From: IN%"JJCooper@dmu.ac.uk" "Jonathan Cooper" 15-DEC-2000 14:18:10.82 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" "'applied-ethology@skyway.usask.ca'" CC: Subj: ISAE Communications Hi Apologies to ISAE members who are seeing this for a second time and to = those not interested in ISAE activities, but a big HELLO to ISAE members and potential members who are getting this for the first time. I am the new ISAE Communications Officer as of the Brasil Conferance, so you will be receiving infrequent messages from me about ISAE events and developments. I also have responsibility for the = ISAE website and the editing and distribution of the newsletter. Before = taking on the post I had three ideas 1. Build on the ISAE website to make it the prime source of internet information on for academics and lay-people on applied animal = behaviour. This will include links to reputatable education and research websites = in applied ethology. More about this in New Year. 2. Create an ISAE members mailing list for disemination of ISAE = business to run in parrellel with this more general discussion list. I have been = beaten to this by Joe who has created one which is brilliant. If you are an = ISAE member and have not been included on the ISAEnet, (ie did not register = on the Brasil mailing list) then let Joe know and he'd be happy to add = you.=20 3. Move the newsletter to an electronic mailing, which will be a = speedier and more efficient means of distribution for most members. Members = without access to email will still recieve Newsletter by post.=20 If you are interested in joining ISAE (International Society for = Applied Ethology) for the princely sum of =A310 (or equivalent) to take = advantage of ISAEnet or any of its other goodies (cheaper registration to = conferances, members rate for Applied Animal Behaviour Science, increased self = worth, regular newsletter) then details can be found on the website at http://sh.plym.ac.uk/isae/tsthome2.htm or by contacting Janet Swanson = on jswanson@oznet.ksu.edu The next newsletter will be published next week and will include = details of the Davis Conferance. In the meantime the organisers have recently = updated their website with more details of the scientific programme etc. and a = form for electronic submission of abstracts. These should be submitted by = 15th February 2001. The website can be found on http://animalwelfare.ucdavis.edu/conference/ethology/isaeannouncement.ht= ml In addition for those planning on submitting abstracts to the UK = Regional meeting which will be held in York on April 9th-11th with the BSAS and = WPSA, the (hard) deadline will be 19th December (ie next Tuesday). For = further details there are websites at http://www.isaeuk.fsnet.co.uk/ and http://www.bsas.org.uk/ For those not familiar with the BSAS (British Society for Animal = Science) and WPSA (World Poultry Science Association), their meetings are = important events in the farm animal science calender, attracting in excess of 500 delgates each year from Britain and abroad. In addition to sessions on genetics, nutrition, health and management they usually have a large = number of behaviour and welfare papers. The BSAS organisers are keen to widen = the interest base of their spring meeting by involving other organisations = and this is an excelent oppurtunity to share ideas and build new contacts. = They also know how to party. Dr Jonathan Cooper Animal Behaviour Cognition and Welfare Group, School of Agriculture, = Faculty of Applied Sciences, De Montfort University. Caythorpe Court, Caythorpe, Lincolnshire, UK. NG32 3EP Tel 01400 275678. Fax 01400 275686. Email jjcooper@dmu.ac.uk http://www.dmu.ac.uk/ln/Agriculture/staffcvs/Dr.JonathanJCooper.htm From: IN%"FoodFarm@aol.com" 19-DEC-2000 08:06:42.17 To: IN%"Applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: National trends in animal welfare concern Dear applied ethology subscribers - I am working on an article for the DLG (German Agricultural Society) in Frankfurt/Main (actually for the society's international farm management magazine AgriFuture) on the different attitudes of the public in individual European countries regarding farm animal welfare. Could anyone help me, please, with references to any research or reporting that has been done on this? Just as an example: the British public (or at least the relevant lobby groups) showed massive concern about tied and tethered sows....a level of concern not evident in most other EU countries. Sweden is another country where public concern about conditions for farm animals seems to be much more alive. People in some other EU countries seem, to put it kindly, less than interested in what goes on out in the country Are there just a few countries who push for animal welfare reforms within the EU - and are they always the same states? How about farmers themselves? Is there evidence that their attitudes to welfare are nationally different? Any input would be gratefully received. Norman Dunn FoodFarm Communications FoodFarm@aol.com From: IN%"Andreas.Briese@tiho-hannover.de" "Andreas Briese" 20-DEC-2000 03:54:53.35 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: ENS-News covering EU-Animal transportation ENVIRONMENT NEWS SERVICE Dec. 19th 2000: EU Countries Ignoring Animal Transport Laws BRUSSELS, Belgium, December 19, 2000 (ENS) - Animals are often subject to brutalities and improper care and handling, according to a report, which finds major shortcomings in enforcement of European Union transport rules. You may find the ENS-Story at http://ens.lycos.com/ens/dec2000/2000L-12-19-11.html If you're interested in the original report, you may use the link http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/availability /en_availability_2000_17.html and scroll dowm to the document number COM (2000) 809. I would like to mention, that reports like this may enlight the foggy situation at animal transport and show up the problems with this issue. But, only because of intensive investigates in this field we get some picture. What i want to say is, that it's simple to blame the EU-countries because of their ignorance according to the commissions report but are there other serious investigations in other countries e.g. USA ? Andreas ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Institut for animal hygiene and welfare Veterinary School Hannover Dr. med. vet. Andreas Briese Buenteweg 17p 30559 Hannover Tel.: (0511) 953-8836 (0511) 120 2102 Fax.: (0511) 953-8588 (0511) 120 99 2102 e-mail: Andreas.Briese@tiho-hannover.de (bigger Attachments): Andreas_Briese@animcare-sci.de ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ From: IN%"Karoline.Schmidt@vu-wien.ac.at" "Karoline.Schmidt" 21-DEC-2000 14:24:05.29 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: Dr. Geoff W. Arnold Could you kindly send me Dr. Geoff W. Arnolds email adress? Thank you very much indeed! Karoline Schmidt From: IN%"Rexxie1@aol.com" 22-DEC-2000 12:49:04.55 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: RE: Vatican and animal welfare For your interest. Marlene Halverson Vatican official calls for more just relationship with animals By John Thavis Catholic News Service VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Human dominion over the natural world must not be taken as an unqualified license to kill or inflict suffering on animals, a Vatican official said. The cramped and cruel methods used in the modern food industry, for example, may cross the line of morally acceptable treatment of animals, the official said in an article Dec. 7 in the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano. The article, titled ``For a More Just Relationship With Animals,'' was written by Marie Hendrickx, a longtime official of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. She said that in view of the growing popularity of animal rights movements, the church needs to ask itself to what extent Christ's dictum, ``Do to others whatever you would have them do to you'' can be applied to the animal world. The ``Catechism of the Catholic Church'' says it is legitimate for humans to use animals for food and clothing, and to domesticate them for work or leisure. But Hendrickx pointed out that a small but significant change in wording was made between the catechism's first edition and its official Latin edition on use of animals for medical experimentation. Such experiments are now called morally acceptable only if they contribute to caring for or saving human lives. Moreover, the catechism says that in general it is ``contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly.'' Hendrickx said the question today is whether ``the right to use animals to feed oneself implies raising chicken in cages that are each smaller than a notebook.'' ``Or raising calves in boxes where they cannot move or see the light of day? Or pinning down sows with iron rings into a nursing position so that piglets can suck the milk without ever stopping, and thus grow faster?'' she said. Likewise, she questioned whether the right to dress oneself with animal skins meant it was morally acceptable to let fur-bearing creatures die slowly in traps from hunger, cold or bleeding. Hendrickx also questioned treatment of animals in traditional spectacles that have survived into the modern age, like bull-fighting or ``throwing cats or goats off a bell-tower.'' She was referring to the tradition in a Spanish town of tossing a goat from a 50-foot bell tower into a piece of tarpaulin, to mark the beginning of the festival of St. Vincent, the town's patron saint. The town gave up the practice earlier this year after years of protest from animal rights groups. She said that spectacles involving cruelty to animals are sometimes justified as ``cathartic'' acts that release collective aggression. But experience shows the opposite is true: where brutal spectacles are popular, aggression only seems to increase, she said. Hendrickx said that in applying church teaching, Catholics should remember that causing suffering to animals should be avoided unless there are serious reasons to do so. Feeding oneself or one's family is a legitimate reason, but the sole motive of profit is not, she said. END From: IN%"Rexxie1@aol.com" 22-DEC-2000 20:04:26.98 To: IN%"applied-ethology@sask.usask.ca" CC: Subj: sex changes in salmon I just received this posting and thought those of you on the applied ethology network might find it of interest. Marlene Halverson Friday, December 22 11:31 AM SGT Salmon in gender crisis: research SEATTLE, Dec 21 (AFP) - Sexual identity may be a problem facing the Pacific Northwest's endangered wild salmon runs, according to the findings of new research into gender of the fish. A study of the chinook-salmon run in the Columbia River's most fertile spawning ground late last year found that 80 percent of the spawning female fish probably began life as males. The findings surprised the study's lead author, James Nagler, a University of Idaho zoologist. "The research raises more questions than answers," Nagler told AFP. He believes that the sex changes could be caused by pollutants or water temperature changes. However, ruled out as a cause is radiation seeping from the nearby Hanford Nuclear Reservation. The amount of radioactivity known to be going into the river is too small to have produced such changes, according to the study's authors. The possible "sex reversal" of salmon could have a significant impact on efforts to preserve the genetic traits of wild runs. The study by Nagler, Gary Thorgaard, a fish geneticist at Washington State University, and two other researchers, was published last week in Environmental Health Perspective, a journal of the National Institute of Environmental Sciences. Researchers sampled 50 female and 50 male chinook in Hanford Reach, the last free-flowing stretch of the Columbia River -- and its most fertile spawning ground. Most of the female fish carried a genetic marker found only in male salmon. "What we've got is an interesting observation with many unknowns," said Nagler. "This could be a contributing factor, coupled with all the other burdens on the backs of these fish, that tweaks the health of these populations. It could be the tip of a pretty significant iceberg," he said. "There's no reason this couldn't happen," said Paul Bentzen, a geneticist at the University of Washington Fisheries Department. "Sex determination is more relaxed in fish than in humans or other animals." Nagler said the sex of salmon has been changed under laboratory conditions, usually through the concentrated use of hormones. For example, aquaculture farms sometimes transform male salmon into females because the females often grow larger and produce more desirable meat. But the phenomenon has never been seen in wild salmon stocks, according to Nagler and other researchers. Nagler's major concern about sex reversal in wild runs is that it might create a "supermale" fish whose characteristics in the wild are unknown. Indeed, this may already have happened, the researchers conceded. Normally, female fish carry two X chromosomes, while males carry an X and a Y chromosome. The altered females, which produced eggs, spawned and died in the normal cycle, also had an X and Y chromosome. Half their offspring could wind up with two Y chromosomes, Nagler said. "It would be frightening if we're whittling down the female population and female genetic traits," said Nagler. "It might just be a correcting thing but my gut tells me that if you reduce female genetics in a species it's got to have an impact." However, Nagler said that the effects on the offspring can be studied no further until the salmon return to the Hanford Reach to spawn. Future expanded studies are being planned to determine if the sex reversals were a one-time event or if other wild salmon runs have undergone similar changes. Thorgaard believes the most likely cause of the reversal is pollution from agricultural or industrial chemicals, which may act like estrogens. By contrast, a study of fish from the same genetic stock from the nearby Priest Rapids Fish Hatcher showed no evidence of sex-reversal. "It's unlikely this is naturally occurring," said Thorgaard.