animal rights

1,614 petitions

Update posted 41 minutes ago

Petition to David Caretto, Jeff Mathieu, San Bernardino County Government Officials, Mayor Big Bear Lake, Randall Putz, Bob Jackowski, Bill Jahn, Nishalet Wilson, Kelly Papp, Greg Beck, Big Bear Chamber of Commerce, City of Big Bear Lake, Sarah M. Siep, Kathleen Smith, Robert Dalquest, Big Bear Lake Planning Commission, James Ramos, Dan Silverman, Robert Lovingood, Mike Ramos, Brian Cronin, Kelly Papp, Christopher Covington, Trudy Raymundo, CaSonya Thomas, Debi Pasco, Gary Mcbride, Supervisor Rutherford, Supervisor Ramos, Supervisor Lovingood, Supervisor Mitzelfelt, Susan Michl, Corwin Porter

We Declare Big Bear "No Kill" & Demand City & County Officials Update Policies Now!

Big Bear No Kill Declaration (provided by the year, some three million animals will be killed in shelters. The vast majority can and should be placed into loving homes or should never enter shelters in the first place. But there is hope. No Kill sheltering models, based on innovative, non-lethal programs and services, have already saved the lives of tens of thousands of animals. But instead of embracing No Kill, many shelters—and their national agency allies—cling to their failed models of the past, models that result in the killing of millions of animals in U.S. shelters every year. No Kill is a revolution. And behind every revolution is a declaration—a statement of grievances, and a listing of rights and principles that underscore our great hope for the future. We assert that a No Kill nation is within our reach—that the killing can and should be brought to an end. Join us in endorsing The Declaration of the No Kill Movement in the United States. It is open to every individual, every group, and every agency that wants to bring about an end to the killing by implementing the programs and services that will establish a No Kill nation. Programs like allowing rescue groups to save animals on death row and offsite adoption events. These are not radical concepts, but in the current sheltering world, one can be ostracized for daring to proclaim the simple truths that population control killing is not an act of kindness and that free-living animals have a right to live. ​Join us in speaking for those who can’t. In the length of time it will take you to read the Declaration, nearly one hundred animals will be needlessly killed. I. Big Bear No Kill Preamble​One hundred and fifty years ago, societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals and other humane organizations were founded to establish standards for humane treatment of animals, to promote their rights, and to protect them from harm. This marked the formal beginning of the humane movement in the United States. The scope and influence of these early humane organizations were testament to the public’s concern for animals. It did not take long for them to set their sights on the abuse of homeless animals and cruel methods of killing by public pounds. It was common practice at the time for city and town dogcatchers to beat, drown, or shoot homeless animals. Many humane agencies responded by entering into animal control contracts with towns and cities to ensure that the killing was done more humanely. But in taking on municipal animal control duties, these agencies abandoned their lifesaving and life-enhancing platforms when those beliefs conflicted with their contractual responsibilities. In the current era, where laws require killing by even more “humane” methods, these contradictions have become starker. Increasingly, the practices of both humane societies and municipal animal control agencies are out of step with public sentiment. Today, most Americans hold the humane treatment of animals as a personal value, which is reflected in our laws, cultural practices, the proliferation of organizations founded for animal protection, increased per capita spending on animal care, and great advancements in veterinary medicine. But the agencies that the public expects to protect animals are instead killing some four million animals annually. Lifesaving alternatives to the mass killing of animals in shelters have existed for decades. These lifesaving methods are based on innovative, humane, nonlethal programs and services that have proven that the killing can be brought to an end. Too many of these agencies, however, remain mired in the kill philosophies of the past, unwilling to or hampered from exploring and adopting methods that save lives. This is a breach of their public trust, a gross deviation from their responsibility to protect animals, and a point of view that we, as caring people and a humane community, can no longer accept or tolerate. We assert that a No Kill nation is within our reach—that the killing can and must be brought to an end. It is up to each of us working individually and together to implement sheltering models that have already saved tens of thousands of animals in progressive communities. If we work together—with certainty of purpose, assured of our own success, with the commitment that “what must be done, will be done”—the attainment of our goals will not be far off. II. Big Bear No Kill ResolutionWhereas, the right to live is every animal’s most basic and fundamental right; Whereas, societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals and other humane organizations were founded to establish standards for humane treatment of animals, to promote their rights, and to protect them from harm; Whereas, traditional sheltering practices allow the mass killing of sheltered animals; Whereas, every year shelters in the United States are killing millions of animals who could be saved, and are also killing millions of free-living animals who do not belong in shelters; Whereas, life always takes precedence over expediency; Whereas, the No Kill movement in the United States has successfully implemented new and innovative programs that provide alternatives to mass killing; Whereas, lifesaving change will come about only if No Kill programs are embraced and further developed; Whereas, failure to implement No Kill programs constitutes a breach of the public’s trust in the sheltering community; Now, therefore, be it resolved that No Kill policies and procedures are the only legitimate foundation for animal sheltering; and, it is incumbent upon all shelters and animal groups to embrace the philosophy of No Kill, to immediately begin implementing programs and services that will end the mass killing of sheltered animals, and to reject the failed kill-oriented practices of the past. III. Big Bear Statement of RightsWe acknowledge the following:• Sheltered animals have a right to live;• Free-living animals have a right to their lives and their habitats;• Animals, rescuers, and the public have a right to expect animal protection organizations and animal shelters to do everything in their power to promote, protect, and advocate for the lives of animals;• Animal protection groups, rescue groups, and No Kill shelters have a right to take into their custody animals who would otherwise be killed by animal shelters;• Taxpayers and community members have a right to have their government spend tax monies on programs and services whose purpose is to save and enhance the lives of all animals;• Taxpayers and community members have a right to full and complete disclosure about how animal shelters operate. IV. Big Bear Guiding PrinciplesNo Kill is achieved only by guaranteeing the following:• Life to all healthy animals, and to all sick, injured or traumatized animals where medical or behavioral intervention would alter a poor or grave prognosis;• The right of sanctuary for aggressive dogs where behavior intervention cannot alter a poor or grave prognosis;• The right of free-living animals to live in their habitats; ​These conditions can be achieved only through adherence to the following:• Shelters and humane groups end the killing of savable animals;• Every animal in a shelter receives individual consideration, regardless of how many animals a shelter takes in, or whether such animals are healthy, underaged, elderly, sick, injured, traumatized, or not social with humans;• Shelters and humane organizations discontinue the use of language that misleads the public and glosses over the nature of their actions, such as “euthanasia,” “unadoptable,” “fractious,” “putting them to sleep,” and other euphemisms that downplay the gravity of ending life and make the task of killing easier;• Shelters are open to the public during hours that permit working people to reclaim or adopt animals during nonworking hours;• Public shelters work with humane animal adoption organizations to the fullest extent to promote the adoption of animals and to reduce the rate of killing;• Shelters provide care and treatment for all animals in shelters to the extent necessary, including prompt veterinary care, adequate nutrition, shelter, exercise, and socialization;• Shelters are held accountable for and make information publicly available about all the animals in their care. V. Big Bear No Kill StandardsThe implementation of these lifesaving procedures, policies, and programs must be the immediate goal of every shelter, and animal control and animal welfare agency:• Formal, active commitment by shelter directors, management, and staff to lifesaving programs and policies, and dedication to promptly ending mass killing of shelter animals;• Immediate implementation of the following programs by all publicly funded or subsidized animal shelters:•• A foster care network for underaged, traumatized, sick, injured, or other animals needing refuge before any sheltered animal is killed, unless the prognosis for rehabilitation of that individual animal is poor or grave;•• Comprehensive adoption programs that operate during weekend and evening hours and include offsite adoption venues;•• Medical and behavioral rehabilitation programs;•• Pet retention programs to solve medical, environmental, or behavioral problems and keep animals with their caring and responsible caregivers;•• Programs to release free-living animals back to their habitats;•• Rescue group right of access to shelter animals;•• Volunteer programs to socialize animals, promote adoptions, and help in the operations of the shelter;•• Documentation that all efforts to save an animal have been considered, including medical and behavioral rehabilitation, foster care, rescue groups, re-release, and adoption.• An end to the policy of accepting trapped free-living animals to be destroyed as unadoptable, and implementation of re-release programs;• Abolishment of trapping, lending traps to the public to capture animals, and support of trapping by shelters, governments, and pest control companies for the purposes of removing animals to be killed;• An end to “owner”-requested killing of animals unless the shelter has made an independent determination that the animal is irremediably suffering;• The repeal of unenforceable and counter-productive animal control ordinances such as cat licensing and leash laws, pet limit laws, bans on feeding stray animals, and bans on specific breeds. Please also sign the nationwide "No Kill Declaration" by clicking here. INFORMATIVE LINKSDoes Your Community's Shelter Measure Up?No Kill 101Economic Benefits of No Kill Animal ControlWe Can Do It! Adopt Your Way Out of KillingThe Myth of Pet OverpopulationA Guide for Legislators & Policy MakersDefining No KillHelping Community DogsThe No Kill Revoluntion Starts With YOU!Countering The OppositionThere Out To Be a Shelter Reform LawLegal Rights of Rescuers and VolunteersSuperhero For Animal SheltersThe Companion Animal Protection ActThe Animal Rescue ActThe Prevention of Cruelty To Animals ActThe Family Standard of Care and Protection ActPerserving Life: Protecting FamiliesWhat Shelters Owe Traumatized AnimalsNo Dog Left Behind: We Can Save Them AllCalculating An Animal Shelter's Live Release RateAnimal Matrix: Policies and ProceduresProtecting Community CatsBreak The Chains: Model Anti-Tethering Legislation Dear Mayor, City Manager and City Council, We now have a solution to animal shelter killing and it is not difficult, expensive, or beyond practical means to achieve. No Kill is a humane, sustainable, cost-effective model that allows open admission animal control shelters to save all healthy and treatable animals. Unlike the “adopt some and kill the rest” form of animal sheltering that dominates in the United States and is responsible for the needless killing of millions of animals every year, municipal No Kill shelters are saving as much as 99% of all animals entrusted to their care. By working with people, embracing lifesaving programs, and treating each life as precious, a shelter can transform itself. Here’s a free film that highlights several communities which have made the transition: Here are free guides that demonstrate how they did it, including model policies and procedures for the operation of a municipal, No Kill animal shelter: And here’s even more good news: the more animals a community shelter saves, the more money people in the community spend on those animals. A University of Denver study found that the total dollar value of additional spending and other economic impact realized by one city over a 6-year period as a result of passing a No Kill ordinance was over $150,000,000. Saving lives not only makes ethical sense; it makes dollars and cents: The No Kill Advocacy Center has helped numerous communities in their transition to No Kill and they can help ours, too. Please do not hesitate to contact them:

Ted Trent
7,787 supporters
Update posted 12 hours ago

Petition to О'КЕЙ Академический Санкт-Петербург, Антон Фарленков, Press Department, Public Relations Department

Нет жестокости живым рыбам в О'КЕЙ супермаркетах! No sales of alive fish in supermarkets!

Cruelty against alive fish and crabs in О'КЕЙ-supermarkets has to stop! The О'КЕЙ-supermarket group is one of the biggest grocery store chains in Russia. These markets sell a broad variety of high-quality food and things of daily convenience. Unfortunately, they also sell alive animals, which are kept in horrifying conditions. Fish are kept in broad neon-light in small aquariums, where they start eating each other due to the lack of space. Crabs are kept in similar conditions, which forces them to walk over their already dead companions. Apart from the necessity to protect these animals from unnecessary cruelty, the storage of alive animals in these conditions is threatening the health of potential consumers as well. Please have a look at the attached photographs, taken at the store in Sankt-Petersburg - Akademicheskaya (Санкт-Петербург, проспект Науки, 17, корп. 1, 195220), in late January 2019. You can also check out the website of the company, where they even advertise this form of cruelty towards animals as a guarantee of freshness: (in Russian and English). Concerning the fish: Clearly, the fish are in a very bad shape, as they show signs of cannibalism and further disturbed behaviour. For example they stick together without moving in a futile attempt to find some safety in a blank water tank. Usually, these fish are not used to bright neon lights for twelve and more hours per day. Furthermore, they have nowhere to hide and no refuge, all the while dozens of people walk past them, knock on the glass and are very noisy. It is surely a very frightening and stressful experience for them. Just because these fish are meant for consumption, it does not mean that we don’t have to treat them as living beings whilst they are still alive. Science has proven that fish have nociceptors (pain receptors) similar to those of higher vertebrates and show discomfort behaviour and changes in physiology when noxious substances are applied (Sneddon et al., 2003), strongly suggesting that fish can feel pain. Furthermore, it has been shown that fish have long-term memory of at least one year (Brown, 2001), are capable of social learning (Laland and Williams, 1997) and show a basic sense of quantity (Agrillo et al., 2012). Wrasse have even been shown to use rocks to crush sea urchins to access the meat inside or anvils to break open shellfish (Jones et al., 2011) which clearly demonstrates tool use in fish, a trait that was once thought to be unique to humans. Brand new research has even shown that cleaner wrasse pass the mirror-mark test (Kohda et al., 2019), which has long been regarded as evidence for self-awareness in other animals. Just because fish cannot vocalize and have no mimic that we can read, it does not mean that they cannot suffer. Stop selling alive fish in supermarkets! Concerning the crabs: There were already dead crabs in the tank. This leads to a contamination of the whole tank and thus spoils the whole produce - as knows every fish-handling restaurant. They are therefore not suitable for human consumption and pose a health risk. The crabs are kept in such a confined space that they are forced to stand on one another - and thus to eat one another, too. This is cruel and totally unnecessary. The idea of freshness cannot outweigh the harm done to these animals - and thus also to the produce. OK-Markets have an overall great reputation of providing quality and safe foods. These tanks show the opposite. I am sure that О'КЕЙ-purchase rates will not drop, because you shut down these tanks. Therefore, we demand: Stop selling alive fish and crabs in your supermarkets! Close down your water tanks! --- Russian: Нет жестокому обращению с живыми рыбами и крабами в супермаркетах О'КЕЙ.Жестокость к живым рыбам и крабам в супермаркетах О'КЕЙ должна быть прекращена. Компания супермаркетов О'КЕЙ предоставляет широкий ассортимент высококачественных продуктов и товаров ежедневного пользования. К сожалению, они также продают живых животных, которые содержатся в ужасных условиях. Рыбы находятся в общих маленьких аквариумах с неоновой подсветкой, где они начинают пожирать друг друга. Крабы тоже содержатся в аналогичных условиях, отчего они вынуждены ходить по трупам своих собратьев по несчастью. Содержание живых животных в таких условиях напрямую угрожает здоровью потенциальных покупателей, не говоря уже о необходимости защиты этих животных от ненужной жестокости. Что касается рыбы: Очевидно, что рыбы находятся в плачевном состоянии, если они проявляют признаки каннибализма и неадекватного поведения. Например, они неподвижно липнут друг на друге в тщетных попытках обрести хоть какую-то безопасность в цистерне с водой. В обычной жизни эти рыбы не привыкли находиться в ярком неоновом свете по 12 и более часов в день.Кроме того, им негде спрятаться и нет убежища, и все время множество людей проходят мимо, шумят и стучат по стеклу. Вне всякого сомнения это пугающий и стрессовый случай для них. Только потому, что эти рыбы предназначены к употреблению, это не означает, что мы не должны обращаться с ними, как с живыми существами в то время, пока они ещё живы. Наука доказала, что у рыб есть ноцицепторы (рецепторы боли), аналогичные тем, что есть у высших позвоночных, и что они ощущают дискомфорт и изменения в физиологии при применении ядовитых веществ (Снеддон и др., 2003), строго говоря, рыбы могут чувствовать боль. Кроме того, учёные нашли, что у рыб есть долгосрочная память не менее одного года (Браун, 2001), что они способны к социальному обучению (Леленд и Уильямс, 1997) и проявляют базовое чувство количества (Агрилло и др., 2012). Например, губаны используют утёсы, чтобы сломать панцирь морского ежа и достать из него мясо, или штыри, чтобы открыть моллюсков (Джонс и др., 2011), что наглядно демонстрирует использование рыбами инструментов, причём эта характерная черта считалась когда-то уникальной для людей. Только потому, что рыбы не могут говорить и не имеют мимики, которую мы можем понять, это не значит, что они не могут страдать. Остановите продажу живых рыб в супермаркетах! Что касается крабов: В баке уже были мёртвые крабы. Это приводит к загрязнению бака и таким образом портится вся продукция - это известно каждому ресторану, работающему с рыбой. По этой причине они не подходят для употребления человеком и представляют угрозу для здоровья. Крабы содержатся в таком ограниченном пространстве, что они вынуждены стоять друг на друге и оттого есть друг друга тоже. Это жестоко и абсолютно бессмысленно.Данное представление о свежести не совместимо с наносимым этим животным вредом, а также всей продукции. Супермаркеты О'КЕЙ имеют повсеместно отличную репутацию в обеспечении качественными и безопасными продуктами. А эти баки демонстрируют противоположность. Я уверен, что количество покупок в О'КЕЙ не упадет, если вы не будете больше использовать эти баки. Итак:Прекратите продажу живых рыб и крабов в ваших магазинах! --- Literature: Further reading and scientific proof of the statements made above: Agrillo, C., Piffer, L., Bisazza, A. and Butterworth, B. (2012) Evidence for two numerical systems that are similar in humans and guppies. PLoS One, 7(2), e31923. Brown, C. (2001) Familiarity with the test environment improves escape responses in the crimson spotted rainbowfish, Melanotaenia duboulayi. Animal Cognition, 4, pp.109–113. Cited in: Brown, C. (2015) Fish intelligence, sentience and ethics. Animal Cognition, 18, pp. 1-17. Jones, A.M., Brown, C. and Gardner, S. (2011) Tool use in the tuskfish Choerodon schoenleinii? Coral Reefs, 30, p.865. Cited in: Brown, C. (2015) Fish intelligence, sentience and ethics. Animal Cognition, 18, pp. 1-17. Kohda M, Hotta T, Takeyama T, Awata S, Tanaka H, Asai J-y, et al. (2019) If a fish can pass the mark test, what are the implications for consciousness and self-awareness testing inanimals? PLoS Biol 17(2): e3000021. Laland, K. and Williams, K. (1997) Shoaling generates social learning of foraging information in guppies. Animal Behaviour, 53, pp. 1161–1169. Sneddon, L.U., Braithwaite, V.A. and Gentle, M.J. (2003) Do fishes have nociceptors? Evidence for the evolution of a vertebrate sensory system. Proc. R. Soc. Lond., 270, pp. 1115–1121.

Achim Klüppelberg
1,075 supporters
Update posted 22 hours ago

Petition to Mr. Matt Buchanan, N. David Smith, William "Bill" Moore

Cancel and Boycott “Big Lick” Tennessee Walking Classes - North Carolina Championship Show

Please SIGN this Petition to STOP “Big Lick” Animal Cruelty to beautiful Tennessee Walking Horses. Asheville and Fletcher, North Carolina, are two progessive beautiful cities located in Western North Carolina.  Both are known for gentle tolerance, enlightenment and kindness. Unfortunately,  these two cities are hosting the three day “Big Lick” North Carolina Championship Walking Horse Show, Oct. 6 – 8.    Sadly, the horse show will feature “Big Lick” Animal Cruelty to Tennessee Walking Horses.     Tennessee Walking Horses are tortured from an early age to learn how to do the “Big Lick”.   It is a pain induced gait. The horses throw their legs high while wearing Chains and 6 – 8 pound stack shoes.   Caustic chemicals are applied to sensitive skin above the horses hooves, and then wrapped with plastic to “cook in” the chemicals which causes the skin to be blistered.   When the chains hit the skin,  the horses throw their front legs high while squatting down on their back legs – creating the cruel “Big Lick”.  “Big Lick” TWH are the only horses in America which wear Chains in the show ring.    According to Tennessean and Noted Equine Vet Dr. John Haffner,   the "Big Lick" is a "business built on the suffering and pain of horses".   Dr. Haffner is a member of the Horse Science Faculty at MTSU (Middle Tennessee State University) in Murfreesboro, TN. Even worse, the horse show will be held at the McGough Arena at the Western North Carolina Agriculture Center owned by the State of North Carolina.  Of 83 total horse classes  45 will feature the “Big Lick” gait. In March 2015,   the North Carolina Commissioner of Agriculture banned “Big Lick” Tennessee Walking Horses from the 2015 NC State Fair.  This action came after a Change.Org Petition gained almost 20,000 signatures, and a public Protest was held at the 2014 NC State Fair. At the 2015 North Carolina Championship Horse Show,   USDA Vet inspectors disqualified a shocking 35% of all the “Big Lick” Tennessee Walking Horses they inspected for allegedly being in violation of the Horse Protection Act (Animal Cruelty). On July 25, 2016,  the U. S. Secretary of Agriculture took action and opened a Public Comment period to make the “Big Lick” illegal by removing the “Pads and Chains”, consequently abolishing the “Big Lick” Animal Cruelty.  So far over 81% of the “Public Comments” favor the Federal Regulation to the Horse Protection Act.  The Regulation can be made official after October 26, 2016. It’s time for Americans,  and people all over the World,  to urge the General Manager of the Western North Carolina Agricultural Center;  North Carolina Chief Deputy Commissioner of Agriculture;  and the Mayor of Fletcher, North Carolina to ban the “Big Lick” Tennessee Walking Horse classes, and to urge the public  to Boycott “Big Lick” Animal Cruelty. After you SIGN,  please SHARE the petition with your friends and family via email, Facebook, and Twitter! Your PETITION Signatures and Comments will be delivered to the proper officials. WE, The People,                                                                             CCABLAC (Citizens Campaign Against "Big Lick" Animal Cruelty)

Mary Smith
126,555 supporters