SEND ME TO THE AVMA EXECUTIVE BOARD TO PROMOTE HUMANE ANIMAL LEGISLATION

February 5th, 2010

John G Hynes Dvm February 5 at 5:19pm

I NEED YOUR HELP, and it only involves posting my message, and calling your veterinarian- and asking all of your friends to do the same ( if your vet is in NEW YORK, CONNECTICUT, NEW HAMPSHIRE, MAINE, MASSACHUSETTS, RHODE ISLAND, OR VERMONT.)

I am one of two candidates for the AVMA Executive Board in District 1. My intent is clear- to be a voice for humane animal legislation, and to push for policies that help reduce suffering and cruelty in our food industry, entertainment industry, and all aspects of our society that cause unnecessary pain and suffering. Please check my website, www.nycvet.org, or contact me for more information on my position statements.

WHAT I NEED YOU TO DO: Call your vet TODAY- and ask the same of your friends- ASK YOUR VET TO VOTE FOR ME WHEN THEY RECEIVE THEIR BALLOT IN THE MAIL NEXT WEEK. My only goal is to help to reduce the suffering of millions of animals in this country, that the AVMA, and their Animal Welfare Committee, has not adequately attempted to do.

My opponent, Dr. John de Jong, has said of my candidacy:

“I called the AVMA offices today before they had the chance to send me an email indicating that they have received the nomination of another candidate for the EB seat. The nomination is of John G. Hynes of New York who was nominated by petition. I urge you to google this individual who is a member of HSUS, PETA, and other animal welfare groups. Attached is a quote of his that was made or printed in August of 2009”. Dr. John de Jong

This is the quote of mine that he was referring to:
“The AVMA, and the AVMA’s Animal Welfare Committee, prove time and time again that they are unable or unwilling to be a significant voice for the animals that we, as veterinarians, have sworn to protect. The AVMA refuses to take any significant positions or stand on the most important animal welfare issues, and instead, panders to the pharmaceutical industry, agribusiness, as well as the conservative network of veterinarians who look at animals as commodities and the source of their income. The AVMA will continue to lose members, and in time, will realize that the organization is becoming less influential as they lose their credibility by refusing to stand up and be a true voice for more humane treatment of all animals. Until that time, I look to the Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association, as many more veterinarians are doing, to lead us into the future, and be the voice for real change in the animal welfare movement”. —John G. Hynes, DVM

If you want to make a difference, and you want to help me make a difference from inside the AVMA, then SEND ME TO THE BOARD. CALL YOUR VET TODAY, and THANK YOU for your support.

JOIN ME ON FACEBOOK!

January 21st, 2010

http://www.facebook.com/jghdvm?ref=profile

A Place to Find Our Way to Change the World for Animals

January 21st, 2010


<a href=”
http://www.ourhenhouse.com“>

Help end Whaling

January 13th, 2010

Circus Animal Abuse- Letter from AVMA Journal

January 11th, 2010

Discussion on treatment of captive elephants continues
After reading the responses by members of the AVMA Animal Welfare Committee to Dr. Paula Kislak’s letter to the editor,1 and after reviewing the AVMA’s policies and positions, I am left to conclude that the committee’s actions are inadequate and insufficient as they relate to animal welfare.

Dr. Kislak’s main point was that a coercive management system used for elephants that is inherently unsafe, inhumane, and prone to serious abuse is condoned by the AVMA’s policy statement. Drs. Miller and Golab sidestepped the issue of humane treatment and discussed management, training, and husbandry of elephants. They did not address the issue of bullhooks and neglected to acknowledge the documented abuses of elephants by Ringling Bros. and other circuses.2

Circus animal abuse is as old as the circus itself. Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus will finally stand trial (scheduled to commence on October 20, 2008) for multiple violations of the Endangered Species Act.3 The lawsuit is being brought by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Animal Welfare Institute, The Fund for Animals, and the Animal Protection Institute.4 These organizations should have our full support as they pursue this case, which could have far-reaching effects as related to the use and abuses of animals in entertainment.

Drs. Miller and Golab state, “Articles in the press and lawsuits regarding elephants must be evaluated critically, as the information provided is sometimes misinterpreted or distorted in line with the beliefs of various interest groups.” Yet, in my opinion, it is these groups that are actually making strides forward and truly advancing the cause of animal welfare. We should applaud them for stepping up and actually taking an active and positive role in an area that has often been overlooked in veterinary medicine.

John G. Hynes, DVM

New Providence, NJ

1. Miller DS, Golab GC. Thoughts on AVMA policy on elephant guides and tethers (lett). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2008;233:550–551.
2. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Available at: www.circuses.com. Accessed Sep 9, 2008.
3. Born Free USA united with Animal Protection Institute. Ringling’s treatment of its elephants is indefensible. Available at: www.api4animals.com. Accessed Sep 10, 2008.
4. Born Free USA united with Animal Protection Institute. US District Court Document, District of Columbia. Available at: www.api4animals.com. Accessed Sep 10, 2008.

Drs. Miller and Golab respond:
We share Dr. Hynes’ concerns about humanely meeting the needs of captive elephants. Where we differ is that Dr. Hynes does not appear to believe that management, training, and husbandry are key components of humane treatment. To the contrary, they are core to maintaining physical and mental health in elephants. Training helps facilitate skin and foot care, as well as our ability to safely administer fluids, assist with parturition, and perform other veterinary procedures. We strongly believe in training animals, where possible, as an alternative to chemical or manual restraint. Guides and tethers are tools that can be used to humanely train elephants. Abuse of these tools is condemned.

Dr. Hynes chooses “coercive” to describe approaches to elephant management. Its use in this context often reflects a philosophic view opposed to human dominion over animals. In our opinion, coercion may apply to a range of methods used to obtain desired behaviors from animals. The spectrum extends from clear instances of animal abuse to actions such as denial of attention or treats, which are more benign than the strategies that animals sometimes use to communicate expectations of appropriate behavior to each other. As everyone should condemn coercion that is abusive, we believe our disagreement centers on coercion that is more benign. If such concerns are specific for elephants or other nondomestic animals in captivity or for specific uses, they are best addressed by discussing the underlying view. If applicable to all animals under human control, then leash training of dogs, harness training of horses, and other activities might also be considered inappropriate. Most of society and the veterinary profession do not currently support this view. A challenge for veterinarians is how to restrain animals for venipuncture, bandage changes, and other procedures in a fashion no more coercive than the application of quality training. Regardless of an animal’s willingness to cooperate, a human is making a decision about what is best for the animal’s welfare and imposing this on the animal.

Implicit to Drs. Kislak and Hynes’ use of legal citations are unstated assumptions that actions against a defendant are indicative of the defendant’s guilt and that all similar persons or entities are similarly guilty of inappropriate activities. We disagree with both assumptions, and our judicial system does not support them either. As it would be inappropriate to ban leashes for all dogs because of the actions of a few people, we do not support universal prohibitions on use of training tools for elephants when they can be, and regularly are, used humanely.

It is not clear whether Dr. Hynes is opposed to the keeping of elephants in captivity or merely to the use of elephants in circuses. Both are valid philosophic views; however, dialogue is best served by addressing those views rather than tangential concerns. The AVMA supports the humane use of animals for human purposes, and the Animal Welfare Committee has developed policy specific to the humane treatment of animals used in entertainment.

David S. Miller, MS, DVM, DACZM

Zoo and Wildlife Medicine Representative, AVMA Animal Welfare Committee and Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colo

Gail C. Golab, PhD, DVM, MACVSc (Animal Welfare)

Director, Animal Welfare Division, AVMA Schaumburg, Ill

Help Ric O’Barry Stop the Dolphin Slaughter in Japan

January 11th, 2010

Help Me Support This Cause

HELP END CIRCUS ANIMAL ABUSE IN NEW YORK CITY

January 9th, 2010

Please sign this petition to NYC Council Speaker Christine Quinn, and the NYC Council, asking them to vote for and pass INTRO 389, which would ban wild and exotic animal performances in New York City.

Please click on this link, and sign-  Pass on to your address book also.  Thank you!

John G. Hynes, DVM
www.NYCVET.org

My Testimony to Massachusetts Senate in support of Senate Bill 1870- An Act Related to the Treatment of Elephants

January 4th, 2010

My Testimony to Massachusetts Senate in support of Senate Bill 1870- An Act Related to the Treatment of Elephants

November 12th, 2009

November 8, 2009

To Members of the Committee on Tourism, Arts and Cultural Development:

I am a veterinarian, and I currently practice in New York and New Jersey. My purpose today is to offer testimony to support the passage of Senate Bill 1870- An Act Related to the Treatment of Elephants/ Commonwealth of Mass.

For the past two years, I have been actively involved with the New York League of Humane Voters, the Humane Society of the United States and other animal welfare groups to educate the public about circus animal abuse. One of the main tools used on elephants for physical punishment and to intentionally inflict fear and injury is the “bullhook”.

I have actively lobbied for the passage of Intro 389, a bill introduced by Council Member Rosie Mendez in NYC, which would ban wild/exotic animal performances in NYC, with particular regard to elephants.

On November 5th, 2009, I met with Speaker of the New York City Council Christine Quinn regarding obtaining a hearing for Intro 389. Council Member Mendez was present, along with RaeLeann Smith, Circus and Government Affairs Specialist, and Captive Animal Rescue and Enforcement Agent from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Patrick Kwan, NYS Director of the Humane Society of the United States, and John Phillips, Executive Director of the New York League of Humane Voters. Speaker Quinn watched the entire undercover video of Ringling Bros handlers beating and abusing the elephants before their performances at Madison Square Garden in NYC last summer. She listened intently to the evidence that was presented, which will hopefully lead to a hearing and a vote on this bill.

Abuse of elephants in circuses is as old as the circus itself, but it should no longer be an accepted practice. These majestic animals are deprived of almost all natural behaviors in the captivity of circuses. Many of them are captured in the wild, and traumatized during transport to their new destinations. They are beaten until they perform acts that are not only unnatural, but dangerous for the animals and the trainers. When they are not performing, they spend most of their time chained and/or travelling in boxcars or trailers.

The elephants that are born in captivity are taken from their mothers at very young ages, often with the knowledge of USDA inspectors, and trained for the circus. Although this is a clear violation of the Animal Welfare Act, inspectors frequently look the other way. The USDA violations for neglect, mistreatment, and abuse against circus owners, trainers, and handlers could fill volumes.

Most children do not want to hurt animals, or see them suffer. If children knew the suffering and cruelty that occurs under the Big Top, I would surmise that most of those children would choose not go to an animal circus. There are several lawsuits currently pending against Ringling and other circuses for multiple violations of the Animal Welfare Act, which I am sure you will hear about in other testimony.

I ask you today to take a first step towards more humane entertainment for the people of your state. I think this bill merits immediate passage. I personally do not think it goes far enough, but this bill would at the very least, eliminate the use of a brutal instrument that more often than not is used as a weapon to punish, and to inflict fear, pain and suffering.

Sincerely,

John G. Hynes, D.V.M., P.C.

Member, Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association

USDA accredited in NY and NJ

Enc. Copy of Intro 389 (NYC)

PETA CLASSIFIED BY USDA AS DOMESTIC TERRORISTS

December 9th, 2009

War on vegetarians: PETA U.S. terrorists?

PETA is not the most popular kid on the block. Between antagonizing meat-eaters and radicalizing the use of naked ad campaigns, the animal rights group has made more than a couple enemies.

This is the first time, however, that the lawful, nonviolent organization has been officially classified as a “terrorist threat.”

In a new security form circulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the federal department asks animal experimentation facilities whether they’ve been confronted by a handful of “terrorist”  groups, including the Earth Liberation Front, known for their use of arson and explosives; the Animal Liberation Front, which popularized property destruction as a form of protest; and, yes, PETA — best known for distributing gory videos of factory farming.

While the USDA form doesn’t necessarily signal anything, some fear repercussions. Will Potter at Green Is The New Red suggests that PETA’s new classification may point to a change in the government’s willingness to charge nonviolent protestors under new antiterror legislation.

Consider the case of Adriana Stumpo, Nathan Pope, Joseph Buddenberg and Maryam Khajavi, who are facing charges under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act over chanting and intent to sidewalk chalk.

“Industries that rely on factory farming,” explains Brian Merchant on Treehugger.com, “may have the lobbying muscle to get PETA listed as a terrorist threat for their benefit.”

Brayden Simms metro/ny Dec 7, 2009

VETERINARIANS DECRY ZOO ELEPHANT PLAN

November 9th, 2009

Veterinarians Decry San Antonio Zoo Elephant Plan at Thursday Press Conference

MEDIA ADVISORY

San Antonio, Tex. (November 4, 2009) – A former San Antonio Zoo veterinarian will be joined by a wildlife veterinarian and Asian elephant expert at a press conference to call for permanent closure of the San Antonio Zoo’s impoverished elephant exhibit. The experts will also advocate sending the zoo’s surviving elephant, Lucky, to a sanctuary and bar the zoo from acquiring any new elephants.

WHAT: Press conference on San Antonio Zoo elephant controversy
WHO: Former San Antonio Zoo veterinarian Mel Richardson, DVM
Wildlife biologist/veterinarian Anand Ramanathan, BVSc, MS
Representatives from Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force and VOICE for Animals
WHEN: Thursday, November 5th, 11am
WHERE: In front of the San Antonio Zoo main entrance, 3903 North St. Mary’s Street

Mel Richardson, DVM, is a captive wild animal consultant with 40 years experience working with a variety of animals, including elephants. He has been a veterinarian for 27 years, working at several zoos, including the San Antonio Zoo for five years, and at an elephant sanctuary.

Anand Ramanathan, BVSc. MS, is a wildlife biologist and veterinarian, who has worked with elephants in the wild and in zoos in the U.S. and India, where he also spearheaded a captive elephant welfare program. He is currently the Executive Director for In Defense of Animals, an international animal protection organization.

This week marks the two-year anniversary of Lucky’s solitary confinement, following the death of her companion Alport. The San Antonio Zoo has refused to send Lucky to a sanctuary, and has repeatedly stated its intention to bring in another Asian elephant, even though its future plans are to display African, and not Asian, elephants. Lucky and any companion the zoo acquires will be shipped off to destinations unknown when construction on the new elephant exhibit begins.

On Monday, In Defense of Animals (IDA) filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, charging that the San Antonio Zoo is in violation of federal animal welfare laws due to its deficient elephant display and for keeping Lucky alone, which is traumatic for this profoundly social species. The complaint followed a scathing report released by the Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force concerning a variety of animal welfare problems at the Zoo.

Contacts:
Catherine Doyle, IDA Captive Elephant Specialist, 323-301-5730, zoos@idausa.org
Suzanne Roy, IDA Program Director, 919-697-9389, sroy@idausa.org