DOCSLIB.ORG

1 | Peta India Investigation Into Jallikattu Events 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 | Peta India Investigation Into Jallikattu Events 2020 1 | PETA INDIA INVESTIGATION INTO JALLIKATTU EVENTS 2020 Contents I. Details of the Investigations ..................................................................................................... 3 II. Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 3 III. Key Observations and Findings ........................................................................................... 3 A. Rampant Cruelty to Bulls ....................................................................................................... 4 1. Avaniapuram Jallikattu ............................................................................................................... 4 2. Palamedu Jallikattu ................................................................................................................... 18 3. Periya Suriyur Jallikattu ............................................................................................................ 26 4. Alanganallur Jallikattu .............................................................................................................. 36 5. Panjampatti T Jallikattu.............................................................................................................. 45 6. Pothamettupatti Jallikattu .......................................................................................................... 60 7. Kokkudi Jallikattu ..................................................................................................................... 71 B. Farce Medical Examination ................................................................................................... 84 C. Avaniapuram Collection Yard: A Sham .............................................................................. 85 D. Cruel Practice of Cutting Loose Nose Ropes From a Height ............................................. 86 E. Illegal Parallel Bull-Taming .................................................................................................. 87 IV. Legal Violations .................................................................................................................... 88 V. Other Information ................................................................................................................. 94 A. Data on Bull and Human Casualties .................................................................................... 94 B. Compound Fines No Deterrent for Fox Jallikattu Organisers .......................................... 94 C. Hen Jallikattu for Women .................................................................................................... 95 D. Health Minister Asks Organisers to Avoid Making Bulls Wait for Hours ...................... 96 E. PIL Against the Use of Foreign Bulls’ Species in Jallikattu .............................................. 96 F. Plea to Quash the Government Order That Notified Jallikattu ........................................ 97 G. News Reports Regarding Cruelty to Animals and Casualties ........................................... 97 VI. Discussion and Conclusion ................................................................................................. 101 2 | PETA INDIA INVESTIGATION INTO JALLIKATTU EVENTS 2020 I. Details of the Investigations Dates: 15 January–19 January 2020 Jallikattu Events Investigated Avaniapuram, Madurai District, 15 January Palamedu, Madurai District, 16 January Periya Suriyur, Tiruchirappalli District, 16 January Alanganallur, Madurai District, 17 January Panjampatti T, Dindigul District, 17 January Pothamettupatti, Tiruchirappalli District, 18 January Kokkudi, Ariyalur District, 19 January Objectives of the Investigations To record the treatment of bulls To check for violations of animal protection laws and rules To record any reported human or bull injuries and casualties II. Executive Summary The comprehensive investigations conducted by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) India at seven jallikattu events organised in four districts in the state of Tamil Nadu from 15 to 19 January 2020 identified and recorded numerous instances of physical and mental cruelty to bulls. PETA India’s latest eyewitness investigation as well as investigations of jallikattu events conducted in previous years reconfirm that jallikattu takes advantage of bulls’ natural nervousness as prey animals by deliberately placing them in a terrifying situation in which they’re forced to run away from those they rightly perceive as a threat. The evidence – in the form of photographs and video footage – demonstrates that bulls are whipped with ropes, hit, kicked and jumped on, tackled, and poked and jabbed with metal sticks, wooden sticks (including nail-tipped ones), and metal sickles. Their tails are bitten and twisted, and they’re treated in other cruel ways. At bigger events, exhausted and dehydrated animals were forced to participate in jallikattu after standing in queues for several hours without overhead shelter or sufficient water and feed. They were yanked roughly by nose ropes, causing their nostrils to bleed, and many collapsed from exhaustion or dehydration before and after they ran through the arena. Such abuse led to severe injuries, including broken bones, and even death. In this year’s jallikattu season, the number of deaths of both bulls and humans at the events has skyrocketed within less than three months. Bull injuries and deaths are not always reported by the media. Yet this year, between January and March alone, six bulls have reportedly died during jallikattu events. At least five bulls and one cow reportedly died during jallikattu events from January to April 2019. At least six bulls died in 2018, and at least three died in 2017. Over the years, there has been a steady increase in the reporting of bull deaths, confirming that no amount of regulation can prevent cruelty and injury to them. Human injuries and deaths are better reported by the media. So far in 2020, at least 570 have sustained injuries and 13 have died during jallikattu events. In 2019, at least nine humans lost their lives during jallikattu events and 627 sustained injuries. The total number of 3 | PETA INDIA INVESTIGATION INTO JALLIKATTU EVENTS 2020 human fatalities resulting from jallikattu events in the last three years, from 2017 to April 2019, is at least 51, according to news reports, and 3,007 humans were injured. As jallikattu continues, a staggering number of human deaths and injuries continue to occur. Inspections conducted by the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) in 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 and investigations by PETA India in 2017, 2018, and 2019 have also demonstrated that jallikattu is inherently cruel, causes bulls unnecessary suffering, and is apparently in direct violation of the provisions of Sections 3 and 11 of The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (PCA) Act, 1960. The findings of the AWBI were upheld by the Honourable Supreme Court of India in its landmark judgment of May 2014. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 2017, received the assent of the president on 31 January 2017 and was deemed to have come into force on 21 January 2017. This Tamil Nadu state law amended the PCA Act, 1960, to allow jallikattu, which includes “manjuviratu”, “vadamadu”, and “erudhuvidumvizha”. The state government also devised corresponding rules – namely, the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Conduct of Jallikattu) Rules, 2017 – regarding jallikattu events, but PETA India’s findings consistently show the rules do not prevent human or bull injuries and deaths. The Tamil Nadu Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Conduct of Jallikattu) Rules, 2017, does not include any fine or punishment that can be levied against people who violate the Rules or inflict cruelty on bulls at jallikattu events. PETA India’s 2020 investigation once again shows that jallikattu must be banned. III. Key Observations and Findings A. Rampant Cruelty to Bulls Photographic evidence of observations and findings from seven jallikattu events that took place between 15 and 19 January 2020 are listed below. The photographs and videos are included on a CD as Annexure 1 for reference. 1. Avaniapuram Jallikattu Photo 1: A person jabs a reluctant bull with a metal stick inside the vaadi vaasal. 4 | PETA INDIA INVESTIGATION INTO JALLIKATTU EVENTS 2020 Photo 2: A bull is poked with a metal stick in the vaadi vaasal. Photo 3: A bull is poked with a metal stick in the vaadi vaasal. 5 | PETA INDIA INVESTIGATION INTO JALLIKATTU EVENTS 2020 Photo 4: A bull is jabbed with a long metal stick inside the vaadi vaasal. Photo 5: A man holds a long metal stick inside the vaadi vaasal. 6 | PETA INDIA INVESTIGATION INTO JALLIKATTU EVENTS 2020 Photo 6: A bull’s tail is yanked in order to force the animal to run out of the vaadi vaasal. Photo 7: Many tamers attempt to subdue a bull as some hold the horns, which is not permitted. 7 | PETA INDIA INVESTIGATION INTO JALLIKATTU EVENTS 2020 Photo 8: Several tamers attempt to subdue a bull together. Photo 9: Many tamers yank on a bull’s head in their desperate attempt to subdue the animal. 8 | PETA INDIA INVESTIGATION INTO JALLIKATTU EVENTS 2020 Photo 10: Many tamers pounce on a bull. Photo 11: A bull falls onto a tamer inside the arena. 9 | PETA INDIA INVESTIGATION INTO JALLIKATTU EVENTS 2020 Photo 12: A panicked bull charges back into the vaadi vaasal from the arena. Photo 13: A spectator partakes in illegal parallel
Load more

Recommended publications
  • District Survey Report of Madurai District
    Content 1.0 Preamble ................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1 2.1 Location ............................................................................................................ 2 3.0 Overview of Mining Activity In The District .............................................................. 3 4.0 List of Mining Leases details ................................................................................... 5 5.0 Details of the Royalty or Revenue received in last Three Years ............................ 36 6.0 Details of Production of Sand or Bajri Or Minor Minerals In Last Three Years ..... 36 7.0 Process of deposition of Sediments In The River of The District ........................... 36 8.0 General Profile of Maduari District ....................................................................... 27 8.1 History ............................................................................................................. 28 8.2 Geography ....................................................................................................... 28 8.3 Taluk ................................................................................................................ 28 8.2 Blocks .............................................................................................................. 29 9.0 Land Utilization Pattern In The
    [Show full text]
  • Reportable in the Supreme Court of India Civil
    1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5387 OF 2014 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.11686 of 2007) Animal Welfare Board of India …. Appellant Versus A. Nagaraja & Ors. …. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5388 OF 2014 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.10281 of 2009) CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5389-5390 OF 2014 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.18804-18805 of 2009) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5391 OF 2014 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.13199 of 2012) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5392 OF 2014 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.13200 of 2012) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5393 OF 2014 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.4598 of 2013) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5394 OF 2014 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 12789 of 2014) (@ SLP(C) CC…4268 of 2013) Page 1 2 WRIT PETITION (C) NO.145 OF 2011 AND T.C. (C) Nos.84, 85, 86, 97, 98 and 127 of 2013 K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. We are, in these cases, concerned with an issue of seminal importance with regard to the Rights of Animals under our Constitution, laws, culture, tradition, religion and ethology, which we have to examine, in connection with the conduct of Jallikattu, Bullock-cart races etc. in the States of Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra, with particular reference to the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (for short ‘the PCA Act’), the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Jallikattu Act, 2009 (for short “TNRJ Act”) and the notification dated 11.7.2011 issued by the Central Government under Section 22(ii) of the PCA Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission for the Inquiry Into the Impact of Animal Rights Activism on Victorian Agriculture
    AA SUBMISSION 340 Submission for the Inquiry into the Impact of Animal Rights Activism on Victorian Agriculture 1. Term of reference a. the type and prevalence of unauthorised activity on Victorian farms and related industries, and the application of existing legislation: In Victoria, animal cruelty – including, but not limited to, legalised cruelty – neglect and violations of animal protection laws are a reality of factory farming. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986 (Vic) affords little protection to farm animals for a number of reasons, including the operation of Codes of Practice and the Livestock Management Act 2010 (Vic). The fact that farm animals do not have the same protection as companion animals justifies applying a regime of institutionalised and systematic cruelty to them every single day of their lives: see, for example, the undercover footage contained on Aussie Farms, ‘Australian Pig Farming: The Inside Story’ (2015) < http://www.aussiepigs.com.au/ >. It is deeply concerning and disturbing that in addition to the legalised cruelty farm animals are subjected to, farm animals are also subjected to illegal/unauthorised cruelty on Victorian farms. The type of unauthorised activity on Victorian farms is extremely heinous: this is evidenced by the fact that it transcends the systematic cruelty currently condoned by law and the fact that footage of incidences of such unauthorised activity is always horrific and condemned by the public at large. Indeed, speaking about footage of chickens being abused at Bridgewater Poultry earlier this year, even the Victorian Farmers Federation egg group president, Tony Nesci, told the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age that he was horrified by the footage and livid at what had happened.
    [Show full text]
  • Cruelty on Animals and Related Rights
    PJAEE, 17 (6) (2020) CRUELTY ON ANIMALS AND RELATED RIGHTS Maithili Chaudhury1, Nilanjan Chakraborty2 1,2 Asst. Professer, Faculty of Legal Studies, Siksha O Anusandhan Email: [email protected], [email protected] Maithili Chaudhury, Nilanjan Chakraborty: Cruelty On Animals And Related Rights -- Palarch’s Journal Of Archaeology Of Egypt/Egyptology 17(6). ISSN 1567-214x Keywords: Animal Rights, Animal Husbandry, Anti-cruelty ethic, Social Ethic ABSTRACT Businesses and occupations must remain consistent with social ethics or risk losing their freedom. An important social ethical issue that has arisen over the past four decades is animal welfare in various areas of human use. The ethical interest of the society has outgrown the conventional morality of animal cruelty, which originated in biblical times and is embodied in the laws of all civilized societies. There are five major reasons, most notably the substitution of husbandry-based agriculture with industrial agriculture, for this new social concern. This loss of husbandry to industry has threatened the traditional fair contract between humans and animals, leading to significant animal suffering on four different fronts. Because such suffering is not caused by cruelty, it was necessary to express social concerns with a new ethic for animals. Since ethics is based on pre-existing ethics rather than ex nihilo, society has looked for its properly modified ethics for humans to find moral categories that apply to animals. This concept of legally encoded rights for animals has emerged as a plausible vehicle for reform. The paper provides brief summary of the animal welfare board of India, legal capacity in order to possess rights and tries to establish relation between legal personhood and rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Jallikattu (Part-II) What the Future Portends for Tamil Nadu
    Jallikattu (Part-II) What the future portends for Tamil Nadu. (N.T.Ravindranath) Dated: 03-04-2017 Hearing petitions filed by Animal Welfare Society of India (AWSI), PETA and other animal rights organizations against Tamil Nadu government’s ordinance allowing Jallikattu in Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court of India on January 31, 2017 refused to stay the ordinance. However, the court expressed its displeasure over the developments in Tamil Nadu by severely criticizing the state government for its failure to control the law and order situation in the state while trying to implement the court directive on Jallikattu. The court’s decision was welcomed by all sections of people in Tamil Nadu as it defused tension and prevented a renewed flare-up in Tamil Nadu. However, the final verdict in the case is yet to be delivered. The Jallikattu is a rural bull-taming sport conducted only in five southern districts of Madurai, Theni, Thiruchirapally, Pudukottai and Dindigul in Tamil Nadu. This harvest sport is generally held in the month of January as part of the harvest festival ‘Pongal’. Though this event is held only in a few villages of five southern districts of Tamil Nadu, it is quite a popular rural sport attracting a large number of villagers. The bulls participating in the game rarely get injured. But many brave men who participate in this dare-devil event get injured every year and some of them get killed also. But people of Tamil Nadu still love this sport and they are very angry over the ban on Jallikattu imposed on it by the Supreme Court in 2014, in response to the demands and objections raised by some animal rights activists.
    [Show full text]
  • Tamil Nadu Government Gazette
    © [Regd. No. TN/CCN/467/2012-14. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [R. Dis. No. 197/2009. 2013 [Price: Rs. 54.80 Paise. TAMIL NADU GOVERNMENT GAZETTE PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY No. 41] CHENNAI, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2013 Aippasi 6, Vijaya, Thiruvalluvar Aandu–2044 Part VI—Section 4 Advertisements by private individuals and private institutions CONTENTS PRIVATE ADVERTISEMENTS Pages Change of Names .. 2893-3026 Notice .. 3026-3028 NOTICE NO LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY IS ACCEPTED FOR THE PUBLICATION OF ADVERTISEMENTS REGARDING CHANGE OF NAME IN THE TAMIL NADU GOVERNMENT GAZETTE. PERSONS NOTIFYING THE CHANGES WILL REMAIN SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES AND ALSO FOR ANY OTHER MISREPRESENTATION, ETC. (By Order) Director of Stationery and Printing. CHANGE OF NAMES 43888. My son, D. Ramkumar, born on 21st October 1997 43891. My son, S. Antony Thommai Anslam, born on (native district: Madurai), residing at No. 4/81C, Lakshmi 20th March 1999 (native district: Thoothukkudi), residing at Mill, West Colony, Kovilpatti, Thoothukkudi-628 502, shall Old No. 91/2, New No. 122, S.S. Manickapuram, Thoothukkudi henceforth be known as D. RAAMKUMAR. Town and Taluk, Thoothukkudi-628 001, shall henceforth be G. DHAMODARACHAMY. known as S. ANSLAM. Thoothukkudi, 7th October 2013. (Father.) M. v¯ð¡. Thoothukkudi, 7th October 2013. (Father.) 43889. I, S. Salma Banu, wife of Thiru S. Shahul Hameed, born on 13th September 1975 (native district: Mumbai), 43892. My son, G. Sanjay Somasundaram, born residing at No. 184/16, North Car Street, on 4th July 1997 (native district: Theni), residing Vickiramasingapuram, Tirunelveli-627 425, shall henceforth at No. 1/190-1, Vasu Nagar 1st Street, Bank be known as S SALMA.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Leachate on Groundwater Around Vellakal Dumping Site , Madurai , Tamilnadu
    International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 05 Issue: 04 | Apr-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072 IMPACT OF LEACHATE ON GROUNDWATER AROUND VELLAKAL DUMPING SITE , MADURAI , TAMILNADU R. Banupriya1, D. Vibesh2, P. Surya3, S. Suresh4 1Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Sethu Institute of Technology, Virdhunagar, Tamil Nadu, 2,3,4 Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Sethu Institute of Technology, Virdhunagar, Tamil Nadu. ---------------------------------------------------------------------***--------------------------------------------------------------------- Abstract - In most cities, the solid waste is dumped in open dumps without proper lining which affects the environmental Dumping site media such as air, water and land. So, the present study was focused on the impact of leachate percolation on ground water quality. Leachate and ground water samples were collected from Vellakal Dump site and the surrounding areas. The leachate and ground water samples were tested for various physiochemical parameters and heavy metals. The heavy metals tested in the groundwater shows Fe and Pb in places nearer to dumpsite. The result of the test and interpolated maps of parameters shows that there is a high concentration of TDS, Total hardness,Ca2+ ,Mg2+ ,Cl- present in all collected ground water samples. And the western side of dumping site is highly affected by leachate intrusion. This indicates that the Figure1. Study area map groundwater is affected by leachate percolation and further the groundwater is undesirable for domestic water supply and Avaniapuram is a municipality in Madurai district on the other uses.The results shows that there is a need of landfill state of Tamil Nadu, India. As of 2011, the town had a liner in the Vellakal dumping site.
    [Show full text]
  • Tamil Nadu Government Gazette Extraordinary
    © [Regd. No. TN/CCN/467/2012-14. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [R. Dis. No. 197/2009. 2021 [Price: Rs. 21.60 Paise. TAMIL NADU GOVERNMENT GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY No.1 9] CHENNAI, TUESDAY, JANUARY 12, 2021 Margazhi 28, Saarvari, Thiruvalluvar Aandu-2051 Part II—Section 2 Notifi cations or Orders of interest to a Section of the public issued by Secretariat Departments. NOTIFICATIONS BY GOVERNMENT TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT ACQUISITION OF LANDS AMENDMENT TO NOTIFICATIONS [G.O. Ms.No.2, Transport (I-2), 12 üùõK 2021, ñ£˜èN 28, ꣘õK, F¼õœÀõ˜ ݇´-2051.] No. II(2)/TRA/23(g-1)/2021. The following Amendment Notifi cation for Structures and Trees issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 in Form-C of Tamil Nadu Acquisition of land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 (Tamil Nadu Act 38 of 2019), published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette in respect of Block No.VII, Ayanpappakudi Village, Madurai South Taluk, Madurai Airport Expansion Land Acquisition. FORM-C Madurai District, Madurai South Taluk, 43, Ayanpappakudi Village. Block No:VII Total Extent: 1.41.26 Hectare (3.50 Acre) Survey Classifi - Extent Owner / person interested. Details of Details of Trees No. cation required / Building acquired (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 474/2 Dry 0.09.00 Thiruvankadam Pillai, -- -- Ayyanpappakudi Village, Madurai South Taluk. 475/2A Dry 0.26.27 J.S. Krishnan, -- -- S/o. Sankarachari, 6A, A.V.T. Pandhal, 1st Street, Kamarajar Road, Madurai-9. [ 1 ] II-2 Ex. (19) 2 TAMIL NADU GOVERNMENT GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY Survey Classifi - Extent Owner / person interested.
    [Show full text]
  • Tamilnadu Water Supply and Drainage Board
    TAMIL NADU WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE BOARD TENDER CALL FOR VARIOUS PACKAGES OF COMBINED WATER SUPPLY SCHEMES FORM OF CONTRACT: ITEM RATE (TWO COVER SYSTEM) INVITATION OF BID NO.01& 02 /HO/2010/DATED 29.12.2010 & 31.12.2010 1. For and on behalf of Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board, sealed (wax sealing) bids (in Two cover System) are invited by the Chief Engineers of TWAD Board under Item-war Tender System for Procurement, Construction, Commissioning and Maintenance of 8 Combined Water Supply Scheme in full or in part-Packages (as specified) for as detailed below. 2. This Procurement, Construction, Contract will follow the procedure prescribed under The Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 and Rules 2000 and subsequent amendments there on. 3. Bidding documents in English may be purchased by interested bidders from the concerned Chief Engineers/ Executive Engineers, on submission of written application accompanied with a separate Demand Draft for each Work from any Nationalized/ Scheduled bank drawn in favour of Managing Director,TWAD Board, for the respective packages as detailed below on any working day between 10.00 hours and 17.45 hours as per the dates mentioned below. 4. Cost of tender document per Work is Rs.1000 + 4% VAT. 5. The bid documents can also be downloaded free of cost from www.tenders.tn.gov.in 6. Amount of Earnest Money Deposit will be 1% of the value of work put to tender of the respective Works. 7. Period of contract is as furnished below in respect of the individual Works.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Research Paper Series
    Legal Research Paper Series NON HUMAN ANIMALS AND THE LAW: A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ANIMAL LAW RESOURCES AT THE STANFORD LAW LIBRARY By Rita K. Lomio and J. Paul Lomio Research Paper No. 6 October 2005 Robert Crown Law Library Crown Quadrangle Stanford, California 94305-8612 NON HUMAN ANIMALS AND THE LAW: A BIBLIOGRPAHY OF ANIMAL LAW RESOURCES AT THE STANFORD LAW LIBRARY I. Books II. Reports III. Law Review Articles IV. Newspaper Articles (including legal newspapers) V. Sound Recordings and Films VI. Web Resources I. Books RESEARCH GUIDES AND BIBLIOGRAPHIES Hoffman, Piper, and the Harvard Student Animal Legal Defense Fund The Guide to Animal Law Resources Hollis, New Hampshire: Puritan Press, 1999 Reference KF 3841 G85 “As law students, we have found that although more resources are available and more people are involved that the case just a few years ago, locating the resource or the person we need in a particular situation remains difficult. The Guide to Animal Law Resources represents our attempt to collect in one place some of the resources a legal professional, law professor or law student might want and have a hard time finding.” Guide includes citations to organizations and internships, animal law court cases, a bibliography, law schools where animal law courses are taught, Internet resources, conferences and lawyers devoted to the cause. The International Institute for Animal Law A Bibliography of Animal Law Resources Chicago, Illinois: The International Institute for Animal Law, 2001 KF 3841 A1 B53 Kistler, John M. Animal Rights: A Subject Guide, Bibliography, and Internet Companion Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2000 HV 4708 K57 Bibliography divided into six subject areas: Animal Rights: General Works, Animal Natures, Fatal Uses of Animals, Nonfatal Uses of Animals, Animal Populations, and Animal Speculations.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Rights Movement
    Animal Rights Movement The Animal Protection Movement. Prevention of cruelty to animals became an important movement in early 19th Century England, where it grew alongside the humanitarian current that advanced human rights, including the anti-slavery movement and later the movement for woman suffrage. The first anti-cruelty bill, intended to stop bull-baiting, was introduced in Parliament in 1800. In 1822 Colonel Richard Martin succeeded in passing an act in the House of Commons preventing cruelty to such larger domestic animals as horses and cattle; two years later he organized the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) to help enforce the law. Queen Victoria commanded the addition of the prefix "Royal" to the Society in 1840. Following the British model, Henry Bergh organized the American SPCA in New York in 1866 after returning from his post in St. Petersburg as secretary to the American legation in Russia; he hoped it would become national in scope, but the ASPCA remained primarily an animal shelter program for New York City. Other SPCAs and Humane Societies were founded in the U.S. beginning in the late 1860s (often with support from abolitionists) with groups in Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and San Francisco among the first. Originally concerned with enforcing anti-cruelty laws, they soon began running animal shelters along the lines of a model developed in Philadelphia. The American Humane Association (AHA), with divisions for children and animals, was founded in 1877, and emerged as the leading national advocate for animal protection and child protection services. As the scientific approach to medicine expanded, opposition grew to the use of animals in medical laboratory research -- particularly in the era before anesthetics and pain-killers became widely available.
    [Show full text]
  • Bringing Animal Protection Legislation Into Line with Its Purported Purposes: a Proposal for Equality Amongst Non- Human Animals
    Pace Environmental Law Review Volume 37 Issue 2 Spring 2020 Article 1 May 2020 Bringing Animal Protection Legislation Into Line With its Purported Purposes: A Proposal for Equality Amongst Non- Human Animals Jane Kotzmann Deakin University Gisela Nip Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr Part of the Animal Law Commons, Energy and Utilities Law Commons, Environmental Law Commons, International Law Commons, and the Natural Resources Law Commons Recommended Citation Jane Kotzmann and Gisela Nip, Bringing Animal Protection Legislation Into Line With its Purported Purposes: A Proposal for Equality Amongst Non-Human Animals, 37 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 247 (2020) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol37/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pace Environmental Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLE Bringing Animal Protection Legislation Into Line With its Purported Purposes: A Proposal for Equality Amongst Non-Human Animals JANE KOTZMANN* & GISELA NIP† The United States has a strong history of enacting laws to pro- tect animals from the pain and suffering inflicted by humans. In- deed, the passage of the Massachusetts’ Body of Liberties in 1641 made it the first country in the world to pass such laws. Neverthe- less, contemporary animal protection laws in all jurisdictions of the United States are limited in their ability to adequately realize their primary purpose of protecting animals from unnecessary or unjus- tifiable pain and suffering.
    [Show full text]