFortheVoiceless] and [SayNoToDogMeat] have yet to witness any such decrease of trade within Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos. Trafficking and snatching of pet dogs and cats continues within Thailand feeding the trade within the Viet Nam and China. Why has it taken from 2013 to do nothing? One only has to walk the streets of Hanoi, Saigon, Hoi An and Ben Tre to witness dog meat traders more than active. On June 30 2015, police from Sakol Nakorn intercepted a truck carrying the butchered remains and carcasses of more than 100 dogs. The truck was heading for Tha Rae, [the traditional home of Thailand’s dog meat trade]. Yet trade is illegal!
Within the Philippines the government has introduced tough and stringent laws with regards to pet meat traffickers and peddlers (Please click the links to view current data from government). Say No To Dog Meat recognizes the Philippines as one of few Asiatic countries on the continent that has taken the pet meat trade seriously. Despite a law banning the killing and maltreatment of dogs (Animal Welfare Act of 1998), dog-eating and the industry that supplies it continues particularly in the northern part of the country. Back in June 23 2013, some 12 dogs were rescued in San Pedro Laguna, according to the Department of Agriculture (DA).
The Philippines government aims to eliminate the country’s dog meat trade by 2016, AKF Head and Legal Counsel Heidi Caguioa told Rappler . Eradication means no more dog meat traders and no more dog meat restaurants. Say No To Dog Meat will be lobbying the Philippines embassy within Brisbane, Australia calling on the government to strengthen the current Animal Welfare Act 1998 and Rabies Act 9482.
Finally Say No To Dog Meat volunteers will be lobbying the Indonesian embassy calling on the government to enact law and close down all known dog meat markets. The Indonesian dog meat trade is allegedly associated with the Minahasa culture of northern Sulawesi, Maluku culture and the Bataks of northern Sumatra, where dog meat is considered a festive dish, usually reserved for occasions such as weddings and Christmas. While Say No To Dog Meat and our comrades Animal Defenders Indonesia, Surabaya Tanpa Dog Meat, Bali Adoption and Rehabilitation Center would like to believe this, the trade on dog and cat meat actually occurs every day of the month.
This September 2015 please unite with Say No To Dog Meat this Embassy Day 2015. For more information please contact the organisation here via email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Image: Say No To Dog Meat, Team Perth.
Chief Executive Officer.
Endangered Species Friday: Alopecoenas kubaryi
This Fridays Endangered Species watch Post (ESP), I document on the Caroline Ground Dove scientifically identified as Alopecoenas kubaryi. The species was discovered and named back in 1880 by explorer Friedrich Hermann Otto Finsch (8 August 1839 - 31 January 1917, Braunschweig) was a German ethnographer, naturalist and colonial explorer. Since new data has emerged in relation to the species that Hermann identified, the bird has since been correctly renamed and placed into the correct specie table (please read more below). (Image: Alopecoenas kubaryi: Author unknown).
Listed as vulnerable populations are continuing to decline, and with such a small population size its quite likely this rather beautiful and peaceful little bird will soon meet the criteria for endangered listing on the threatened species list very soon.
Endemic to Micronesia there are no fewer than 250-999 ‘mature individuals’ remaining if that, (that’s incredibly depressed for a bird listed as vulnerable). This sadly equates to exactly 375-1500 individuals in total. In theory I’m perplexed as to why this beautiful bird hasn’t been re-categorized as critically endangered. Should the wild population continue to decrease at the rate it currently is there will be no time left to re-list this bird or, implement much stronger and professional conservation efforts that are already seen today.
As explained the species is native to the Federated States of Micronesia which is an independent sovereign island nation and a United States associated state consisting of four states – from west to east, Yap, Chuuk, Pohnpei and Kosrae which are situated and spread across the Pacific ocean. The Caroline Ground Dove (common name) is located mostly within the Pohnpei region.
From 1983-1984 within the Pohnpei region populations were said to be as high as 841 mature individuals. That would have equated back then to roughly just over 3,000 individuals in total. Back in 1994 another census was undertaken in relation to the species current population trend within the birds stronghold of Pohnpei.
Unfortunately the survey recorded a staggering decrease in overall population rates within the lowlands. Meanwhile back in 2001 a further survey was conducted which again showed a dramatic decline in population trends. A conservationist by the name of Dr Baker ‘alleged’ in 1951 that the Caroline Ground Dove populations have always been depressed.
I personally disagree with this statement and if populations were ‘surveyed’ to be declining then why wasn’t extreme conservation measures implemented back then to protect the species stronghold and establish a type of nature reserve to increase population sizes? Furthermore and as I have explained why hasn’t the species been listed as (critically endangered?). The evidence is more than clear that populations rather than being (small) have in fact (declined). Conservation efforts that are currently underway too are in my opinion way to late.
The Caroline Ground Dove is commonly known by the locals as; Caroline Ground-dove; Caroline Islands Ground-Dove or the White-fronted Ground Dove. Caroline Ground Dove’s scientific identification back in the 1880’s was put into the wrong (specie) listing commonly known as Gallicolumba kubaryi. However the bird has since been entered into the correct specie list, now known as Alopecoenas kubaryi. The genera remains the same.
Caroline Ground Doves are known to inhabit tropical or sub-tropical rain-forest of which their preferred habitat is normally within Hibiscus trees. The dove takes a preferential liking to the specie of Hibiscus known scientifically as Hibiscus tiliaceus. Unfortunately the areas from which the bird specie resides is normally within and/or around human settlements which sadly poses a direct threat to the bird due to habitat destruction from human settlements. The dove can also be located in lowland, mangrove and montane rain-forests too.
In the region of Chuuk the Caroline Ground Dove is normally seen inhabiting agricultural areas (again this can pose a significantly high threat) to the bird in general. Reports have also stated that some small populations were located on islets which would indicate coastal habitat is also preferred by the Caroline Ground Dove. Within the region of Weno where habitat is said to be degraded spotters have confirmed the bird may also prefer degraded habitat too.
Diet normally consists of seeds, worms, snails and insects. A. kubaryi normally nests in dense forest at around 180 meters inland. Within the Chuuk province conservationists have confirmed that nests with eggs in have been surveyed from the months of; February, April, June and September. So we know the species normally mates and nests all year round. However unlike other doves that normally lay in the region of 1-3 eggs within a clutch, the Caroline Ground Dove is only known to produce one egg per clutch. Again I question why the species hasn’t been listed as (critically endangered). How much evidence does one need?
Image: Alopecoenas kubaryi
On Pohnpei, predation by introduced species (mainly rats Rattus spp. and cats) and excessive hunting may have caused some depletion. Habitat loss is also a major issue. Overall, there was a reduction of undisturbed upland forest on Pohnpei of over 60% from 1975-1995.
The majority of the island’s forests have been, to varying degrees, converted or at least degraded to mixed forest (native species mixed with lowland secondary species), largely attributable to the cultivation of sakau (kava) Piper methysticum as a major cash-crop. The fragmentation of such forest by sakau clearings also introduces and encourages the spread of invasive species in isolated areas throughout the forest.
Although efforts over the past 20 years to reduce the amount of clear-cutting for sakau plantations have resulted in the slowing of native forest conversion rates, the trend remains negative. On Chuuk, the only remaining semi-original forest remains in tiny remnants on the higher reaches of a few islands.
Traditional leaders have been encouraged to adopt a programme to plant sakau in the lowlands, but resistance is high because the plant grows best on wet mountain slopes and is less likely to be pilfered in more remote areas. Watershed Forest Reserve boundary lines have been laid down and enforced in Madolenihmw and Uh on Pohnpei.
Proposed conservation actions (already now underway) and past conservation actions are in my expert opinion not good enough nor will they prevent this bird from going extinct within five years to seven years max. I do find it somewhat odd that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service haven’t steeped in here to increase more help. But then these islands really are not run by the United States Government. I personally believe the specie will be extinct in five years. Sadly not enough is being done to preserve this stunningly beautiful dove.
Thank you for reading.
Dr Jose Carlos Depre.
Environmental and Botanical Scientist.
For more information follow us on Facebook.
Endangered Species Friday: Acinonyx jubatus
This Fridays endangered species I speak up about the now (not co common Cheetah). Endangered Species Watch Post (ESP) tries to limit the amount of commonly known specie on the platform, however due to recent declines we’ve now included the specie within the (ESP).
Listed on the ‘threatened list’ of (endangered species) as vulnerable, the common Cheetah was formally identified by Johann Christian Daniel von Schreber (1739 in Weißensee, Thuringia – 1810 in Erlangen), often styled I.C.D. von Schreber, was a German naturalist. (Image Cheetah, photographer unknown).
Identified back in 1775 there remains a total of some five sub-species known that inhabits north, south, west and east Africa. The sub-species A. j. venaticus is known only to inhabit Iran. Some very contradictory reports state there may or may not be populations living within Central India too.
From 1996 to 2002 A. jubatus populations haven’t increased of which this amazing hunting cat commonly known as the Cheetah or (Hunting Leopard) continues to sit at (vulnerable listing). Further population declines will most certainly see the specie qualifying for the category of (endangered). Should this occur the African Cheetah will become the first specie of big cat within the new millennium to hit endangered level.
Cheetahs have disappeared from some seventy six percent of their known historical range which now overtakes that of the Panthera leo (Lion). African populations are considered ‘widely common’ however still known to be sparsely populated. Meanwhile in Asia the Cheetah has practically vanished which is why we must do more to protect the last known remaining Africans populations before further extinctions occur. Cheetahs were known to be quite common throughout Mediterranean and the Arabian peninsula, north to the northern shores of the Caspian and Aral Seas, and west through Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan into central India However this is no longer the case.
One reason for for Asiatic Cheetah population declines was due to live captures of the animal which were trained to hunt other fauna. Unfortunately that was not the main reason why the specie spiralled into near extinction. The primary threat was Cheetah prey decline. This same problem has also been noted as effecting other big cats within Africa and Asia too. Agriculture, over-unregulated-hunting, over-culling, urbanization and habitat destruction via humans, has all played a significant role pushing the species furthermore into the realms of near extinction. Within Iran the sub-species A. j. venaticus is known to be (critically endangered)
In Tunisia Cheetahs were known to roam freely, however there are no known populations remaining within the country. The El-Borma region, near the Algerian boundaries, was probably among the areas where Cheetahs have last been seen in 1974 and documented. Reports compiled back in 1980 now tell us the specie is incredibly rare (if not regionally extinct already). Recently hunters yet again stated that (hunting) has never impacted on the species whatsoever. That’s a complete barefaced lie by members of (PHASA) Professional Hunting Association of South Africa and (DSI) Dallas Safari International.
Cheetahs became extinct from most of the Mediterranean coastal region and easily accessible inland habitats of El-Maghra and Siwa oases one decade after being widely distributed in the northern Egyptian Western Desert until the 1970s. The main reasons explaining cheetah extirpation have been attributed to (extensive and uncontrolled hunting and the development of coastal lands). Please view images lower down the article.
“The main reasons explaining cheetah extirpation have been attributed to (extensive and uncontrolled hunting and the development of coastal lands)”…
Current data on Cheetah population within Eritrea, Sudan and Somali is unknown. Populations within these three countries could very well already be extinct. Reports conducted within most “known Chad Cheetah zones” have sadly concluded the species is no longer present within the of much African country either, 2008 surveys did pick up few roaming species within Southern Chad though. Few populations remain within Central Sahara although to what extent is again unknown.
Within the African countries of Cameroon, Central African Republic, Congo, and Democratic Republic of Congo again population counts are not known. (Its’ quite possible that the species has already gone extinct). Cheetahs are already officially extinct within Burundi and Rwanda. Reports have sadly confirmed the species is also extinct within Nigeria. Poaching and over-hunting have wiped all populations out within the three central African countries. A 1974 study ‘suggested’ that few populations may be occupying both Cameroonian boundaries and Yankari Game Reserve. This report is though mere speculation and not confirmed evidence.
EXTINCTIONS TO DATE
Extinctions have already occurred within; Burundi; Côte d’Ivoire; Eritrea; Gambia; Ghana; Guinea; Guinea-Bissau; India; Iraq; Israel; Jordan; Kazakhstan; Kuwait; Oman; Qatar; Rwanda; Saudi Arabia; Sierra Leone; Syrian Arab Republic; Tajikistan; Tunisia; Turkmenistan; United Arab Emirates; Uzbekistan and Yemen.
Afghanistan; Cameroon; Djibouti; Egypt; Libya; Malawi; Mali; Mauritania; Morocco; Nigeria; Pakistan; Senegal, Uganda and the Western Sahara.
Known Endemic Zones
Algeria; Angola; Benin; Botswana; Burkina Faso; Central African Republic; Chad; Congo; Ethiopia; Iran; Kenya; Mozambique; Namibia; Niger; South Africa; South Sudan; Sudan; Tanzania, United Republic of; Togo; Zambia; Zimbabwe. (Updated 2015)
2015 WILD POPULATION COUNTS
(Please note the following populations below are wild and not captive nor farmed)
Reintroductions of Cheetah populations have taken place within Swaziland however to what extent the populations are within Swaziland is unknown.
What we know to-date is that populations within the “Southern Africa” (not just South Africa) hosts the largest populations at roughly some 5,000+ mature individuals. Botswana and Malawi holds roughly 1,800 mature individuals. Populations are unknown within (Angola) and ‘considered possibly extinct’. Mozambique holds some 50-60 mature individuals, Namibia 2,000. SOUTH AFRICA holds some 550 mature individuals, Zambia some 100 mature individuals, Zimbabwe 400. A large proportion of the estimated population lives outside protected areas, in lands ranched primarily for livestock but also for wild game, and where lions and hyenas have been extirpated. So we do question why trophy hunting and unregulated hunting still persists out of farmed areas.
Ethiopia, southern Sudan, Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania holds an estimated (2,500 mature individuals) however due to intense hunting pressure, poaching and habitat destruction this number could be much lower. (There is NO evidence that hunting within any of the ‘legal zones’ has increased Cheetah populations whatsoever”. Furthermore I challenge all hunting organisations within the legally allowed hunting areas to prove myself wrong? The largest population (Serengeti/Maro/Tsavo in Kenya and Tanzania) is estimated at 710.
Kenya hosts some 790+ mature wild individuals, Tanzania 560+ to 1,100 individuals. Uganda, Gros and Rejmanek (1999) estimated 40-295 with a wider range in the Karamoja region, whereas now Cheetahs have been extirpated and just 12 are estimated to persist in Kidepo National Park and surroundings. North-West Africa the species stands at no fewer that 250 mature individuals (if that).
Within Iran the ‘sub-species’ of Asiatic Cheetah - A. j. venaticus (if still extanct) stands at some 60-100 mature individuals. We do like the fact the conservation trustee is a known hunter allegedly supporting Cheetah conservation. We’ve yet to see an real improvement of Iranian Cheetahs in the country (more money talk)…
The overall “known Cheetah population” for Asia and Africa is by far more threatened that the Lion. To date there are some 7,000 known mature individuals remaining within the wild but no greater than 10,000. This sadly make the Cheetah by far more threatened than Panthera leo. African Lion populations stand at some 15,000 to 13,000 maximum. As the Cheetah population will not likely exceed 10,000 individuals - the species therefore qualifies for (vulnerable status).
Nowell and Jackson stated that Cheetah populations in the past have undergone some alarming declines, now it would seem that history is re-repeating itself (this time the specie may not survive). The Cheetah exhibits remarkable levels of genetic diversity in comparison and compared to other wild felids, so there could be a high chance the species may make it back from the near brink of extinction within the wild.
Problem is poaching and over-hunting then wasn’t as prolific as it is today. Scientists stated that interbreeding among other individuals had saved the species from bottleneck declines in the past. This history dated back some 10,000 years. Sport hunting then wasn’t an issue as it is today, so in all fairness the species could be hunted into extinction illegally or legally (with much thanks to Cites on the ‘legal part’). So in all honesty we may lose the Cheetah before the Lion.
While the causes of the Cheetah’s low levels of genetic variation are unclear [back then], what is clear is that large populations are necessary to conserve it. Since Cheetahs are a low density species, conservation areas need to be quite large, larger than most protected areas. Major areas of the African continent are being overtaken by humans, agriculture to cope with human expansion and deforestation. No longer is it a case of ‘if’ rather than ‘when’….
Cheetahs are ‘hunted for sport and trophies’, as well as handicrafts products. Live animals are also traded - the global captive Cheetah population is not self-sustaining. Pest animals are also removed.
In Eastern Africa, habitat loss and fragmentation was identified as the primary threat during a conservation strategy workshop (2007). Because Cheetahs occur at low densities, conservation of viable populations requires large scale land management planning; most existing protected areas are not large enough to ensure the long term survival of Cheetahs. A depleted wild ungulate prey base is of serious concern in northern Africa. Cheetahs which turn to livestock are killed as pests. Conflict with farmers and depletion of the wild prey base are also considered significant threats in parts of Eastern Africa.
In Iran, the Asiatic Cheetah A. j. venaticus is threatened indirectly by loss of prey base through human hunting activities. In addition, most protected areas are open to seasonal livestock grazing, which potentially places huge pressure on the resident ungulate populations through disturbance and potential competition. Additionally, domestic dogs accompanying the herds present a likely threat to both Cheetahs and their prey. An emerging threat is the possibility of fragmentation into discontinuous subpopulations as a result of increasing developmental pressures (mining, oil, roads, railways); this is particularly the case in Kavir N.P., currently the north-western limit of the Asiatic Cheetah’s range.
Conflict with farmers and ranchers is the major threat to Cheetahs in southern Africa. Cheetah are often killed or persecuted because they are a perceived threat to livestock, despite the fact that they cause relatively little damage. In Namibia, very large numbers of Cheetahs have been live-trapped and removed by ranchers seeking to protect their livestock (from government permit records, Nowell  calculated that over 9,500 cheetahs were removed from 1978-1995). While removal rates have fallen, in part due to intensified conservation and education efforts, many ranchers still view Cheetahs as a problem animal, despite research showing that Cheetahs were only responsible for [3% of livestock losses] to predators. Although Cheetah in Iran have been killed because of predation on livestock, since 2003, there has been no direct evidence of killing Cheetahs, though it is likely most incidents go unreported.
“Cheetahs are also vulnerable to being caught in snares set for other species”.
Another threat to the Cheetah is interspecific competition with other large predators, especially lions. On the open, short-grass plains of the Serengeti, juvenile mortality can be as high as 95%, largely due to predation by Lions. However, mortality rates are lower in more closed habitats.
CITES [allows legal trade in live animals and hunting trophies under an Appendix I] quota system (annual quotas: Namibia - 150; Zimbabwe - 50; Botswana - 5). This was accepted by CITES as a way to enhance the economic value of Cheetahs on private lands and provide an economic incentive for their conservation. The global captive Cheetah population is not self-sustaining; Cheetahs [breed poorly in captivity] and in 2001 [30% of the captive population] was wild-caught. While analysis of trade records in the CITES database shows that these countries have reported almost no live exports since the late 1990s, Conservation groups are concerned that there is a substantial illegal cross-border trade in live animals.
There is also concern about illegal trade in skins, as well as capture of live cubs for trade to the Middle East. There is an increasing trade in cubs from [north-east Africa into the Middle East], but there is currently little trade in cubs from the Sahel region, where it was previously considered a major problem. Cheetahs are active during the daytime and there is concern that they can be driven off their kills by [tourist cars crowding around, or mothers separated from their cubs]. Burney (1980) conducted a study and concluded that [tourist cars did not seem to harm cheetahs, and in fact sometimes helped, as cheetah chases more often ended in a kill when there were cars around, distracting prey, providing cover from which to stalk, or otherwise waking Cheetahs up to notice prey in the area]. However, [tourist numbers have risen sharply by then, and its potential impact on cheetahs remains a concern].
The Eastern African Cheetah conservation strategy identified four sets of constraints to mitigating these threats across a large spatial scale. Political constraints include lack of land use planning, insecurity and political instability in some ecologically important areas, and lack of political will to foster Cheetah conservation. Economic constraints include lack of financial resources to support conservation, and lack of incentives for local people to conserve wildlife. Social constraints include negative conceptions of Cheetahs, lack of capacity to achieve conservation, lack of environmental awareness, rising human populations, and social changes leading to subdivision of land and subsequent habitat fragmentation. These potentially mutable human constraints contrast with several biological constraints which are characteristic of Cheetahs and cannot be changed, including wide-ranging behaviour, negative interactions with other large carnivores, and potential susceptibility to disease.
Disease is a potential threat to the Cheetah, as its reduced genetic diversity can increase a population’s susceptibility. However, the most serious disease mortality thus far documented in wild Cheetahs was from naturally occurring anthrax in Namibia’s Etosha National Park; Cheetahs, unlike other predators, do not scavenge carcasses of ungulates killed by anthrax, and thus [had no built-up immunity] when they preyed upon springbok sick with the disease. The Cheetah’s low density may offer some measure of protection against infectious disease; for example, Cheetahs were not affected by an outbreak of Canine Distemper Virus in the Serengeti National Park which [killed over 1/3 of the Lion population]. Serological surveys of Cheetahs on Namibian farmland indicate some exposure and survival of the disease.
We are losing the Cheetah faster than the specie of Lion. Although some regulations are in place with the species listed on Appendix I (Cites) its quite likely we’ll lose wild populations should hunting, poaching and unregulated hunting not stop now.
Thank you for reading.
Dr Jose C. Depre
Environmental and Botanical Scientist.
Sources; Cites, Red List, Wiki, Wild Forum, DEA, CCG, DSI, PHASA, Cambridge University, Oxford University.
July - August Malbok Festival
South Korea which is located in the southern half of the Korean Peninsular of east Asia will this July to early August host its annual dog meat-eating festival commonly known as “Bok Day”, “Bok Days” or the Malbok Festival. The festival normally begins on the 13th July or 21st July, and runs into early August which is considered the hottest days of the year within the country.
The event is hosted on the first “Cho Bok” first summer continuing through to “Joong Bok”, mid-summer, on the 28th, and “Mal Bok”, end of summer, on August 7th, lasting 21 days. It’s during this event that South Korean dog and cat meat markets will begin a mass slaughter of dogs and cats. One particularly commonly killed dog is the “Noo-rung-yee” or commonly known as the “Nureongi” a yellowish traditional dog breed that has been bred to specifications over time within East Asia. There are various terms used for this festival which I’ve included within the entire article for your information and research.
To date, and like the Yulin festival there remains no factual estimates from governmental research or observation counts to place an exact number to how many dogs or cats are killed during the twenty-one day event. Some critics have placed the number of “dogs” killed during the entire “Bok Day - dog meat-eating days” at some one million dogs killed during this cruel and barbaric festival. Meanwhile other organisations and critics have placed the number at a much reduced count at some 15,000 during the Malbok Festival.
Sambok (삼복), also known as Boknal (복날), or the dog days of summer, covers a month of time at the peak of the growing season and traditional time that to some South Koreans is classified as a traditional time to cool off and extract some medicinal healing powers from the consumption of dog meat. In reality there still remains no proof or medical evidence that supports the East Asian pet meat consuming beliefs that such meats increase human health.
Image: No mercy for cats either at the Malbok Festival.
The most commonly consumed dish during the South Korean Malbok festival is that of peppery dog meat soup (quite a commonly consumed dish that we have noted within western Africa and central Africa). During the festival dogs will be seen roasted and served on a spit, and prepared in stews too. However as explained the most commonly sought after dish is that of peppery dog meat soup known as (bosintang or gaejang-guk) a dish that is steeped in history dating back thousands of years, and is now commonly consumed throughout western, central and northern Africa.
International Animal Rescue Foundation Africa has uncovered in the years of intensive bush and pet meat trade research Asian construction workers bringing the dish and recipes into the African continent. The environmental companies most shocking report that has yet to be released will finally prove that south Africa has more than its fair share of dog meat traders with illegal “404” joints too.
Bosintang aka gaejang-guk:
Bosintang or “dog meat cuisine” as the dish is commonly known remains part of the traditional south Korean dish. Research on the north Korean pet meat trade also indicates bosintang to be a commonly consumed soup eaten throughout the year. furthermore within the “404 restaurants of Lagos, Abuja and Jos in Nigeria the exact same dish is consumed by locals commonly with very potent gin”.
In reports last month and last year I.A.R.F.A and Say No To Dog Meat have unearthed very concerning data regarding dog meat and gin trade of which has seen countless scores of people dropping dead like flies. International Animal Rescue Foundation Africa and Say No To Dog Meat also uncovered hard and firm evidence that migrant workers from south Korea, China and Viet Nam had introduced the dish of gaejang-guk into the plateau states.
The main primary ingredient of Bosintang or - Gaejangguk (개장국, -醬-) - as its more commonly known in south Korea is dog meat. Dog meat is boiled with a range of aromatic and fresh vegetables with herbs such as chamomile and dandelion added to the dish. (Its believed by some tourists and locals the inclusion of these scented herbs is to remove the strong pungent, and at times nauseating aroma of stewed dog. Doenjang (된장), Gochujang (고추장), and perilla seed powder are also known to be included within this rather unsavory dish.
Bosintang has quite an extensive history within south Korean traditional food. Dating as far back to the 4th century ((AD) After the Death of Christ). We know this because of evidence that was located on the wall painting in the Goguryeo tombs complex in South Hwanghae Province, a UNESCO World Heritage site which dates from 4th century AD, depicts a slaughtered dog in a storehouse (Ahn, 2000). (Please refer to the UNESCO World Heritage site for further information).
The Balhae people also enjoyed dog meat, and the Koreans’ appetite for canine cuisine seems to have come from that era. So in all fairness it’s quite possible the Malbok festival or a similar festival will also be hosted within north Korea too. If this is true then the vast number of dogs killed and consumed for meat will heavily exceed all kill and consume estimates from organisations and animal rights individuals. Unfortunately as we’re unable to freely travel into north Korea to document on this case we’ll never know the full truth. Please do stay tuned though.
During the first day of the Malbok festival (BOK - the first day that consumers are encouraged to dine on the traditional soup or stews), other types of dishes will be on the menu - something that the Australian organisation (Say No To Dog Meat.Net) are currently demanding to be removed off the menu within south Korea.
Image: “Nureongi” a traditional dog breed commonly killed for meat within Asia.
These dishes include:
- Bosintang (보신탕; 補身湯); Gaejangguk (개장국)) – Stew containing boiled dog meat and vegetables.
- Gaegogi Jeongol (개고기 전골) – An elaborate dog stew made in a large Jeongol pan.
- Gae Suyuk (개 수육; 개水肉)- Boiled dog meat
- Gaegogi Muchim (개고기 무침) – Steamed dog meat, Korean leeks (부추), and vegetables mixed with spices
- Gaesoju (개소주; 개燒酒) – Mixed drink containing dog meat and other Chinese medicine ingredients such as ginger, chestnut, and jujube to invigorate one’s health.
~ Source Wiki
While all dishes are considered grotesque, probably the most vile and repulsive of them all is that of the Gaesoju (개소주; 개燒酒). When I say vile I truly mean “vile and utterly bloody disgusting”. There remains some mystery as to what is included within this trinket of liquid dog meat although the very basic ingredients are known. Research from universities in Maine and California have located liquefied dog meat being the primary ingredient, intestines (not normally used in this liqueur type drink), traces of dog hair, teeth, herbs, spices, blood, beef and an entire textbook of virus’s, diseases and, toxins that would normally harm the non-pet-meat consumer.
Both Maine and California scientists confirmed that no medicinal properties were located in either samples or synthetic medications that could give the illusion such a tonic increases libido, lowers blood pressure, wards of evil spirits, prevents miscarriages and, acts as a bodily coolant. However as the tonic, stew and soup are consumed with “liquid” the liquid itself I.e common water helps by decreasing dehydration which in turn helps to cool the body down.
Has the common old aged belief which states “soup” can help decrease dehydration, and helps to reduce cold like symptoms been taken a little to far within in traditional Asian food and medicine culture? It’s possible and what’s more as soup contains liquid I.e water it does indeed help cool the body and relieve some cold like symptoms which is a proven scientific fact.
Cuisine Row and Moran Market:
Cuisine Row - commonly referred to by international tourists as the “Postcard Row” is located behind the local Seoul City Hall which is an area where many dog meat restaurants trade during the Malbok festival. It’s wrong for anyone to state that the festival is confined just to Moran Meat Market as the festival is a common country event gathering that thousands of people attend during the first Cho Bok (first summer) of the Malbok festival.
Back in 2014 one of Seoul’s most “infamous” yet liked restaurants within the “Cuisine Row” closed its doors to trade. Daegyo, an acclaimed Seoul restaurant that had been serving dog meat since 1981, doled out its last serving of boshintang, or dog stew in the first week of September 2014. Daegyo’s owner stated she used to serve over “700 bowls of dog meat stew a day”. Should that figure be correct, and taking into account the entire number of markets and restaurants followed up by the Malbok festival its quite likely the number of dogs (excluding cats) killed within south Korea alone could hit one to two million every month. However and as frustrating as it is statistics on the number of dogs and cats killed within the month-long Malbok festival is still sketchy to say the least.
However lets not all think negative and become emotional. Daegyo’s closed for a reason which in the owners own words “There are no young customers,” she said. To cater to the changing times, Keum-il plans to reopen the restaurant as a Korean beef barbecue diner.
Image: Laws prohibit companion dogs viewing friends killed for the plate in south Korea.
Cuisine Row is quite a sprawling shopping district situated behind City Hall that hosts many restaurants with live and dead meat markets. The most commonly seen shops and stalls are dog and cat meat vendors, however since our last visit to the country many of these restaurants and markets have shut up shop and, like Keum-il has confirmed - reopened as a non-dog or cat meat trading company.
Seongnam Moran Market:
Seongnam Moran Market is often called “Moran Meat Market” due to its unhealthy sales of dogs, cats, chickens, goats and just about any other animal you could possibly think of. However it must be noted Moran Market doesn’t just sell meat or live animals. Vegetables, clothing and more or less the same products you purchase at home in your country are also on sale within the countries largest bustling market hence its true name “Seongnam Moran Market” and not “Moran Meat Market”. The market is located within Seoul and has been notoriously described as hell on Earth by activists and tourists.
Seongnam Moran Market is located within the Gyeinggi-do-province which is south Korea’s largest “five-day” open market. The market is known by the locals as a farmers market which is where we now bring the horrors of Bok Nal to you. Strangely the days ending in “4 and 9” is when you’ll witness more street vendors within the markets bargaining and selling anything from dogs, cats, haberdashery to clothing too.
Image: Moran Market is known to be the largest supplier of dogs in the country.
As you venture into the center of the market the stench truly is gut churning. Dogs and cats can be witnessed in small cramped cages most of them still wearing identification collars. Many of the dogs and cats suffer from a wide range of illnesses, parasites and diseases “unfit for human consumption” of which are still beaten, killed then sold to the unsuspecting locals.
On visiting the market few years back I counted on average around twenty-three stalls that sold “just dog and cat meat” or live dogs and cats. Many of the stalls host their own unhygienic butchery of which there is no refrigeration, chilling cabinets or freezers to slow down food decomposition. One of my major concerns was fact that both “live animals, raw and cooked meats were laying next to one another. Within the western world this would be considered a food hygiene nightmare forcing the local food inspectors to close such entities down immediately. Selling diseased animals next to raw, cooked and under-cooked meat is tantamount to murder or common assault.
Purchasing any animal, raw or under-cooked meat is not only dicing with death but also spreads diseases and virus onto other people which is probably why we now have quite an extensive increase of Avian Flu and now MERS outbreaks within dog meat-eating zones and states of America and Europe where dogs have been rescued and flown out of South Korea. Dogs but not cats can host Avian Flu. To date there is no proof that rescued dogs from south Korea brought back into the states of America have spread Avian Influenza.
Moran Market is known as the largest supplier of dog and cat meat within South Korea. When the Bok Nal festival kicks off there is within the region an estimated (100,000) dogs and cats killed within the first few days alone. However please remember this is based on estimated figures that do not present any proof that such number is factual.
A member of the public whom was investigating the market stated “cages and cages stuffed with chickens, roosters, black goats (extracts and soups), bunnies, kittens (medicinal extracts, stews, and soups) and the crush of so-called “meat” or yellow dogs (Nureongi), ubiquitous, crammed together, in obscenely filthy cages”. Sadly this is common within Moran Market and something that the Australian organisation “Say No To Dog Meat” are taking seriously.
Despite laws that have been drafted into place to halt such abuse, dog and cat meat traders will this July into early August beat, blowtorch, hang and inhumanely kill countless dogs and cats. Back in 2007 the south Korean government made history by making “An act of killing in a cruel way such as hanging” and “an act of killing in an open area such as on the street or in front of other animals of the same kind watching” are explicitly prohibited until Article 7 (1) of the Animal Protection Act of 2007. Unfortunately the laws apply to abuse rather than prohibiting the trade full stop.
However sadly, dogs and cats are brutally beaten in front of their companion friends (a violation of APA 2007), electrocuted (a violation of the APA 2007), hung from rafters in the markets alive (a violation of the APA 2007) and, furthermore street vendors continue to kill in open spaces as well within the center of the market (a violation of the APA 2007 Act) - excluding the center market place).
Updates to the policy from 2008 can be briefly read below. The policy is believed to have been brought into practice back in 1991
Animals under protection should be free from the following (Article 3 Animal Protection);
- Hunger and thirst.
- Able to express natural behavior.
- Free from pain and disease.
- Free from fear and stress.
- Animal Welfare Act Plan should be updated every 5 years and local governments shall cooperate with the central government.
The Animal Welfare Act Plan includes the following:
- Basic policies on animal welfare and prevention of animal abuse.
- Management of lost and abandoned animals.
- Policy on Animal Experiment Ethics Committee.
- Policy on farm animal welfare.
Image: Puppies are sold for slaughter within Moran Market - A violation of the APA.
Interestingly and despite just about every rule in the book being violated come this July’s Bok Nal festival under Article (19 Animal Protection Warden) the government or any organisation must provide an experienced and duel qualified warden to walk the market places and “non-Moran Market” zones to ensure that the Animal Protection Act 2007 is being enforced.
The following legislature states:
The Minister of Food, Agriculture, Foresting and Fisheries, Mayor or Governor and Mayor or County Magistrate must appoint an animal protection warden in order to manage the work related to animal protection. The Minister of Food, Agriculture, Foresting and Fisheries, Mayor or Governor and Mayor or County Magistrate can appoint a person recommended by a private organization approved by presidential decree, or a person who is well learned and experienced in animal protection, as the animal protection warden for the monitoring of animal abuse and rescue and protection of abused animals.
The Animal Protection Act was allegedly brought into practice back in 1991 however is more aimed at the “slaughtering of animals” rather than the upkeep, care and abuse in general. Say No To Dog Meat.Net are lobbying the south Korean government to amend the current legislation to include more rights and welfare for animals. Say No To Dog Meat.Nets petition can be seen below that holds over 150,000 signatures. Please click on the image link and help the organisation by placing your signature to the petition that will eventually be handed direct to the south Korean president and Mayor of Seoul.
Image: Click the image above and help Say No To Dog Meat.Net end this torturous trade.
As explained in many past and present articles there remains no “factual” governmental statistics that can prove how many dogs and cats are killed “year round” within south Korea and, no real data to prove how many dogs and cats have been killed during the Bok Nal festival past and present. Without these statistics organisations such as Say No To Dog Meat must then rely on visual reports from the ground, interviews with traders and restaurant owners.
It would be deemed as grossly unprofessional for any organisation or individual to place any number into the domain without proof then ask for public donations. Instead bringing the trade and abuse into the limelight is considered more of a realist approach in the hope it will eventually bring the government to its feet to ban the trade or implement tough legislation to prosecute traders whom violate the laws already set out. Below are (estimates) and must not be taken as a proven or accurate statement.
The following data below derives from actual traders on the ground that have been interviewed during and after the Bok Nal festival. Included beneath is the average price of dogs and price for slaughter.
Estimated statistics on consumption and ownership:
- Trader 1 - Dog and cat meat restaurants number around 500-600 in Seoul alone.
- Trader 2 - During the last summer festival “estimates” of some 5 to 6 million dog meat dishes were sold during the twenty-one day event.
- Trader 3 - According to the Korean Kennel Foundation it’s believed that some 3.5 to 5.0 million dogs are kept as companion pets nationwide.
Estimated south Korean dog price and slaughter info:
- Gyeongdong Market in central Seoul - trader 1 states that the average price of slaughter/preparation/cooking and bagging is around 150,000 won.
- The current starting price for one dog comes in at 120,000 won and can exceed 190,000 won to 200,000 won stated trader 2.
- Separate pieces of dog meat are usually sold by weight, 5,000 won per geun (1.3 pounds/0.6 kilograms) explained trader 3.
- Another commonly served dish is sliced dog meat. A whole dog usually costs around 300,000 won in restaurants trader 4 stated.
- Gyeongseong Oriental Medicine Clinic, located near the market ask 350,000 won for a month’s worth of gaesoju; they charge half that if the customer provides the dog. Customers have to pay 20,000 won extra for slaughtering.
~ Source JoongAng Daily.
Image: Gyeongdong Market in central Seoul.
While the trade in dog and cat meat continues times are in fact changing despite some organisations stating the trade is out of control to the point it cannot be controlled. Say No To Dog Meat, In Defense of Animals, Humane Society, Soi Dog and countless other organisations are all working towards providing dog meat traders with a more sustainable and healthier trade. Say No To Dog Meat’s mission for example is not just about “banning the trade”. One must remember this is indeed a trade and taking away people’s livelihoods despite the fact the western world sees such trades as cruel - will only increase unemployment, poverty and crime.
The board of directors have since founded, already devised a strong and trusted plan supported by over fifty thousand people and counting. Your donation can make a difference by providing traders and farmers with land and equipment to create a more attractive, non-abusive and a prosperous future ahead instead of using any donation to purchase dogs or cats from traders which only increases the circle of abuse.
Image: Cebu, Philippines young activists aligned with the Say No To Dog Meat.Net organisation make their voice heard this past April 4th 2015 for S.N.T.D.M’s mass global anti pet meat trade demonstrations. The event hit Asia by storm supported by countless organisations and animal loving individuals. Say No To Dog Meat.Net rolled its youth education program out last year and has already seen a massive response from the young Asian community. Cebu children sent a message via Say No To Dog Meat to the pet meat-eating community - Please click the link above to view that message on Facebook. To join the Youth Club please contact: email@example.com today.
Creating fruit farms, vegetable farms, cotton farms, is one of many options already implemented by some organisations and the organisation Say No To Dog Meat. Establishment of pet rescue clinics has already been on the Say No To Dog Meat agenda of which removes dogs and cats from the streets, treating and, re-homing to trusted and caring families locally and internationally.
Many young people from all over Asia have already joined the Say No To Dog Meat mission and to date are lobbying with the organisation to bring this trade to an end while creating education and awareness to the many younger generations. Spreading the word among the young is pivotal and, has already proven to be a positive step for the Say No To Dog Meat organisation and mission objectives.
Say No To Dog Meat.Net:
Say No To Dog Meat.Net was established back in 2012 and founded in 2013. The organisation’s team are tackling traders within south Korea; Viet Nam; Cambodia; Thailand; Philippines; Nigeria; Ghana; Liberia and, Niger. Since founded Michele Brown, myself (Jose Depre), Donna Armes and our sister organisation have begun intensive lobbying of south Korean ministers, south Korean President, and the mayor of Seoul.
Say No To Dog Meat which is not related to the British charity (No To Dog Meat) also hosts petitions for each country they are actively working to end the trade within. South Korea being the most prominent of which the Aussie organisations petition holds over 150,159 signatures. The organisation requires at least a million signatures that will form part of the #Operationunite project bringing activists together to end this barbaric trade once and for all while offering dog and meat traders a way out of their traditional trade and, into a trade that is more profitable and all-round healthy.
Image: Stray dog looks on in sadness as friends are killed in front if him.
You can help Say No To Dog Meat.Net below:
- Sign the petition calling on the South Korean Government to take dog and cat meat of the menu.
- Get involved this September that will see many individuals lobbying for change this Embassy Day. South Korean embassy will be one of many embassies that the organisation will be pursuing for change.
- Encourage the younger generation to become involved. Say No To Dog Meat are currently seeking all young animal lovers to draw or paint their thoughts and, send in a small written message addressed to the South Korean government with an image of their hand with the words “I Say No To Dog Meat” on. (Watch the page for new updates)
- Host an awareness and education day this July in your city or begin planning for an adult/youth awareness and education day for Say No To Dog Meat’s #OperationUnite 2016 events.
- Donate. Say No To Dog Meat.Net cannot tackle the dog meat traders or farmers without your donation. (Please note: Say No To Dog Meat.Net “does not accept donations via cell phone devices”. All donations can be made via direct online transactions “safe and secure” or you can donate to the Say No To Dog Meat’s Environmental Companies F.A.A.W.S bank account on Pay Pal. Simply input this address - firstname.lastname@example.org and add the amount. You’ll receive like the SNTDM organisation will an electronic receipt, and you’ll be entered into the organisations free news letter subscription service.
For further information please contact the organisation hereto: email@example.com
Thank you for reading.
Dr Jose C. Depre
Chief Environmental Officer and CEO.
Abuse or Culture?
Its been a long time since I last documented on the hyena men within Nigeria. My last article was more focusing on why men feel the need to take any animal from its natural habitat, drugging the animals into submission thus in a way domesticating them. Peter Hugo was one of the very first men to document and illustrate on this rather strange and morbid behavior of both man and animals.
This Wednesdays article focuses more on whether such domestication of wild hyenas (or any animals from the wild) is considered abusive or culture and, will such a “fashion trend” spread into neighboring countries on the continent of Africa? Yes, you did just read that correctly - hyenas are seen by some people (mainly men) within Nigeria as a fashion statement over dogs. Yet the hyena is more closely related to cats and not dogs.
Brief hyena history:
Hyenas or hyaenas (from Greek ὕαινα hýaina) are the animals of the family Hyaenidae /haɪˈɛnɨdiː/ of the feliform suborder of the Carnivora. With only four extant species, it is the fifth-smallest biological family in the Carnivora, and one of the smallest in the class Mammalia. Despite their low diversity, hyenas are unique and vital components of most African ecosystems.
Within Western African tradition hyenas have been known to mingle and interact with humans. The spotted hyena was considered a “bad Muslim” who challenge the local animism that exists among the Beng in Côte d’Ivoire. In East Africa, Tabwa mythology portrays the spotted hyena as a solar animal that first brought the sun to warm the cold earth, while West African folklore generally shows the hyena as symbolizing immorality, dirty habits, the reversal of normal activities, and other negative traits. In Tanzania, there is a belief that witches use spotted hyenas as mounts.
In the Mtwara Region of Tanzania, it is believed that a child born at night while a hyena is crying will likely grow up to be a thief. In the same area, hyena faeces are believed to enable a child to walk at an early age, thus it is not uncommon in that area to see children with hyena dung wrapped in their clothes.
Image: Hyena and cub.
The Kaguru of Tanzania and the Kujamaat of Southern Senegal view hyenas as inedible and greedy hermaphrodites. A mythical African tribe called the Bouda is reputed to house members able to transform into hyenas. A similar myth occurs in Mansoa. These “werehyenas” are executed when discovered, but do not revert to their human form when killed. In all hyena’s are pretty much disliked among many traditional communities and are thought to bring a whole host of bad spirits and bad luck.
The hyena men and hyena man:
There are two groups of hyena men known. The first resides in Nigeria known as travelling performers while in Ethiopia there remains a “hyena man” rather than “men” named as Yusef. The Nigerian hyena men were first photographed by Peter Hugo. Nigerian hyena men are known to capture hyena’s, baboons and pythons of which are then tamed aggressively which we believe the use of powerful narcotics or veterinary tranquilizers are used to heavily subdue or sedate the animals removing their primal hunting instincts and natural behavior thus converting to human slavery.
Noted as travelling performers the hyena men are said to care for their animals while travelling the country followed by many whom shower the men with Naira (Nigerian currency). From observing reports it seems that the hyena men are really no different to the Monks of Tiger Temple in Indonesia. Drug and herbal concoctions are administered to subdue the animals before being captured and when on display to ensure the men are not injured or even killed by these aggressive carnivores. Peter Hugo also described how the men bathe in an unknown medical concoction of herbs as well as drinking medicinal concoctions in the belief that this will protect the men from harm when hunting and capturing the animals for later human domestication.
On hunting the hyena down with dogs the men are then said to blow a white tranquilizing powder into the face of the hyena in the hope to subdue it once the beast has been coaxed out its den. Once the hyena is subdued the men are then said to cage the animal before bringing the animal back to the local village community. Mr Hugo described that when the hyena’s are captured the hyena men then rub a unknown medicine onto the body of the hyena that is said to make the animal completely obedient.
Environmental News and Media are not quite sure as to what the medicine is or even if any such “medical rub” is administered that has any form of active properties to help subdue the animals. Its quite possible the “white powder” that is blown into the face of the animal could be “Diazepam” which would explain why the animal is then quickly subdued and for long periods of time. We don’t believe that any such skin rub that is administered to the animal would then make the animal[s] completely obedient. For such a large predatory animal to be subdued completely one would require a significantly large dose of analgesia, opiates or a stronger barbiturate to fully contain and subdue the animal. That would then be considered as abuse and something which is a violation under the Nigerian Animal Welfare Law.
Image: Hyena boys with muzzled Hyena.
Once the hyena is under the complete control of its handlers the handler will then teach the animal performing tricks and, how to live with its captive abductors (see video below). We do find this again quite baffling to take on board as hyena’s are natural born killers, very predatory and, on viewing the imagery taken by Peter Hugo it clearly shows multiple hyenas heavily chained and muzzled. So in all fairness while some people have been led to believe this is all OK its quite possible that these stunning animals are being fed a heavy dose of tranquilizers and/or depressive human or animal related relaxation medications.
Due to Nigeria’s rampant poverty the handlers were/are “allegedly forced” to parade their captive animals through the local community streets of which any raised money is said to be used to fend and care for the animals well being. In reality any money that is raised or stolen is used to feed their alleged narcotic habit and crime.
Baboons will perform a variety of tricks of which money is handed over to either animal or animals handler. Unfortunately the main earners are hyenas. Another concern raised was that many abducted animals are sold onto zoological gardens within the country that’s seen as another money maker. Peter Hugo quoted “The hyena men of Nigeria do more than simply put on a street show but they provide medicine to the public and more importantly stimulate the economy of whatever area they are in as well as act as a cultural product from the area”.
Meanwhile on the outskirts of Harar, Ethiopia another hyena man is said to exist known as Yusef. Yusef does not make money from animal performances but more admires their attention - despite these animals belonging to the wild and can at times be very unpredictable. Every night Yusef will feed the visiting hyenas with mule and camel meat. In a way these species of hyena seem to tolerate Yusef and also enjoy his company of which Yusef treats them like domesticated dogs. Many people in Harar are said to actually worship the hyena and treat them with the utmost respect which could explain why they’re not kept as performing animals but left to live how they should within their natural habitat.
Crime and exploitation:
Moving back to the Nigerian hyena men local press and media that picked the story up few years back were quoted as stating “that these men were bank robbers, bodyguards, drug dealers and debt collectors”. Between March 7th and 15th 2015 a local man named as Mr Mohammed Nafiu aged 27 who has been “suspected” of being part of the hyena men group was arrested and charged after using baboons and pythons to rob people within the country.
He pleaded not guilty to the charges. However, the prosecutor, ASP Eranus Nnamonu insisted that the accused committed the offences on March 7 and 17 when he terrorised the residents of Ogba and Ijaiye in Lagos.
He said Mr. Nafiu, armed with a fully grown baboon and a venomous snake, also terrified a crowd waiting to board a bus at Ogba Bus Stop. Mr. Nnamonu said the accused isolated a witness, Joshua Odogwu, and thereafter obtained N57, 000 from him.
“The obviously terrified victim dropped all he had in his bag along with N57, 000 cash, which the accused collected,” he said. In addition, he said the accused had on March 17 visited the shop of a man, Henry Ugwuokoh, and forcefully obtained N230, 000. The offences, Mr. Nnamonu noted, contravened Sections 166, 294, 295 and 409 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2011. In her ruling, the Magistrate, Abimbola Komolafe, granted the accused bail in the sum of N100, 000 with two sureties in like sum and adjourned the case to June 18 2015 for trial to be held tomorrow.
Recently back in 2014 a local documentary-maker Tarryn Crossman won the award for Best Documentary Short for Hyena Boys at the California International Shorts Festival. Despite much criticism and debate from Carte Blanche, 50/50 and environmental and animal welfare groups the “award winning short film” was aired. Since Peter Hugo’s capture on the hyena men now known as the hyena boys, countless film, documentary producers and organisations have visited the group of men headed by Baba Mohammed that is in our eyes creating the wrong image and sending the wrong message to many people that abducting a wild animal to generate money from street performances is OK?
As explained its not just hyena’s that are taken from the wild and held in solitary confinement. Baboons, reptiles, snakes and small monkeys are also removed illegally from the wild. Furthermore the animals are also sold on to individuals within the communities as “pets” or as seen in the image below killed for meat to feed the locals.
Image: Hyena meat carcass and Hyena boy with muzzled hyena.
Yahaya one of the Nigerian, Lagos “hyena men” was quoted as saying “Any animal that people want, we can get for them,’ said Yahaya, who claims that they have supplied hyenas, pythons and other animals to zoos in Nigeria, Cameroon, Burkina Faso and Benin. ‘A mature hyena is sold for one hundred and fifty thousand naira, but a cub is more expensive at two hundred and fifty thousand naira. This is because a cub can be trained. An adult baboon goes for fifteen thousand naira, a young one for eight thousand. A python goes for eight to ten, depending on the size.’”
What has turned in to a street performing activity to make money to “allegedly” feed the impoverished has clearly been heavily exploited too. Capturing these stunning animals from the wild to perform or to sell on as meat or pets is wrong and any film production team that honestly believes this is totally OK are foolish and supportive of animal captivity, abuse and, exploitation.
The entertainers have also been accused by the Nigerian police of using the animals to threaten or intimidate members of the public into parting with money or possessions. In June 2004 a report in Lagos newspaper This Day claimed that an armed ‘gang who used a hyena and a monkey to rob their victims’ had a shootout with police. The report can be read below:
June 2004: Four armed man suspected to be from the group “hyena boys” held up a bank with baboons and hyenas.
Four armed gang who used a hyena and a monkey to rob their victims in Katsina State have been arrested by the police after a gun duel in Bichi, headquarters of Bichi Local Government of Kano State. According to a statement made available to newsmen in Katsina, the robbers who were seven in number went to Kankia market in Kankia Local Government of Katsina State to display with the animals while they robbed their victims of N66,000 during their operation.
Shortly after their operation, the statement added, the robbers took to their heels and they were chased by the police down to Bichi in Kano State where they engaged the police in a gun battle which led to the death of two of the robbers. During the battle with the police, the gang let off the hyena and monkey to fight with the police during which the animals bit one of the policemen who is now lying critically ill at the Katsina General Hospital.
Two of the robbers were killed while four of them arrested on the spot. The police had however killed the two animals during the fight in Bichi. Meanwhile, two robbers have been arrested by the police in Funtua for allegedly burgling the home of the former Minister for Special Duties during the Abacha administration in the country Alhaji Wada Nas.
The hyena boys are known to deal heavily in narcotics which the film crew producer Tarryn Crossman confirmed on visiting the hyena boys back in 2014. Tarryn Crossman stated that on entering the camp they walked into a large camp populated with many people and cannabis laying everywhere. Tarryn Crossman’s own words “We thought we were going to die”.
Captive cruelty and abuse:
For years International Animal Rescue Foundation Africa has documented on animal abuse and captive cruelty however, nothing can be more cruel and abusive than this. Abducting wild animals from their natural habitat with vicious dogs, using hypnotic medications to subdue the animals and beating the animals should they not do what their masters demand. It really baffles us as to why any such film or press agency would even document on such so called traditions knowing their abuse that goes on within camp and outside of camp.
Wild animals in captivity are often anxious about being cooped up. And the stressors of social animals can sound strikingly similar to the popularity concerns of high school girls. Mark Wilson, a neuroscientist at Yerkes National Primate Research Center of Georgia’s Emory University, studies captive female rhesus macaque monkeys, housed in groups as they would live in the wild. The monkeys naturally form a hierarchy with some females dominating others, and subordinates enduring harassment and a general lack of control.
Furthermore and even more worrying is the sheer fact the hyena boys have not tamed wild caught adult hyenas at all. The only thing stopping these dangerous carnivores from ripping their owners to shreds are illicit “unknown” medications that help to subdue the animal and take its inhibitions away therefore doing everything the owner or owners bark at the hyena or other animals. I
have included two images for you to clearly evaluate from research. One depicts an non-muzzled adult hyena and a Tiger from the repulsive Tiger Temple. Both hyenas and tigers are dangerous animals of which their natural instincts are to hunt and be predatory. I have searched in vain for as many images as possible depicting non-muzzled hyenas from the hyena boys camp however, to no avail.
Image (1) and (2) Drug induced state - Subdued Hyena and Tiger.
As one can quite clearly see both tiger and hyena are being man-handled. Neither animals would if not drugged take this abusive treatment for very long before lashing out and seriously harming the owner[s]. Which has led us to believe since Peter Hugo first documented on the hyena boys, the hyenas are clearly drugged with either cannabis that was witnessed at the camp in 2014 by film producer Terryn Crossman or heroin. Furthermore individuals from the Australian organisation known as (Cee4life) have been quoted as witnessing cannabis being fed into Tiger food and possibly Sativex, a liquid cannabis tincture.
Further research and accounts from the hyena men have generally stated that hyenas make very good pets and as they are related to dogs they’d be the ideal candidate for home security. Furthermore my research conducted last year of which I located a earlier video of the hyena men stating “hyenas are the new black mans dogs, pit bulls are for sissies”. So, lets debunk this. Firstly hyenas are nowhere near related to dogs. Hyenas are actually more related to cats. Keeping hyenas as pets is considered the “new image” within Nigeria however, do hyenas actually make good pets?
Although a few people in Africa and Asia find very young hyenas in nature and raise them as pets, these animals generally appear to be extremely unhappy as “domestic companions” as adults, and must often be kept muzzled at all times so that they do not harm people or property One only has to view the videos above that clearly illustrates their unhappiness at being chained and muzzled. A muzzle prevents the hyenas from being able to groom itself properly.
As spotted hyenas need several years of practice to become proficient hunters, and as they are deprived of this practice when reared as pets, it is effectively a death sentence for a captive-reared hyenas to be released into the wild. In addition, pet hyenas cannot be released for fear that they might transfer new pathogens from captive environments into the wild. Upon reaching adulthood, many “pet” hyenas must therefore be euthanized.
I have researched many so called traditions and cultures over the years involving humans and wild animals removed from their natural habitat to be used in street or circus performances or domesticated as pets. Never within my entire career have I yet to locate any real evidence that indicates large predators, monkeys or apes are suited to domestication or take to being used as performing animals. Large predators, monkeys and apes belong in the wild and not within a human controlled environment. It is therefore in my own expert opinion the Nigerian Government must act to firstly ban such cultures and remove these animals either placing them into a more suited human controlled reserve or, unfortunately euthanizing them immediately. We as humans do not have the rights to wander into any animals natural habitat to abduct and then exploit for monetary greed. We are playing with fire here and opening Pandora’s box furthermore to virus’s jumping from animal to human. 75% of all known virus actually derive from animals.
Thank you for reading.
Dr Jose C. Depre
Environmental and Botanical Scientist.
International Animal Rescue Foundation (Africa, Europe, Canada, America, Asia, South America).
An organisation called Say No To Dog Meat.Net are holding an event on the 4th April 2015 at 10:00 am internationally. The event that’s been in the planning since last year is to be held in many countries from London, Australia, Canada, America, Serbia, Indonesia, South Africa and more. For more information on Say No To Dog Meat’s global demonstration please click this >here< that will direct you to their Facebook page event forum.
Say No To Dog Meat was formed by three Chief Executive Officers that work within the environmental and animal rescue sector. The organisation has to date attracted hundreds of thousands of people worldwide, readers and supporters to their cause. Say No To Dog Meat is within the transition process of becoming an Australian registered charity, furthermore have recently purchased a run down derelict building within Viet Nam of which will be their main Asian pet medical rescue and rehabilitation clinic. Once dogs and cats are safe from the clutches of pet eaters, traders and snatchers they will be re-homed internationally to loving and caring adopters.
The rescue and rehabilitation clinic is incredibly important to the three Chief Executive Officers their volunteers and staff. Say No To Dog Meat’s rescue and rehab clinic will be one of few such rescues within Viet Nam that actively help to remove strays of the streets within Viet Nam that have no home thus removing dogs and cats from the snatchers clutches whom feed into the cruel and diseased pet meat trade.
B.A.R.C. IS ALSO MARCHING WITH Say No To Dog Meat in their Global March for dogs and cats in the meat trade; 10am Saturday April 4th, 2015. Will you be marching with them too, in your country? For more information email Say No To Dog Meat here at - firstname.lastname@example.org for a march location in your country.
While the Organisation is being heavily supported by its sister Environmental Organisation - International Animal Rescue Foundation Africa via media, press and private funding, funds are limited. Say No To Dog Meat need public support both financially and via its supporters through sharing articles, news and helping with organizing events and educational classes worldwide to help reduce the pet trade through honest youth and adult education. Not forgetting educating the public about meat food viruses and viruses as a whole that are passed on or mutate from live or dead animals and meat kept in unsanitary conditions. Some amazing media articles have already been released about Say No To Dog Meat such as here on Dogster and even while underfunded Say No To Dog Meat have already helped shut down a small dog meat market and rescued dogs from the meat trade - Read more here
A unique organisation:
Say No To Dog Meat are unique as their main ambition is not only to end the pet meat trade within Asia and Africa but also the cruel and barbaric bushmeat trade that poses a serious disease and health risk threat to humans and animals. The term bushmeat, also called wildmeat and game meat, refers to meat from non-domesticated mammals, reptiles, amphibians and birds hunted for food in tropical forests. Commercial harvesting and the trade of wildlife is considered a threat to biodiversity and human security. Should the bushmeat trade trade continue to be ignored we’ll see catastrophic declines of wildlife in areas of Africa and Asia of which extinctions are already occurring both locally and regionally of some exotic species.
Say No To Dog Meat also appeals to all tourists visiting Viet Nam to please refrain from making their jobs harder to ban the trade. Its commercials such as this seen below that only feed the trade.
Say No To Dog Meat’s founders have decades of experience fighting this inhumane industry and have worked hard to achieve unprecedented access into areas of the trade not readily accessible to most outsiders. The organisations investigative work allows them to gather current, accurate and up-to-date information and images, evidence that is paramount in spreading global awareness and pressuring governmental organizations to enact enforceable animal welfare laws that protect companion animals. Ultimately, the organisations intention is to help create meaningful social and governmental change that results in a more humane world for dogs and cats and wildlife endangered by the bushmeat industry.
The organisation is determined to expose the cruel and ruthless activities within the dog and cat meat trade that are perpetrated by dog farmers, cat farmers, animal traffickers, butchers, vendors and dog and cat eating customers. “This is a billion dollar industry” Co-Founder Donna Armes stated, centered on live companion animals being tortured, killed and served as menu items. “It is a gruesome, violent trade that must be halted” stated Michelle Brown Director of Say No To Dog Meat and Co-Director for International Animal Rescue Foundation Africa.
Video below shows Viet Nam dog snatchers this October caught on CCTV - these dogs are most likely now dead - fed into a cruel and horrific pet meat industry, Say No To Dog Meat aims to stop this with new laws they are lobbying the Viet Nam government with on two separate petitions.
By tackling poverty in the nations of Africa where dog meat is being consumed, Say No To Dog Meat will work with aid organisations and companies, as well as welfare groups and communities. Founder Dr Jose Depre states “we are positive that by improving dietary needs and wiping out poverty in these small areas of Africa, we can wipe out the dog meat trade and black market, thus decreasing infectious diseases, rabies, H1N1, mutations and food poisoning”.
Further to this awareness and education, within the arable agricultural section, Say No To Dog Meat hope to improve the lives of families and increase employment, thus decreasing crime, however the CEO stated “this is going to be the toughest area both within the pet meat industry and black market trade we’ve ever tackled, these actions will bring a better welfare for all though and we’ll not stop marching forwards for animal welfare nor will anyone get within our way in conquering our goals set, we have a job to do and we’re going to do it”
INDONESIA IS MARCHING WITH Say No To Dog Meat in their Global March for dogs and cats in the meat trade; 10am Saturday April 4th, 2015. Will you be marching with them too? For more info email Say No To Dog Meat.Net @ email@example.com for a march location in your country. INDONESIAN SUPPORTERS: please join Animal Defenders Indonesia in the JAKARTA march.
Founders of Say No To Dog Meat aggressively opposes legislation that promotes or legalizes companion animal slaughter. They do not believe in the myth of “humane meat,” reject the concept of “humane slaughter” and strongly believe that dog and cat butchers cannot be relied upon to implement “humane” practices. The organisation founders also oppose dog farmers, cat farmers, slaughter unions, individual farmers or any persons being permitted to “farm” small numbers of dogs and/or cats for personal consumption. In addition, they are against dog and cat elixirs and tonics, despite (unproven) claims of their health benefits.
Through educational efforts, Say No To Dog Meat hopes to enlighten the global public about the miserable lives farmed companion animals face and how this trade impacts dogs and cats throughout the world. Education will also be provided for those wishing to adopt rescued animals from the live meat trade. These animals have been through varying degrees of trauma, so guidance is needed in ensuring adoptive families understand the process of restoring their new pet’s health, happiness and well-being. In addition, Say No To Dog Meat will provide education for people in dog and cat eating countries who wish to learn about responsible pet ownership and providing safe, long-term environments for dogs and cats as loved family members.
Say No To Dog Meat has commenced fundraising, from which their efforts will include rehoming rescued dogs and cats from the live meat trade once the Viet Nam rescue and medical clinic has been established. “All fundraising will be conducted with full transparency and information pertaining to our monetary activities will be made readily available” stated Michelle Brown wildlife rescue specialist that resides in Australia. Donna Armes that resides now in Canada stated “participating in Say No To Dog Meat campaigns and signing our petitions supports our work furthermore to bring change for a better world for dogs and cats victimized by this trade”. “We invite you to join our fight to halt the live dog and cat meat trade and Say No To Dog Meat” stated the team of elite environmentalists and animal rescuers.
Say No To Dog Meat’s donation link is below. The link will direct you to their Facebook page from which you can also subscribe to their site for news and events plus lots more.
Please Make a donation TODAY and help Say No To Dog Meat - Thank you
The organisation now requires public funding to help establish their rescue and medical facility for dogs and cats in Viet Nam and hopefully over the borders too. Say No To Dog Meat requires funding for renovation, water, gas and electrical services to be reinstated, pet triage and surgical clinic, rehabilitation and special needs area, isolation clinic, cages and pet boxes, surgical equipment, bedding and blankets, medical supplies, food, and much more.
Once the rescue and rehabilitation clinic is fully operation specialist staff employed will then commence rescuing strays from the streets of Viet Nam of both sick dogs and cats and pets in need of a loving forever home. There’s more too. The organisation will also be holding rabies and vaccination clinics to help reduce disease and decrease rabies within the country and over the borders. Lastly while Say No To Dog Meat recognizes the honest work undertaken by groups of Asian activists that actively seek out pet meat traffickers - no animals that Say No To Dog Meat’s staff rescue will come from traffickers or butchers that require payment. “What’s the point in paying pet meat traffickers and marketeers just for them to purchase more dogs and cats from public funding” stated Jose Depre, “that is defeating the main objective and continues to feed the pet meat trade, were here to help and rescue pets not to continue a trade a circle of abuse”.
SAY NO TO DOG MEAT.NET is calling on the public to help them with their global march planned since January 2014. Demonstration event organizers and demonstrators are required eagerly to beef up numbers to make change happen. For more information you can contact Say No To Dog Meat hereto at firstname.lastname@example.org
Liam Williams - Publisher Environmental News and Media