Tag: Priscilla Feral

Friends of Animals Condemns Chiron Bombing

While many animal rights activists and groups were cheering the bombs set off at Chiron Corp. in August, Friends of Animals did quickly issue a press release condemning both that bombing specifically and extremist actions in general.

Friends of Animals’ said,

On Saturday the 30th of August, an obscure group called the Revolutionary Cells claimed responsibility for the two small explosive devices that went off early Thursday morning at the Chiron Corp. buildings in Emeryville, reportedly in protest against the firms’ relationship with animal research group Huntingdon Life Sciences. The blasts did not injure anyone, but a handful of Chiron employees were reportedly in the building.

“Vandalism, arson, explosives, and threats have no place in a movement for animal rights,” said Priscilla Feral, president of Friends of Animals.

“Such irresponsible acts are unacceptable in any movement for the betterment of society, and we categorically denounce them.”

. . .

“Clearly there is a tremendous social value in informing the public about the detriments of cross-species transplantation and other biotech research using animals, and in bringing the urgent and multi-layered ethical problems into the open,” said Priscilla Feral. “But this can only be done by education. It cannot be done through acts of intimidation or the endangerment of works.”

Unfortunately Friends of Animals was apparently in the minority of animal rights opinion about the Chiron bombing (it was the only group, to my knowledge, that bothered to issue a condemnation of the attack).

Source:

Friends of Animals condemns Friday’s pipe bomb attack in the city of Emeryville, California. Friends of Animals, August 2003.

Alaskan Governor Signs Wolf Cull Bill

Apparently willing to risk the promised boycott from Friends of Animals, Alaska Gov. Frank Murkowski signed a bill in June that will allow private citizens to hunt wolves from airplanes.

The law also alters the rules that determine when the Alaska Department of Fish and Game can order a culling of the wolf population. Under the old rules, it could only do so if it found that there was a decline in the population of animals that wolves prey on. Under the new rules, the department can order a cull of wolves when their numbers grow regardless of the impact such growth is having on prey species.

The Department of Fish and Game will likely use the aerial hunts to thin the population of wolves near McGrath, where residents would like to see the moose population expand to provide more hunting and economic opportunities. The department already has a project underway to capture and remove bears from around McGrath.

Friends of Animals, meanwhile, apparently believes there are constitutional issues with the law and are holding off on calling for a boycott hoping that those issues will render the law moot,

FOA believes that there are legal problems with the new statute. Among other things, it appears that this statute violates the Alaska Constitution’s separation of powers rule by invading the legal authority of the Governor and the Commissioner of the Department of Fish and Game. We brought this problem to the attention of the Alaska Attorney General, and we expect that it be addressed before anyone tries to take any action under the statute. Aside from that constitutional infirmity, there are also some serious legal, administrative and fiscal impediments to implementation of the statute. FOA anticipates litigation if the Game Board tries to use this new statute to initiate wolf-killing. If wolf control is implemented, Friends of Animals will call for a tourism boycott of Alaska during the months of November 2003 through January 2004 — when tourists book summer visits to Alaska with tourist agencies. — Priscilla Feral

Sources:

Murkowski signs aerial wolf control bill. Associated Press, June 19, 2003.

Friends of Animals Unhappy with Proposed Pig Race

Derby, Connecticut is planning to hold a pig race as part of its Derby Day festivities on June 29, which has drawn fire from Friends of Animals which considers it cruel to allow spectators to watch pigs race around a track.

Friends of Animals’ Jessica Rae Patton told The Connecticut Post,

It’s inhumane to pigs because pigs can’t sweat; they have no sweat glands and can’t pant. They need pools of water and mud holes to keep cool, and they shouldn’t be made to run in the summer heat. It’s ludicrous

John Coscia, a member of the Derby Cultural Commission, countered that the animals are treated humanely and have access to wallowing pools and rest areas. Coscia told The Connecticut Post,

I don’t think it is inhumane like they say. I’ve seen these pig races before and they’re fine.

Of course Friends of Animals thinks it is cruel to ever have animals perform for entertainment purposes. According to Patton,

We don’t think any animal should be forced to perform for entertainment.

That is a sentiment that Friends of Animals’ Priscilla Feral reinforced, saying,

I don’t think the pigs should be used for entertainment purposes in spectator sport. Pig should be left alone.

Source:

Pig race promotion prompts complaints. Associated Press, May 25, 2003.

Official: Pig racers for Derby Day not mistreated. Anthony Spinelli, The Connecticut Post, May 12, 2003.

Alaska Board of Game Approves Wolf Kill

In March, the Alaska Board of Game voted unanimously to approve a plan to kill wolves and move black bears in 520-square mile area in interior Alaska, in order to boost the moose population in the area. The proposal requires the additional approval of the state Fish and Game Department and Alaska’s governor, Frank Murkowski.

The plan also calls for a temporary moratorium on moose hunting in the McGrath area.

Friends of Animals’ Priscilla Feral has threatened a consumer boycott of Alaska if it approves the wolf kill. She was quoted by the Associated Press as saying that she was “horrified but not surprised” by the board’s decision.

In testimony before the Alaska Board of Game on March 6, Feral told the board,

If the Board of Game convinces Gov. Murkowski to approve this proposal, and appease the predator control minority, as opposed to most Alaskans and wildlife-watching tourists who denounce shot-gunning wolves from helicopters, FoA will initiate demonstrations and protests all over the country ? and internationally –matching every dollar you devote to killing wolves in launching an offensive.

Murkowski is himself a hunter who has said before that he is unafraid of a consumer boycott of his state and will almost certainly approve the plan.

Source:

Game Board backs predator control near McGrath. Associated Press, March 12, 2003.

Friends of Animals Threatens Alaska Boycott

The Friends of Animals is threatening a tourism boycott of Alaska if the Alaska Game Board follows through on a proposal to thin the wolf pouplation in order to boost the moose population.

At issue is a 520 square mile area near McGrath, Alaska (about 200 miles northest of Anchorage). According to biologists with the Alaska Fish and Game Department, the 490 moose inthe area produce 344 calves annually. By the time black bears, wolves, grizzly bears and human hunters have killed adult moose, the herd remains static in size.

The state would like to remove some predators in order to allow the moose population to increase so that hunters can kill 130-150 of the animals each year instead of the 98 or so that they harvest currently.

Friends of Animals’ Priscilla Feral promises a tourism boycott of Alaska if the state goes ahead with the predator removal.

“For every dollar you spend to kill a wolf,” Feral told the Alaska Game Board, “we will match in launching an offensive.”

Feral said that her group would take out advertisements in major newspapers urging tourists to avoid Alaska.

Source:

Alaska wolves plan prompts boycott. Dan Joling, Associated Press, March 8, 2003.

Friends of Animals' Hilarious Hypocrisy

Back in May, Friends of Animals blasted People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals for supporting Burger King’s introduction of a veggie burger. In a letter distributed on the Internet, Priscilla Feral noted that the BK Veggie Burger was not vegan since the buns include butter. She concluded,

How much sadder if ethical and religious vegetarians have to sue animal protection groups for misleading the public about the ingredients in Burger King products.

The hilarious thing is that at the same time Feral was writing this, Friends of Animals was promoting a cookbook on its web site that includes recipes that call for shrimp and butter!

Friends of Animals quickly took down the page after it was publicized by critics of the group, but the group had a web page that listed several recipes and noted that were from The Moosewood Restaurant Daily Special Cookbook. Friends of Animals provided a handy link to an online bookstore where people could buy the book and Friends of Animals would get a small cut of the proceeds.

Profiting from a book that sanctions the killing of poor helpless shrimp and the exploitation of cows for butter? How cruel.

Source:

It’s easy to have delicious vegan meals and desserts! Friends of Animals.