About The Cover The majestic humpback, shown breaching in Alaskan waters (photo by John Hyde), is one of many whale species whose protections were at stake at this year's International Whaling Commission meeting in Anchorage, Alaska. Greenland's Native population sought permission to kill humpbacks for subsistence purposes, and fortunately, the request was denied on the final day of the meeting. However, the country did receive approval to kill additional minke whales and to add bowhead whales to its list of targets. Despite over two decades of a ban on commercial whaling, many whale species have not yet recovered from the dramatic losses that resulted from brutal hunts of the past. Aboriginal populations and pro-whaling countries have been able to sidestep the moratorium, further hindering the animals' recovery. The Animal Welfare Institute is pressing the US government to stand by its conservation-minded position on behalf of the whales, and to not make compromises. Protecting Wildlife at Any Cost On June 4, the Animal Welfare Institute selected eight outstanding honorees (listed below) to receive its Clark R. Bavin Wildlife Law Enforcement Awards. The prestigious award is given to those who engage in exemplary law enforcement actions to protect species of wildlife listed in the Appendices of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). It is named after the late chief of the US Fish and Wildlife Service's Division of Law EnforcementÑa trailblazer who pioneered highly effective undercover investigations and "sting" operations. At this year's Conference of the Parties, certificates of appreciation were personally presented to recipients or their representatives by CITES Secretariat Willem Wijnstekers. Mr. Paul Cerniglia, US Fish and Wildlife Service Supervisory Wildlife Inspector Mr. Yvan Lafleur, Canadian Wildlife Service (retired) Mr. Emmanuel Muyengi, United Republic of Tanzania Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism Wildlife Division Officer (awarded posthumously) Mr. Paulin Ngobobo, Congolese Institute for the Conservation of Nature Chief Warden Mr. Samson Parsimei Ole Sisina, Kenya Wildlife Service Ranger/Driver (awarded posthumously) Mr. John T. Webb, US Department of Justice Environment and Natural Resources Division Attorney Last Great Ape Organization, Cameroon, Africa Rajasthan Police Department, India Board Members Pass the Torch Marjorie Cooke, an esteemed member of the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) Board of Directors since 1974, has stepped down from her post. AWI wishes to thank Mrs. Cook for her dedicated service to both AWI and the Society for Animal Protective Legislation (SAPL). The sister of the late John Kullberg, a well-known activist and former director of SAPL, she is a longtime animal advocate herself and worked closely with Christine Stevens. Roger Fouts, Ph.D. has stepped down from the board as well, but will fortunately serve on AWI's Scientific Committee. AWI would also like to welcome its newest board members, Barbara Buchanan of Vikor Barrier Corp.; Penny Eastman of Mayer, Brown and Maw; and Mary Lee Jensvold of Central Washington University's Chimpanzee and Human Communication Institute. animals in the oceans Fisheries Subsidies at Stake: US proposes cuts...4 Protection for Cook Inlet Belugas?...4 "Dolphin Safe" Label Remains Intact...5 Pact Reached to Curb Bottom Trawling...5 Scientists Shed Light on South Korea's Whaling Secret...5 Whales Prevail at IWC...6 Drilling Debate: The world's most endangered whale species may face a new threat...7 The Sociable Orcas of Kamchatka and the Russian Students Who Care for Them, by the Far East Russia Orca Project...10-12 animals in the wild Disappearing Act: Where have North America's honeybees gone?...7 CITES 2007: Call of the Wild Goes Unanswered...14-15 Beijing Olympics 2008 Part Three: The Deadly Fur Trade in China...20 news from the states and capitol hill Damaging Dams: Can salmon runs be restored on the Pacific Coast without dam removal?...8 Brutal Leghold Traps Challenged...9 US Court of Appeals Lets Illinois Plant Resume Horse Slaughter for Now...9 Provision Would Put Local Authority in Jeopardy...9 in memoriam Breaking the Silence: AWI looks back on Rachel Carson's unprecedented environmental revolution, by John Gleiber...13 animals in the laboratories Cooperation Counts, by Dr. Andrew Winterborn...16 Small Changes, Big Results, by Allison Bechard...17 humane education BioSafaris: A Smart Dissection Alternative, by Lynette Hart...18 books Just for Elephants...19 Making Lives Easier for Animals in Research Labs...19 Tyger! Tyger!...19 Caption: Children concerned about whales drew their feelings on thousands of colorful postcards presented at this year's IWC meeting. Caption: A ban on DDT, prompted by Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, helped save the endangered Peregrine falcon from extinction. Caption: Mice who are weaned closer to their natural weaning age are less likely to suffer from anxiety. For subscription inquiries or other information, please contact AWI at: P.O. Box 3650, Washington, DC 20027, phone: (703) 836-4300, facsimile: (703) 836-0400, email: awi@AWIonline.org, or visit AWI's website at: www.AWIonline.org. News in Brief Protection for Cook Inlet Belugas? The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) proposed in April to list the Cook Inlet beluga whale as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), following a November 2006 Status Review and Extinction Assessment that found the population is now at a "26 percent probability of extinction within 100 years." With numbers once estimated at 1,300 in the 1970s, the genetically distinct and geographically isolated Cook Inlet belugas began suffering greatly in the 1990s, when unsustainable subsistence whaling lowered their count to 653 in 1994 and to less than 350 by 1998. Two years later, the NMFS attempted to curtail the devastating hunts by listing the belugas as "depleted" under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. However, the belugas have not achieved the 2 to 6 percent population growth rate that was expected. Instead, their population count has "declined 4.1 percent annually since 1999, with a 5.6 percent annual decline since surveys started in 1994," according to a recent NMFS news release. Current estimates list the dwindling whale population at less than 300. Sadly, threats to these whales far exceed the formerly unregulated hunts. Today, their precarious state is also subjected to predation, ship strikes, anthropogenic noise, ice entrapment, fishery interactions, and habitat loss due to oil and gas development. Caption: Researchers tracking Cook Inlet belugas with satellite tags report that their population numbers continue to fall. Fisheries Subsidies at Stake: US proposes cuts During recent World Trade Organization negotiations in Geneva, Switzerland, the United States submitted a proposal highlighting the need to cut worldwide destructive fisheries subsidies in order to stop the collapse of global fish species. The United States recommends that subsidies distorting trade and endangering marine life be prohibited by the body. Though not welcomed by all nations, the proposal did receive a strong backing, and it will be used as a framework in negotiations. Just days later in the US Congress, a bipartisan group of 13 Senators introduced a resolution calling for an international ban on fishing subsidies, following a similar resolution introduced in the House of Representatives in March. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), a co-sponsor of the Senate resolution, commented, "Fishing subsidies have led directly to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing." Global fisheries subsidies are estimated to total as much as $34 billion annually. At least $20 billion of these funds are harmful subsidies that facilitate overfishing, according to a study by the University of British Columbia. The largest subsidizers of fisheries are Japan, China and the European Union. Caption: Fish gasp for breath and struggle for freedom after being caught with weighted nets. Scientists Shed Light on South Korea's Whaling Secret New research led by Oregon University's Dr. Scott Baker confirms a long-held suspicion that South Korea is ignoring "unintended" whaling. Baker's team used DNA fingerprinting of minke whale meat to determine how many individual whales were killed in recent years as the alleged bycatch of South Korean fishing nets. Researchers analyzed samples of whale meat collected from a selection of supermarkets in South Korean coastal cities from 1999 to 2003. It was discovered that the 289 samples were from 205 different whales, although a catch of only 458 whales was reported to the South Korean authorities for that period. "Since the average market 'half-life' of whale meat is six weeks, at most, we should have found far fewer individuals," Baker said. Researchers used a capture-recapture analysis method to estimate that South Korean fisherman may have realistically caught as many as 827 individuals. South Korea's consistently high minke whale bycatch figuresÑand the fact that the meat is sold commerciallyÑimply that the country is circumventing the 20-year-old International Whaling Committee (IWC) moratorium on commercial whaling. Under IWC rules, the sale of meat from accidentally captured animals is permitted, as long as fishermen report their catches to the government. However, it is clear from Baker's results that South Korea is flouting the rules. The IWC has taken steps to confront South Korea about its high bycatch figures, but the issue will not be addressed successfully until the country's government takes the issue to task. Pact Reached to Curb Bottom Trawling The European Union and the 20 nations party to the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organization have agreed to curb the practice of bottom trawling in the South Pacific. This huge step in marine conservation, reached at a meeting in Renaca, Chile, will take effect on September 30Ñwith particular importance to New Zealand, whose fishermen are responsible for 90 percent of bottom trawling in the South Pacific. The highly destructive, indiscriminate fishing method, whereby boats drag weighted nets along the seabed, produces large numbers of bycatch and destroys the ocean floor. Slow-growing species such as the orange roughy and deep-water corals are bottom trawling's most vulnerable victims. The pact will safeguard Pacific Ocean ecosystems, from Australia to South America and the Equator to the Antarctic, by requiring the presence of observers (at the expense of the fishing vessel) and banning bottom trawling without the implementation of precautionary measures in vulnerable areas. Unfortunately, no agreements were reached at the meeting to provide relief for the exploited Chilean jack mackerel, which has seen massive declines from irresponsible fishing practices in recent years. Caption: Fishermen remove ancient coral caught in nets that are used in the ecologically devastating fishing practice known as bottom trawling. "Dolphin Safe" Label Remains Intact In late April, a three-judge panel of the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals refused to permit the Bush Administration to weaken the "Dolphin Safe" tuna label, criticizing the US Department of Commerce's failure to base its findings on science. The Administration has been trying for years to alter the Marine Mammal Protection Act to ease rules for the foreign fishing industry and allow tuna caught with dangerous purse seine nets in Mexico to be imported to the United States under a false "Dolphin Safe" label. Following the unanimous decision against this proposal, District Court Judge Thelton Henderson stated, "[T]his court has never, in its 24 years, reviewed a record of an agency action that contained such a compelling portrait of political meddling." Whales Prevail at IWC Caption: Japanese whaling commissioners huddle during the debates at the 59th IWC meeting. At the 59th International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting held this May in Anchorage, Alaska, pro-whaling nations were expected to bristle with confidence gained from the simple majority they achieved briefly at last year's meeting. But the 2007 gathering was anticipated anxiously by both sides of the whaling debate, since all of the aboriginal subsistence quotas, including Alaska's own, were up for their 5-year renewal. Participants were leery of a repeat of the 2002 meeting, where aboriginal whaling quotas were held hostage by Japan and its allies in an attempt to weaken the US resolve on commercial whaling. Susan Millward, D.J. Schubert and Serda Ozbenian represented the Animal Welfare Institute, pressing the United States not to capitulate on any measure in exchange for the Alaskan bowhead whale quotaÑas it did with a vote in support of a resumption of Japanese small-type coastal whaling in 2002. The pro-whaling factions were unusually reasonable and almost conciliatory during the first few days of the meeting, although constant references to reciprocity hinted at an expectation of future payback. Nearly all of the aboriginal whaling quotas, including the one for Alaskan bowhead whales, were approved by consensus. The exceptions were the quotas sought by the Natives of Greenland, who on the final day were denied their request to kill humpback whales, but received approval for a significant increase in the number of minke whales and the addition of bowhead whales to their hunt. Japan's anticipated call for reciprocity came to a head on the last day, with a proposed schedule amendment for a resumption of its small-type coastal whaling. Japan has been trying for two decades to get the IWC to sanction commercial whaling for its coastal communities, including Taiji, where the notorious dolphin drive hunts take place. This year's attempt was deftly tailored to mirror the aboriginal subsistence whaling that Japan and the other pro-whaling nations had been so agreeable to earlier in the meeting. Japan first tried to remove the term "aboriginal" from the subsistence whaling category. When that initiative failed, it still pursued the subsistence argument for its coastal people, who are not indigenous and do not have subsistence need for whale meat. If successful, the proposal would have resulted in a partial lifting of the moratorium on commercial whaling and had significant ramifications for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. The issue resulted in a protracted debate over two days and was finally defeated. Japan then threatened to leave the Commission and was forced to rescind its offer to host the 61st meeting in 2009. A good deal of discussion at the meeting centered on the future of the currently polarized IWC, which is at an impasse because, despite the moratorium, whales continue to be killed for commercial purposes at an increasing rate through loopholes in the IWC. The pro-whaling factions favor "normalization" of the IWC, taking it back to its originsÑwhich once led to the mass slaughter of tens of thousands of whales and pushed many to the brink of extinctionÑwhile others favor "modernization" and the evolution of the IWC into a non-lethal use and whale conservation regime. The escalating commercial whale killing, the inadequacies of the IWC, and the lack of progress in improving whale-killing methods are deeply troubling. However, we are also concerned that efforts to resolve the perceived impasse may lead to dangerous compromises. There are already rumblings of suggested solutions among traditionally conservation-minded IWC members and observers, including accelerating the development of the Revised Management Scheme (the rules that would guide a reinstated practice of commercial whaling), revisiting the Irish Proposal of the late 1990s that sought to ban high seas whaling and the international trade in whale products in exchange for coastal whaling, and the creation of a whaling-free Southern Hemisphere. An intercessional meeting has been proposed to further the negotiations, and we will attend to ensure that poor compromises are not made. Disappearing Act Where have North America's honeybees gone? Each year, bees and their hives travel across the United States aboard tractor-trailers to pollinate vegetation on the West Coast. Because wild pollinators such as birds and bats are unable to keep up with the demand for pollination of the increasing dimensions of almond groves and over 90 varieties of crops from California to Washington State, migratory beehives and their apiculturists are essential to the region's agricultural health. However, in recent months, millions of bees have abandoned their hives, gone missing or died. The predicament, deemed "Colony Collapse Disorder," has affected beekeepers in 24 US states and some areas of Canada, resulting in a loss of 25 percent to over 75 percent of their hives. Once-burgeoning colonies have become skeletons of their former selves, often with only the queen bee and a few of her workers leftÑwith no trace of the thousands of previous hive inhabitants. Experts are worried about the implications of this phenomenon, and they fear it may be far from resolved. A number of possible culprits are making the suspect line-up, including bad weather, pesticides or miticides, bad corn syrup and genetically modified corn. Many believe the problem may be compounded by the presence of the varroa mite, a tick-like arachnid that wreaked havoc on apiculture in 2005. Feeding on adult honeybees and their unborn, the parasite can destroy a hive by killing young or causing deformities that weaken colonies and make them more susceptible to invading pathogens. For the time being, no remedy has been established. The Colony Collapse Disorder Working Group, based primarily at Penn State University, is leading research on the issue, but Caption: North American honeybees, crucial to many ecosystems along the West Coast, have been disappearing at a rate that is causing major concern. Drilling Debate The world's most endangered whale species may face a new threat Right whales in the North Pacific have still not recovered from being ravaged by historic commercial whaling, and according to US government sources, fewer than 300 may existÑmaking them the most endangered whale species in the world. Unfortunately, a recently planned lease sale area in Alaska's Bristol Bay overlaps with their critical habitat, and proposed exploration would expose right whales and other marine species to threats such as noise pollution, oil spills, chemical pollution, vessel collisions and entanglement with or ingestion of marine debris. This latest danger first presented itself on January 9, when President Bush revoked the former moratorium on drilling in Bristol Bay. While bills to block leasing in the Bristol Bay are currently pending in both chambers of Congress, the Bush Administration's new 5-Year Oil and Gas Leasing Program of the Minerals Management Service is currently set to go into effect. The program includes plans for a lease sale in the Bristol Bay and other US coastal areas. At this summer's International Whaling Commission meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, several governments voiced concern over the effects of oil and gas drilling on this highly endangered species. The US government must be pressed to refrain from subjecting North Pacific right whales to this potentially devastating action. news from capitol hill brought to you by the Society for Animal Protective Legislation Damaging Dams Can salmon runs be restored on the Pacific Coast without dam removal? In a victory for both salmon and the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Bush Administration's misguided strategy for making hydroelectric dams in the Columbia-Snake River Basin safe for salmon. Ruling against the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration claim that it was not necessary to consider the effects of the four dams on salmon because they were built before the implementation of the ESA, the judge acknowledged that it might be necessary to breach the dams to restore salmon populations. Salmon populations throughout the world are struggling. The Puget Sound steelhead was recently listed as threatened under the ESA, and poor management plans for this and other salmon species are prevalent. One such plan, reintroduced as H.R. 1769 by Representatives from Washington and Oregon, is an ill-advised proposal to cull California sea lions that predate on Columbia River salmon. This proposal only serves as a short-term fix and ignores the real problemÑthe Bonneville DamÑwhich concentrates the salmon, attracting the sea lions. The recent court ruling leaves open the possibility that dam removal is a feasible option that should be considered. Dams reduce the flow of water, obstruct salmon migration routes, and concentrate the fish, making them vulnerable to predators. Over the years, many raging rivers have been transformed into stagnant, warm lakes with depleted oxygen levels. This scenario is playing out in many areas on the West Coast. Although dams are harmful for salmon, their removal is controversial since they provide a clean source of power and aid in flood control and irrigation for farmers. However, many outdated dams serve no purpose. For example, the Snake River dams do not store much water due to sediment build up, and they only produce about 5 percent of the region's power. Similarly, the two hydroelectric dams on the Elwha River were originally built to support a timber mill that has since been retired; they no longer generate any power. Thankfully, the process of removing the Elwha River dams is underway. The most controversial case by far involves the four dams in the Klamath River basin, home of the threatened Coho salmon. In 2002, over 30,000 of these fish perished in the river due to low river flows caused by river diversions. For years, there has been a push for the removal of the dams, which produce electricity for thousands of customers and irrigation water to farmers. Earlier this year, the federal government ruled that PacifiCorp, the owner of the dams, must modify the dams with fish ladders to accommodate salmon migrations. However, some estimates show that the removal of the dams may actually be more cost effective than modifications. No decisions have yet been made on the future of the dams, but dam removal projects such as that in the Goldsborough Creek in Washington State highlight how they can help salmon. Five years ago, the ancient dams were removed, and the salmon populations have since flourished, having access to habitat that had been obstructed for 120 years. In March, US Representatives Jim McDermott (D-WA) and Thomas Petri (R-WI) introduced H.R. 1507, the Salmon Economic Analysis and Planning Act (SEAPA), calling for more research into the proper methods of salmon management in the Columbia River Basin, including dam removal. We commend these legislators and the bipartisan bill's 30 cosponsors, as the measure is a necessary step toward the recovery of depleted salmon runs. Caption: Fish ladders help salmon head upstream to spawn. However, the fish may tire on their journey and form clusters that attract predators. Provision Would Put Local Authority in Jeopardy This June, a dangerous provision entitled Section 123 was inserted quietly into the 2007 Farm Bill (H.R. 2419), putting at risk critical state and local authority to ensure food safety, fight against animal cruelty, and protect the environment. The measure sought to prevent a state or locality from "prohibiting an article the Secretary of Agriculture has inspected and passed, or an article the Secretary has determined to be of non-regulated status." "Section 123 provides the USDA with exclusive jurisdiction over public health issues and circumvents the ability of the states to adopt programs that support and promote farmers and rural economies," said Bill Wenzel, the national director of the National Family Farm Coalition's Farmer-to-Farmer Campaign on Genetic Engineering. Under a provision such as Section 123, states could be required to lift their bans on horse slaughter, the brutal production of foie gras, and the sale of bioengineered food. This was a major gambit by Big AgÑdriving a knife into the remaining ability of states and counties to control rampaging agribusiness corporations. It was an attack, above all else, against democracy. While the latest version of the bill, presented on July 6 in the House Agriculture Committee Chairman's Markup Documents, did not contain Section 123, the Society for Animal Protective Legislation (SAPL) will continue to keep a close eye on the full bill's progress. The provision's removal is a tremendous step to protect state and local animal protection laws, but there is no guarantee that similar language will not be inserted into the final version or slipped through via other legislation. Caption: Any measure that challenges the legislative authority of local governments could abolish stronger local laws such as state bans on the use of rBGH in dairy cows. The dangerous growth hormone can cause painful mastitis and myriad other health problems. Brutal Leghold Traps Challenged Millions of furbearing animals each year suffer pain and fear when caught in highly destructive steel-jaw leghold traps, which are banned in 89 countries. Companion animals, birds, deer and other non-target animals fall victim to the indiscriminate trap as well. An animal caught in its grip might even chew off his or her own foot to escape on three legs; the trappers call this all-too-common activity "wring off." In an effort to protect animals from the cruel device, Representatives Nita Lowey (D-NY) and Christopher Shays (R-CT) have reintroduced the Inhumane Trapping Prevention Act as H.R. 1691. The bill seeks to end the use of steel-jaw leghold traps on animals in the United States by making it unlawful to import, export, or transport in interstate commerce leghold traps and articles of fur derived from animals caught using such traps. YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE Please ask your Representative to cosponsor H.R. 1691 (the Inhumane Trapping Prevention Act) and H.R. 1507 (the Salmon Economic Analysis and Planning Act), and to oppose H.R. 1769. Write to: The Honorable (name) US House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 US Court of Appeals Lets Illinois Plant Resume Horse Slaughter for Now Much to our chagrin, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit granted an emergency motion by Cavel International that allows the DeKalb, Ill.-based horse slaughter plant to recommence killing horses for sale as meat for human consumption overseas. As the only US horse slaughter plant still in operation, Cavel was previously forced to shut its doors in late June when US District Court Judge Frederick Kapala denied its request to continue to evade prosecution under a recently enacted Illinois state law that criminalizes the slaughter of horses for human consumption. In May, Cavel filed suit in federal court to challenge the new law's enforceability, but on July 5, Judge Kapala ruled that the law was constitutional and thus, enforceable. Cavel has appealed Judge Kapala's latest decision to the US Court of Appeals, and while its appeal is pending, the slaughterhouse may once again slaughter horses for human consumption. The Court granted the plant's request for an injunction without a hearing, just two days after the slaughterhouse filed its motion. The Animal Welfare Institute is represented by the nationally renowned law firm Patton Boggs. We will continue to do our utmost to ensure that the law passed in Illinois to stop this brutal trade within the state's boundaries is put in force. The Sociable Orcas of Kamchatka...and the Russian Students Who Care for Them by the far east russia orca project "Kawoof!" is the sound of an orca, or killer whale, spouting. It seems to echo off the big snow-capped Viluchinsky volcano in Avacha Gulf, southeast Kamchatka, Russia. Three researchers on our team, sitting in an inflatable boat, turn their heads. Where there is one orca, there are usually many more, for these are highly social mammals. As almost a dozen orcas from the Avacha clan explode in quick sequence at the surface and their spouts drift toward the boat, our team takes their photographic identification shots (photo at top far left). Another part of the team sitting in a boat nearby drops a hydrophone into the water to record the dialects of this orca podÑand to try to puzzle out the meaning of the orcas' complex communication (top photo, second to left). For several years, the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) has helped support the Far East Russia Orca Project (FEROP), a group of university students in Moscow, St. Petersburg and Vladivostok. Our project was the vision of Russian marine mammal researcher Alexander Burdin, Japanese researcher Hal Sato and Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society Senior Research Fellow Erich Hoyt. Beginning with a pilot project in 1999, the team has grown with every summer, extending the chance to Russian students to work with a species that had never been studied in Russia. In the Kamchatka Peninsula in the Russian Far East, there is little support for whale research. Through the project, three of our students have received Master's degrees (including Tanya Ivkovich, pictured at top left), and two (Olga Filatova and Karina Tarasyan) have received Ph.D.s. More are in progress. The team has separately identified and catalogued more than 400 individual orcas using digital dorsal fin photographs (top two photos at right), found important feeding habitat, and identified fish-eating resident and seal-eating transient-type orcas similar to the different ecotypes found in the well-studied orca populations in the eastern North Pacific off the United States and Canada. Our acoustics expert Olga Filatova has also identified sound dialects, with each pod or family group having some unique sounds passed down through the mothersÑsimilar to the dialect system found in the eastern North Pacific, albeit with Russian accents. We spend a lot of time with the mothers and calves, as well as the big bulls, who, despite their size, stay beside their mothers for life. We have come to know them and have given them names, including Humpy, Hookie, Jeka, Brodyaga, Misha and Stepa. In 2003, the project changed from a simple science project to a strongly conservation-minded science project. Our original thinking was that it was necessary to train Russian biologists to work in their country, both in terms of science and conservation; otherwise, all would be lost. We knew that killer whales in Russia were under threat of capture for aquariums in Japan, China, the United States and other locations. In September 2003, a few days after we left our camp, two young female orcas we knew were taken and killed by aquarium captors. One suffocated in the nets during capture. The other was transported on the ship to a makeshift pen and then flown nine time zones to the Black Sea, where she died 13 days later from an infection. We were devastated. Since then, we have worked to reduce and marginalize the quotas. The captors are no longer allowed to work in our study area off eastern Kamchatka. There have been no successful capture attempts since 2003, although some permits are still being granted. At the same time, we have published articles in local newspapers and magazines, and we have talked to people about "our" orcas. We feel that if people could get to know orcas as individuals, the way we know them, things would be different. We are looking forward to the day when there will be no quotas and killer whales will be celebrated in Russia. The Wildlife Paradise of Kamchatka Our study site for the Far East Russia Orca Project off southeast Kamchatka is a marine wildlife paradise. Based on a small rocky island just off the coast, our team lives among tens of thousands of seabirds. Sometimes we rescue and help save tufted puffins or other small birds who get into trouble (photo at top right). We also encounter common murres (photo below at left) and pigeon guillemots (photo below at right). Largha seals (center photo below) live all around the island and are frequently curious neighbors who watch us in the evenings as we clean our cameras, eat dinner, and prepare for the next day. For more information about the project, see www.russianorca.com or contact erich.hoyt@mac.com. In addition to AWI's continuing support, FEROP has been funded by the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society, Humane Society International, Sacher Trusts, Project Thursday's Child, St. George's School for Girls, and Cetacean Society International. In 2002, the project won the prestigious KlŸh Prize for Innovation in Art and Science from Germany. Breaking the Silence AWI looks back on Rachel Carson's unprecedented environmental revolution by John Gleiber There are all kinds of revolutionsÑpolitical, cultural, historic and economicÑbut the most effective ones are unexpected. In 1962, this was proven by the earth-shattering uprising brought about by a woman working in quasi-anonymity for the US government. Rachel Carson that year published Silent Spring, a lodestar of intelligent analysis of the destruction of our environment that had been engendered by "omniscient" scientists. In her book, Ms. Carson skillfully presented the effects of pesticides on animals and the environment, accusing industry and the government of spreading misinformation. She revealed that the chemical DDT was causing birds to have reproductive problems and lay eggs with thinner shells. Today, because of her influence, we are aware of the perils that chemicals pose to the environment. Sometimes promptly and sometimes slowly, we have made strides in mitigating the horrendous toll humanity has paid for years of indiscriminate poisoning. I still remember a time when DDT was as ubiquitous as toothpasteÑand as zealously employed. I go back to a time in our history when the loss of birds, other wildlife and good health was an accepted way of life. Academia and science can be as unseeing as any of us until they are brought up short by a determined researcher with a message. One woman, unknown and unheralded and unappreciated, turned around the environment surrounding millions of our fellows and brought some equilibrium to the man vs. nature debate. Not a research team, not a committee, not a think tankÑone woman. Looking back on the trajectory of this beacon of common sense, one can only marvel at how we were so willfully blind to the irrefutable proof that Ms. Carson put forth. That the reaction to Silent Spring was mixed is to put it as mildly as possible. TIME magazine branded it "nonsense," while Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas hailed it as "the most important chronicle of this century for the human race." My favorite comment is from her editor, Paul Brooks: "É Rachel Carson somehow succeeded in making a book about death a celebration of life." Tributes poured in. Sir Julian HuxleyÑyes, that HuxleyÑsaluted her work. He described it to his brother Aldous, who said, "We are destroying half the basis of English poetry." Upon Ms. Carson's death on April 16, 1964, the Boston Globe ran an editorial simply headlined, "The Power of a Woman." Nearly three decades later, The Christian Science Monitor quoted her in an article about the use of pesticides on vegetable crops, noting that we were living in "an era dominated by industry, in which the right to make money at whatever cost to others is seldom challenged." We must remember Ms. Carson's message in our own era of global warming and other threats to animals and the environment. Caption: Marine biologist and nature writer Rachel Carson joined the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) Advisory Board in 1960. Two years later, she published the book Silent Spring, effectively launching the modern environmentalism movement. Ms. Carson was awarded AWI's 1962 Albert Schweitzer Medal for her contribution to the protection of animals from dangerous pesticides such as DDT. Sadly, she died of cancer at a young age in 1964. To commemorate the 100 years since her birth in 1907, we celebrate her legend. CITES 2007 Call of the Wild Goes Unanswered Only minutes into the opening ceremony of the "Call of the Wild"-themed 14th Conference of the Parties (CoP 14) to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), it was clear that hopes of gaining trade protections for some of the world's most imperiled species would become overshadowed by concerns about livelihoods, politics and profits. While these are not CITES criteria for protecting wild species from international trade, what the treaty says and how it is interpreted are entirely different things. In reality, livelihood concerns often trump trade restrictions, and science takes a back seat to politics and profit. Over the course of the two-week meeting, the "Call of the Wild" became a cry for help, as several critically imperiled species were denied international protection. Not long after the pomp and circumstance of the opening ceremony, oft-repeated claims of science as the standard for CITES listing decisions were cast aside in favor of backroom political deals. A proposal by Mozambique to double its sport-hunted leopard export quota to 120 individuals, despite relying on a questionable 20-year-old population estimate of leopards, was approved by consensusÑto the delight of the Safari Club International and its cadre of globetrotting trophy hunters. Similarly, Uganda, which also relied on two decades-old data, was awarded an export quota of 28 sport-hunted leopards to sell to wealthy trophy hunters. Fortunately, a proposal by the United States to remove the bobcat's CITES protection was rejected by a large majority, due to concerns about several look-alike species that could be drastically affected by unregulated trade. While evidence of declining populations, localized extinction, habitat loss, illegal poaching and international trade is mounting, Algeria's effort to uplist the Barbary red deer to Appendix II was unsuccessful. The country was successful in gaining Appendix I protection for both the slender-horned and Cuvier's gazelle, ostensibly halting the trade in these declining species. An Appendix I listing was also approved for the Guatemalan beaded lizard, which is considered one of the most endangered reptiles in the world, with no more than 250 individuals remaining in the wild. For marine species, the results of CoP 14 were a mixed bagÑlargely because of a "turf war" between CITES and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) over the listing of marine species. Claiming expertise in marine species management, the FAO's alleged scientific review of marine fish proposals blocked the listing of a number of species desperately in need of international trade protections. The failed CITES Appendix II listing proposals for the porbeagle shark and spiny dogfish are particularly alarming, given the 90 to 99 percent decline of these species in some areas. In addition to the FAO's scientifically questionable conclusions, many countries engaged in or profiting from their continued trade further jeopardized their survival by opposing the listings. Appendix I and II listings were approved for the sawfish species and European eel, respectively. The sawfish trade ban, except for a small live trade exemption in Australia, was overdue considering that this species has experienced a 90 percent decline and has been extirpated from many parts of its former range. It is hoped that the Appendix II listing for the eel will reverse its significant decline caused by over-exploitation for international trade and habitat threats. US efforts to list red and pink coralsÑheavily exploited for the manufacturing of jewelryÑin Appendix II succeeded initially in committee, only to be defeated in plenary after a night of intense lobbying by Tunisia, other user countries and the coral industry. For the beautiful Banggai cardinalfish, Indonesia's eleventh hour decision to oppose an Appendix II listing sought by the United States and a complete lack of support from other countries forced a withdrawal of the proposal before a vote. In opposing this listing, Indonesia claimed it was taking steps to protect this species and pleaded with the other delegates to not harm the Banggai people's "hopes and dreams" by listing the species. Indonesia did not disclose that it has not proactively protected the cardinalfish or its habitat, or that only 60 fishermen are involved in the cardinalfish trade. Without international protection, some experts predict that this species could become extinct within a decade, if collection for the aquaria trade continues at it present pace. Ironically, the species will soon be listed as "endangered" by the International Union for the Conservation of NatureÑthough this designation provides no protection from trade. While the debate was intense on many species proposals, elephants, whales and tigers generated the most heated controversies. There was concern that China would seek approval to reopen its domestic tiger trade, using parts from the 5,000 tigers imprisoned on its tiger farms (See AWI Quarterly, Spring 2007). Though tiger farm owners continue to push China to rescind the 1993 trade ban, claiming that trade in farmed tiger parts will help save wild tigers, nearly all of the world's tiger experts agree that it would cause the extinction of tigers in the wild. Fortunately, CITES member countries made it clear to China that lifting the tiger trade ban was unacceptable and would doom wild tigers to extinction. However, China questioned the authority of CITES to dictate its domestic trade decisions and intimated that it may still reopen the domestic trade in tiger parts in the future. After Japan's stinging defeats only days earlier at the International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting in Anchorage, its efforts to undermine CITES protections for whales provided for both tense and comical theatre. CITES member countries roundly rejected Japan's proposal to review the listing designation of all great whalesÑa first step toward downlisting whale species in order to resume international trade in their products. At the same time, a slim majority approved language introduced by Australia to prohibit any such CITES species reviews until and unless the IWC lifts the moratorium against commercial whaling. In the subsequent plenary session, Norway, Iceland, and several of Japan's "puppet nations" engaged in a belabored exercise in procedural gymnastics, attempting to reopen Australia's proposal for renewed discussion. They failed, and Australia's proposal survived intact. Unlike the whale debate, deliberations over elephants and the ivory trade occurred behind closed doors. Delegates and ministers from the African countries met repeatedly to develop a compromise between contrasting ivory trade proposals. Kenya and Mali, recognizing the significant increase in elephant poaching incidents, proposed a 20-year moratorium on ivory trade. Conversely, several southern African countries, including Botswana, South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia, sought approval for an annual ivory trade. The resultant deal called for a 9-year moratorium on ivory trading, but only after a one-off sale of nearly all stockpiled ivory from the four countries with Japan. Many experts believe creating such a legal market for ivory will increase the incidence of poaching to feed the increasing demand for ivory in the Far East. Illegal ivory can be laundered easily when so-called "legal" ivory is permitted in the market. After two weeks of debate and controversy, only a handful of species were provided increased protection from international trade. Even those species' future depends on the commitment of CITES member countries to implement the treatyÑsomething that few countries appear to embrace. Though CITES may be the best tool available to control the international trade in wild species, it is not a panacea to reverse the severe and ongoing loss of biodiversity on the planet. Caption: On July 18, 1989, Kenya's then-President Daniel Troitich Arap Moi burned 12 tons of stockpiled ivory to demonstrate a commitment to saving elephants. Caption: Bobcats retained their CITES protection after a proposal by the United States was rejected overwhelmingly at the 2007 annual meeting. Cooperation Counts Dr. Andrew Winterborn of the University of Rochester Medical Center trains rhesus macaques to take juice from syringes. Our study was conducted on caged animals during their semi-annual testing and physical exam for tuberculosis, with the goal of comparing the efficacy of two orally dosed anesthetic regimens for chemical immobilization in rhesus macaques versus the standard protocol of intramuscular ketamine. The effects of the dosing route on hematological stress were also evaluated. One of the major components for the success of this study required that all animals accept oral dosing, which was achieved through operant conditioningÑwhat is commonly known as positive reinforcement. The 5-day-a-week, month-long task of training the macaques was broken down into three steps. The first step of shaping the desired behavior involved establishing a positive relationship between the macaque and the trainer. This objective was achieved when the animal approached the front of the cage voluntarily after the trainer entered the room. Step two involved restricting the animal to the front quarter of the cage by using the squeeze device. A raisin was placed on the tip of a fruit juice-filled 5 cc syringe and presented to the animal. This encouraged the animal to approach the syringe with his or her mouth or fingers to take the fruit, at which point the trainer gently squirted a little juice into the macaque's mouth or hand. This process was repeated until all of the animals voluntarily approached the syringe and drank all of the juice. Once an animal readily suckled or licked the juice from the syringe, he or she was rewarded with a grape or small piece of fruit. Finally, in step three, animals were offered the juice without being confined to the front of the cage. Once again, the macaques were rewarded for drinking all of the juice from the syringes. By the end of the month, 16 of the 18 animals (88.89 percent) had been successfully taught to drink juice from a syringe. Four of the 18 animals were immediately interested in the syringe and readily came forward to drink the liquid. The remaining 14 required more intensive operant training, with 12 finally succeeding. The time constraint was the limiting factor in training the remaining two animals. One month was not sufficient, although some progress was made. They would both approach the front of the cage when observed and would take treats from the end of the syringe, though they would not drink. Several different liquids were used to see if this would facilitate training, without success. Throughout the month, each training session lasted a maximum of five minutes, and if the desired behavior was achieved in less time, the session was stopped. The average total training time per animal, excluding the time invested in the two animals who did not successfully accept oral dosing, was 13 ± 8.6 minutes. The shortest training period was three minutes, with the animal accepting oral dosing during the first training session. The longest training period was 35 minutes. Operant conditioning for oral dosing has many applications. If macaques are trained to accept liquid from syringes, they can receive test compounds in pharmaceutical testing by voluntarily accepting the liquid and being rewarded for it. This functions as an alternative to the current practice of gavage. In addition, oral dosing has implications for husbandry and veterinary procedures. If an animal is trained to drink from a syringe, medication can be given orally instead of injected. In all instances, the primate is an active participant in the procedure. The key to effective operant training is finding a palatable fluid for each individual animal and identifying a reward when they ingest all of the fluids. Successful oral dose training allowed for the evaluation of the efficacy of oral dosing for sedation. Our study concluded that oral dosing alone was not sufficient to achieve a state of sedation to allow for safe handling. However, animals who received ketamine and medetomidine, followed by supplemental intramuscular ketamine, did have a smoother induction and recovery. Serum cortisol and glucose levels were unchanged across all groups. In contrast, differences were observed in the leukogram profiles, indicating that oral dosed animals experienced a higher level of stress. It was hypothesized that this was a result of their light state of anesthesia, not a direct result of oral dosing. Small Changes, Big Results University of Guelph researcher Allison Bechard examines how weaning age influences the welfare of laboratory mice. Laboratory mice are one of the most commonly used animals in biomedical research, meaning that relatively small changes to their early husbandry could have lasting effects on the health and well-being of millions of animals. The practice of early weaning, for example, can be a cause of stress for almost any animal, and it is typical for young mice in the laboratory. They are usually separated from their mothers at the age of 3 weeks, whereas they would not disperse in nature until about a month later. Mouse pups are born in a highly immature state and depend completely on their mothers for survival. The standard management-imposed separation of the mother and young occurs during a fragile developmental period of neural and behavioral organization. Along with curtailed maternal care, modified social milieu due to early separation of the sexes is a consequence of disrupting the family unit at this age. These influential effects of maternal and social deprivation are often largely overlooked in relation to welfare and as factors in research results. We weaned C57Bl6 (B6) and CD-1 litters at either the standard 21 days or the more naturalistic 35 days to investigate the effects of this artificial, premature disruption to the mother-young bond. Offspring from 14 litters were screened for neophobia and anxiety (e.g. elevated plus-maze, open field, acoustic startle response) between 2 to 3 months of age, and for stereotypic behavior (e.g. bar mouthing, somersaulting) and alopecia at an age of 6 to 7 months. The hypothesis was that delaying weaning age would improve adult welfare. The chosen strains were two of the most commonly used inbred and outbred mouse lines, while selected behavioral parameters bridge the previously distinct fields of neuroscience and welfare. Results indicate that delaying weaning reduces adult anxiety, as measured by an elevated plus-maze (p<0.05). In females, weaning at a later age seems to decrease the prevalence of both alopecia (p<0.01) and stereotypic behavior (p<0.1) in adulthood. There was also a 30 percent reduction in the acoustic startle responses for delay weaned mice (p<0.05), although these findings need to be replicated on a larger scale. Overall, the results supported our hypothesis and were favorable toward weaning when the mice are 5 weeks old, compared to the 3 week standard imposed by most facilities. Preliminary data suggests that delaying weaning produces animals with lower levels of anxiety, abnormal behavior and alopecia. The data presented here should also encourage researchers not to underestimate the importance of the age at which young are separated from their mothers when measuring adult behavior. Finally, weaning mice at an age closer to natural dispersal helps to develop a normal phenotype; it could potentially be further explored as a protective mechanism for enduring life in captivity and to reduce welfare problems in research animals. Later weaning is a simple, relatively low-cost manipulation of early husbandry that could be used to produce more stress-resistant phenotypes with better health and welfare. In collaboration with Jackson Laboratory, we are now working on replicating this work on a larger scale to provide the basis for future research into the effects of weaning age on welfare. These studies were funded by the Animal Welfare Institute Refinement Awards and made possible through the generous support of an anonymous donor. The Animal Welfare Institute thanks the following individuals for their assistance in reviewing the proposals submitted for the 2006 Refinement Awards: Jas Barley, Southampton General Hospital Lorraine Bell, University of Colorado Health Sciences Lynette Chave, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries Alyssa Foulkes, University of Guelph Roger Francis, University of Bristol School of Medical Sciences Kay Steward, University of Notre Dame Karolina Westlund, Stockholm University BioSafaris: A Smart Dissection Alternative by Lynette Hart, University of California at Davis With primary startup funding from the Animal Welfare Institute, researchers from the University of California at Davis have developed BioSafaris, a project using the latest interactive learning technology to address the current gap in pre-college biology education. The web-based software prototype will introduce three body systemsÑdigestive, respiratory, and cardiovascularÑin intermediate and high school life science classes. BioSafaris will present human anatomy and physiology, along with examples from comparative anatomy, key cellular components, and physiological problems. Over the past decade, we have observed a rapid shift away from consumptive uses of animals for teaching anatomy and physiology. New resources have been created to assist students in learning subject material and manipulative surgical tasks without requiring animals specifically for the procedures. The exploding World Wide Web, complemented by the development of non-invasive imaging methods for viewing living organisms, presents enhanced opportunities for creating learning resources that are readily accessible to anyone and reusable. Yet this modernization has not trickled down to pre-college classrooms, and younger students are presented substandard lab materials that fail to convey the excitement of learning human and animal biology. By offering opportunities to ask questions, modify variables, perturb the systems to simulate disruptions in homeostasis, and assess the resulting effects on the human body, BioSafaris will make the learning process an interesting experience for intermediate- aged students. The software will allow participants to rotate bodies, zoom in, change transparency and explore body parts visually by simple mouse movements. Now midway in production, data for the software prototype have been extracted and simplified from the Visible Human dataset from the National Institutes of Health National Library of Medicine. We are working on creating sample interactive tools for simulation, measurement and perturbation of the three systems. Focus groups of teachers assess the web-based prototype in concept and design. This science education program will convey the thrill of science and seek to awaken students' pursuit of learning. In the meantime, a simulation system supporting the perturbation and measurement tools for each system needs to be developed. For example, the cardiovascular system will be represented as a graph-like structure indicating how blood flows through the human body, and a simulation that approximates the blood pressure, heart rate and oxygen levels needs to be developed in order to provide data for students to measure. The prototype design for the simulations of each of the three systems will elicit the necessary variables required to produce the level of realism desired for our final project. While the traditional study of biology in pre-college education evolved by using animals as a surrogate method for learning about human biology, we have chosen to focus primarily on the study of humans. BioSafaris will engage learners on topics relevant to their families, such as indigestion and changes in blood pressure or heart rate. Many students have no further biology education after high school, and it is our hope that this learning experience will assist them in managing their own lifestyles and lifelong medical care. Project team: Lynette Hart, Stuart Meyers, UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine Bernd Hamann, UC Davis Institute for Data Analysis and Visualization (IDAV) and Department of Computer Science Marco Molinaro, UC Davis Center for Biophotonics Frazier Stevenson, UC Davis School of Medicine Bill Storm, Davis Joint Unified School District David Wiley, Stratovan Corporation Mary Wood, UC Davis Health Sciences Library Bequests to AWI If you would like to help assure the Animal Welfare Institute's future through a provision in your will, this general form of bequest is suggested: I give, devise and bequeath to the Animal Welfare Institute, located in Washington, D.C., the sum of $_____________ and/or (specifically described property). Donations to AWI, a not-for-profit corporation exempt under Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3), are tax deductible. We welcome any inquiries you may have. In cases in which you have specific wishes about the disposition of your bequest, we suggest you discuss such provisions with your attorney. Reviews Making Lives Easier for Animals in Research Labs Animal Welfare Institute, 2007 ISBN: 0938414976 188 pages, $5.00 One free copy is available to all AWI Members, libraries and lab techs The Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) just published Making Lives Easier for Animals in Research Labs, a new book of discussions that took place through our online Laboratory Animal Refinement & Enrichment Forum (LAREF) between October 2002 and May 2007. This book was compiled with the hope of encouraging compassion in all those who are responsible for the care and well-being of animals in research labs. Of more than 5,000 comments posted, approximately 3,000 were selected because of their practical animal welfare relevance. Based on the first-hand experiences of 62 animal technicians, 38 researchers and 13 veterinarians, the book presents ways to improve housing and handling conditions for animals in research facilities. Topics include the human-animal relationship, pair formation and housing of monkeys, environmental enrichment for rabbits, bedding for rodents, exercise for dogs, adoption of animals after research completion, and minimizing stress reactions during procedures. Comments were edited and supplemented with relevant references from scientific literature. Please contact us if you would like to obtain a copy, or view the book online at www.awionline.org/pubs/LAREF/LAREF-bk.html. Tyger! Tyger! by Elizabeth Stanley Enchanted Lion Books, 2007 ISBN: 1592700683 32 pages,$16.95 In a story based on a real-life animal sanctuary located just outside of Bangkok, Thailand, author Elizabeth Stanley tells the tale of Buddhist monks who care for Indo-Chinese tigers. These animals are one of the world's most endangered species; it is estimated that fewer than 250 remain in Thailand, due to poaching and habitat loss caused by deforestation. The inspirational tale of monks living in harmony with the majestic tigers reveals the power of the human/animal bond. When the tigers become threatened by illegal hunting, a young monk is compelled to take in two cubs and protect them from harm. Soon there are as many tigers as monks at the monastery, and the young monk has a dream to build a peaceful sanctuary that the animals can truly call home. Both children and adults will be moved by this beautifully illustrated fable. Just for Elephants By Carol Buckley Tilbury House Publishers, 2006 ISBN: 0884482839 32 pages, $16.95 The Elephant Sanctuary in Hohenwald, Tenn. is a 100-acre refuge where "retired" captive pachyderms can roam free and recuperate from the stresses of their former lives. Known for their strong social ties, these intelligent beings suffer greatly when confined at zoos and circuses. In Just for Elephants, author Carol Buckley introduces young readers to Jenny and Shirley, two Elephant Sanctuary inhabitants who epitomize the species' tendency to form intense bonds. Shirley is an injured elephant who used to perform in the circus, and had gone on to live in a zoo. When brought to the Sanctuary, she quickly reunited with Jenny, who she had known as a baby elephant in the circus. The old friends continue to live happily with their elephant family, demonstrating the animals' need to live naturally in groups. Beijing Olympics 2008 Part Three: The Deadly Fur Trade in China As the world eagerly gears up for the 2008 Olympics in Beijing, China's record of animal cruelty is being revealed to all. At the country's fur farms, foxes, rabbits, mink and other furbearing animals are exposed to extreme weather conditions and confined to small, barren wire mesh cages before being transported under horrendous conditions to be skinned. A yearlong undercover investigation in China's Hebei Province conducted by the Environment and Animal Society of Taiwan and Swiss Animal Protection revealed that, prior to being skinned, the animals are pulled from their cages, thrown to the ground, and bludgeoned in an attempt to stun them. Unfortunately, many animals are still alive and fully conscious during the final barbaric process of being hung up by their legs to be skinned. China supplies more than half of the finished fur garments imported for sale in the United States. While many fur products contain a "Made in China" label, additional pelts often move through international auction houses and are purchased there before being distributed to manufacturers all over the world. Products may read "Made in Italy" or "Made in France," even though the fur they contain originated in China. Moreover, a loophole in the federal Fur Products Labeling Act exempts garments that cost less than $150 from truth-in-labeling provisions. Therefore, while the import of dog and cat fur is illegal in the United States, garments containing such fur can be found in retail stores. Whether or not you are a consumer, we hope you will voice your objections to this gruesome trade. YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE 1. If you choose to purchase fur, please ask retailers for documentation on the true source of their products. Be aware that fur products under a certain value may not be labeled a tall. 2. Contact the Chinese ambassador and urge him to China and urge him to put pressure on the Chinese government to stop the cruel practices associated with the treatment of animals killed for fur. Write to: His Excellency Zhou Wenzhong Ambassador of the People's Republic of China Embassy of the People's Republic of China 2300 Connecticut Ave. N.W. Washington, DC 20008 202-328-2574; 202-328-2582 (fax) Caption: As the largest producer of fur garments in the world, China is home to countless fur farms that annually skin millions of animalsÑincluding dogs and catsÑfor their fur. AWI Quarterly Summer 2007 Volume 56 Number 3 Animal Welfare Institute P.O. Box 3650, Washington, DC 20027 Founder Christine Stevens Directors Cynthia Wilson, Chair Barbara K. Buchanan Penny Eastman John Gleiber Charles M. Jabbour Mary Lee Jensvold, Ph.D. Cathy Liss Officers Cathy Liss, President Cynthia Wilson, Vice President Charles M. Jabbour, CPA, Treasurer John Gleiber, Secretary Scientific Committee Marjorie Anchel, Ph.D. Gerard Bertrand, Ph.D. Roger Fouts, Ph.D. F. Barbara Orlans, Ph.D. Roger Payne, Ph.D. Samuel Peacock, M.D. Hope Ryden Robert Schmidt John Walsh, M.D. International Committee Aline de Aluja, D.M.V., Mexico Ambassador Tabarak Husain, Bangladesh Angela King, United Kingdom Godofredo Stutzin, Chile Agnes Van Volkenburgh, D.M.V., Poland Alexey Yablokov, Ph.D., Russia Staff and Consultants Tracy Basile, Editorial Consultant Catherine Carroll, Communications Associate Tom Garrett, Consultant for Rural Affairs Diane Halverson, Farm Animal Advisor Marlene Halverson, Farm Animal Economic Advisor Christopher J. Heyde, Research Associate Vivian Leven, Research Associate Andrea Lococo, Wildlife Consultant Will Mangum, Graphic Designer Susan Millward, Research Associate Serda Ozbenian, Research Assistant Annie Reinhardt, Information Specialist Viktor Reinhardt, D.M.V., Ph.D., Laboratory Animal Advisor Ava Rinehart, Senior Graphic Designer Jen Rinick, Public Outreach Associate D.J. Schubert, Wildlife Biologist Tracy Silverman, Legal Associate Wendy Swann, Research Associate Jill Umphlett, Administrative Assistant