UK: The UK Government ‘Jumps Through Hoops’ to Accommodate An Industry It Has Consistently Failed to Control. Who Are The Real Clowns In This Circus Fiasco ?


Animal Defenders International website:

Copy below of Article from ‘Animal Defenders’ (International) Magazine (UK) – Autumn / Winter 2012.

Contact the Minister responsible for letting down the British public who overwhelmingly want a ban on animals in circuses.

Ask him when the ban will be introduced; or we he continue to drag his heels like the government on so many other animal welfare issues:

E mail:

ADI Winter 2012

Government must ban wild animals in circuses as law fails Anne the elephant


Posted: 26 November 2012. Updated: 26 November 2012

Case shows regulations cannot protect animals in circuses

The decision to release circus owner Bobby Roberts with a conditional discharge, despite being convicted of cruelty to Anne the elephant, has fuelled calls for the Government to bring forward a ban on the use of wild animals in circuses.

The Government’s ‘temporary’ regulations, brought in ahead of the promised ban on wild animals in circuses, have already been shown to be weak and unenforceable with video evidence from Animal Defenders International (ADI). But the court’s decision on Friday has shown that even where a prosecution for cruelty is successful, it is meaningless.

Jan Creamer Chief Executive of ADI: “The Government’s new regulations have been shown to be pointless by the Court’s decision. These circuses are no place for animals like Anne and only a national prohibition on using them in travelling shows can prevent such suffering.”

“This judgement has sent the wrong message to the circuses – don’t worry if you break the law on care of circus animals, you’ll get away with it.”

Video filmed by ADI at the winter quarters had shown Anne the elephant to be chained, barely able to move, for three and a half weeks; this alone was judged by experts to cause more suffering than the beatings she received at the hands of a groom that led to the conviction of Bobby Roberts under the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

The case showed how inspection after inspection had failed to identify Anne’s suffering and when the case was proved Roberts was given a conditional discharge and without even a fine or order for costs.

Expert witness Donald Broom of Cambridge University told the Court that Anne probably suffered more from the chaining and isolation than from the physical abuse she endured. Roberts was seen changing the shackles from one leg to another without releasing her and was convicted for causing her to suffer by being restrained in this way.

Yet Roberts claimed that it was normally his intention for Anne to be chained for thirteen and a half hours a day – more than four times the recommended minimum in zoo guidelines. This staggering level of immobilisation is cruel in itself.

Jan Creamer: It is vital that the Government brings forward the plans to ban the use of wild animals in circuses, right now, otherwise more animals will continue to suffer, and that will be directly as a result of the Government’s decision to do nothing to protect them.

Take action!

  • Please ask Lord de Mauley, the Defra Minister responsible, when the wild animal circus ban that was promised in March will be introduced.
  • Ask your MP to push for the ban to be implemented ASAP. You can find out who your MP is and email them here.

Support our Stop Circus Suffering campaign – make a donation








UK: ‘Make CCTV Mandatory for Slaughterhouses!’ says the British Public


Past SAV links associated with this issue:


‘Make CCTV Mandatory for Slaughterhouses!’ says the British public

A YouGov poll has found that, of those who expressed a view, 73 per cent said the Government should make CCTV mandatory for all slaughterhouses in the UK.

The poll, which was conducted across Great Britain from 15-19 November, asked 3,445 people:

‘Most supermarkets insist that their slaughterhouse suppliers install CCTV, but this does not cover all abattoirs. Some people think that CCTV should be compulsory in ALL slaughterhouses, to help prevent potentially widespread illegal animal cruelty, such as the kicking, beating and punching of animals. Other people don’t think it should be made compulsory, due to the cost to slaughterhouses of installing CCTV and because some law abiding slaughterhouse owners and workers may object to being filmed at work. Do you think the government should or should not make it compulsory for CCTV to be installed in ALL slaughterhouses in the UK?’ 

60 per cent of the total (and 73 per cent of those who expressed a view) answered: The government should make it compulsory.

22 per cent answered: The government should not make it compulsory.

18 per cent answered: Don’t Know.

 The statistics for those who expressed a view in Scotland indicate that 71 per cent support mandatory CCTV. In Wales, the figure is an overwhelming 78 per cent. 

Animal Aid has been campaigning for mandatory CCTV since the national group filmed inside nine randomly chosen slaughterhouses and found breaches of animal welfare laws in eight of them. The cruelties included animals being kicked, beaten, punched and burnt with cigarettes. Animal Aid’s footage led to two men being jailed.

Says Animal Aid’s Head of Campaigns, Kate Fowler:

‘Our investigations have found that breaches of the law inside slaughterhouses are all too common when workers do not think they are being watched. CCTV will deter some of the worst cruelties, help with training and retraining of staff and provide evidence for prosecutions.

‘Despite this practical and achievable option, the government’s recent consultation on welfare at slaughter suggested that slaughterhouse owners “are best placed to decide which monitoring tools are most appropriate for their individual circumstances”. We believe this is a dereliction of the government’s duty and it must now pay heed to the public which rightly feels that regulations must be tightened, not weakened, in order to better protect animals.’ 

– Ends –

Notes to Editors

Information about, and footage from, Animal Aid’s slaughterhouse investigations can be seen here:

The full poll results can be seen here:

Animal Aid’s response to Defra’s consultation can be seen here:

For more information or to arrange an interview, contact Kate Fowler on 01732 364546 (out of hours 07751 990082).

Animal Aid Website =

Cruelty Free Shop =

England: Robert Confronts Ex UK PM John Major – and Reminds Him of His Lack of Action for Russian Seal Pups.


Above and Below – A Russian Seal Pup ‘Netted’ and ready for transport to a farm

– there to be slaughtered for its fur.

Access The Yearly Kill Table:

Kill Table

Robert – Campaigning to Save Russian Seal Pups

November 2012 – It was really great to hear from an old campaigner friend during this last week. I have had the pleasure of calling Robert (Bob) a good friend and fellow activist in the past.

Please do not be fooled that the ban on the Russian seal pups slaughter has very much to do with any campaign work associated with big international welfare organisations – because it has not.

It is only down to the continued persistence and fighting by Robert over many years that this has happened.

He has been the one man dedicated to stopping the hunting of seal pups in the Russian Federation, a man who has had no financial backing from anyone else with any of his campaigning, he has funded everything himself; but a person who has achieved the magnificent result of stopping the Russian seal hunt purely through his persistence and his dedication to protecting these beautiful animals.

Below are a few photographs which show Robert in action. Our campaigning over many, many years took us to London, the European Union in Brussels, and for Robert especially, many many places across the UK.  We handed in campaign postcards at Downing Street, and met with EU Commissioners to try and get our message about pelts entering the EU illegally via routes in Northern Europe.  We slept in cardboard boxes on the streets of Brussels to save on hotel money which could instead, go to the seals campaigning.

Nothing but simple support from the British government with regard to the Russian seal pups slaughter campaign was asked by Robert for many years, and his requests were always denied and ignored. I think it fair to say that Robert, like all of us, was simply labelled as an ‘animal rights activist’ and that the true spectrum of Roberts desires was simply ignored by the UK government who wished simply to label him as ‘trouble’ and keep him out of the way.

As you can see below, and as we say here in the UK, ‘what goes round comes round’; so it was great to read that after more than 17 years of campaigning for the Russian seals, Robert was able to confront former UK Prime Minister John Major during his recent book signing visit to Kent County. The articles from Kent newspapers, which are given below, explain the Robert / John Major meeting which took place recently. As you can see, John Major was left rather dumbstruck by Robert suddenly appearing at the signing and bringing up the issue of Russian baby seal pup slaughter once again.  Mr. Major; an issue from the past has returned to haunt you once again and let the people know that you personally did nothing to support efforts to get the slaughter stopped.

Despite the lack luster attitude of John Major, in 2009 the Russian federal fisheries agency issued an order to protect seal pups up to the age of one year. President Putin (of Russia) called the Russian annual cull a ‘bloody industry’. It was after this that the order to protect seal pups in Russia was introduced.

Congratulations Robert; not only did you become the real man behind the cessation of Russian seal pup killing, but you have now (November 2012) once again encountered one of your old ‘sparring partners’ in the form of John Major, who once again in 2012, has been reminded of his failings from the past to protect Russian seal pups at a time when he was prime minister and as such, was able to voice a strong opposition to the Russian authorities about what was going on. John Major ignored these requests and the devoted dedication for baby Russian seals shown by people such as Robert.

Robert, the kind and gentle man from a humble Kentish Town, who decided to do the right thing and fight tooth and nail for the Russian seal pups, eventually achieved his aims.  Bob, I was happy to call your friend then, as I am now; and I very much respect and admire your dedication in following through your visions over so many years, the vision being that the Russian seal pup slaughter with one day stop.

Now it has.  I was happy to stand alongside you as a fellow campaigner / activist in achieving your / our aims and goals for innocent baby seals. We both have many individual and personal memories of what the Russian seal pup campaign was about for of us as individual people; and we worked together on the issue, campaigned together and eventually, achieved together.

But in my own eyes, the cessation of the Russian seal pup slaughter was down to one campaigner and one campaigner only, and his name was Robert Mouland from Folkestone in Kent (England).  Don’t let the world say otherwise.

Mark –  SAV Founder.

Speaking for the seal pups at Downing Street, London (above);

and at the EU in Brussels, Belgium (Below).

Some old campaign data:

Harp Seals – Sub Order: Pinnipedia

Weight Range: 80-190kgs

Average Length: 160 – 170cm

Normal Life Span: Up to 35 Years.

Gestation for the harp seal is 10 months; with females giving birth after they have come onto the Winter pack ice in February or early March.  The new born pups are yellowish in colour but after around two days they turn white; the distinctive “Whitecoat” we all know and love.  New born pups usually weigh around 5 to 11kgs and are 85cms in length.

Pups are nursed for around 12 days by their mothers, taking milk containing up to 45% fat content.  After this time and during which the pup will triple its weight (around 35-40kgs), it is abandoned by its mother.  After being abandoned, the pups start to moult and are known as “ragged jackets”.  When the coat is completely shed after around 18 days, the pup becomes a “beater” with a short silvery coat with dark spots.

Karelia is a huge area within the White Sea region of the Russian Northwest, located about 250km from the Russian-Finnish border.  It is here that Russian seal pup hunting has largely taken place.  Commercial sealing in what was the former USSR was stopped in 1965, except for pups which were still allowed to be hunted.

The number of baby seals murdered annually for the period 1989 to 2003 are as follows:

Year Total
1989 Hunt Quota Given but not confirmed
1990 30,000 Estimated
1991 Data not known
1992 18,183
1993 19,925
1994 30,500
1995 30,500
1996 31,300
1997 31,380
1998 13,000
1999 30,000
2000 38,302
2001 39,106
2002 34,187
2003 37,936

Pups are murdered in the most inhumane manner; by being clubbed to death or spiked using the gaff.  Those that are not killed directly on the ice by clubbing are delivered to ‘Seal Farms’ as part of the on-going fur production system.  Whitecoats which are murdered on the ice are given a blow across the head or nose by the blunt end of the gaff.  Often after this, the spiked end of the weapon is driven deep into the brain (Spiking).  Pups are not bled on the ice because of fear that this process could damage the pelt.

Hunting takes place in early March. Sealers are transported to specific locations on the ice using chartered helicopters costing around $1000 per hour.  The returning helicopters bring batches of dead seals for processing.  Dead or unconscious pups are loaded into special nets which are collected by the returning helicopters.  Once the full quota of the hunt is reached, attention is turned to the catching of youngsters for seal farming.

Seal farming is common practice, and causes a great deal more stress on the pups than direct killing on the ice.  Pups succumb to disease due to stress and overcrowding, often seen by bleeding from the mouth; something never seen in the wild.  On the farm(s), 24 hour guards are employed.  Pups are killed in batches of around 50 when their coats have reached the right stage, by being injected under the flipper with a drug called ‘Dithyllinum’.

Dithyllinum produces death by immobilising the skeletal system respiratory muscles; thus causing fatal suffocation.  There is no depressing action on the brain and only when given in very high doses does the animal suffocate.  If an animal is given a dosage which only paralyses it, it is impossible to see whether it is dead or still alive.  Thus, some animals are paralysed rather than killed by the drug; and consequently will be skinned alive.

The American Veterinary Medical Association has said of ‘Dithyllinum’:  ‘The use of these drugs to produce euthanasia is strongly condemned’ !.

Around 100 men work on the seal killing on the ice for about one week.  Working in teams of 12 to 15, they keep in touch by radio and move to wherever the large numbers of pups are.  The local population from the hunt areas are not wealthy; and the kill can earn each hunter the equivalent of three months wages; so competition is great to be included.  An alternative economic enterprise would need to bring income into these communities.  But Eco-Tourism IS now under way, with organisations including Harp Seal watching as part of the schedule for the holiday.  Back in the mid-nineties; the Arkhangelsk Ecology Committee (AEC) agreed in principle to recommend seal pup quota cuts as Eco-tourism develops.

But it still happens in Canada !! – Fight It Please.

Vivisection Shorts.


Lab animals drown

After superstorm Sandy flooded New York University’s medical research laboratories, first accounts were of Herculean rescue efforts. But critics are asking whether the laboratories did everything they could – and whether they followed government guidelines – to protect the research animals. Thousands of animals, mostly mice housed in the basement of one NYU Langone Medical Centre building on the East River in Manhattan, died during the storm.  All told, said NYU spokeswoman Jessica Guenzel, the biomedical facility lost 7,660 cages of mice and 22 cages of rats. Each cage houses between 1 and 7 animals, she said. “This happens again and again and research labs never learn,” said Fran Sharples, director of the Board on Life Sciences at the congressionally chartered National Academy of Sciences (NAS).  “Anybody with half a brain knows you do a site-specific analysis” to understand the risk of disasters, she said, “and it’s really stupid to put your animals in the basement if you’re in a flood zone.”  It’s not as if scientists didn’t have recent lessons in the risk of natural disasters to biomedical research, she said. In 2001, tens of thousands of mice and scores of monkeys and dogs were lost when Hurricane Allison struck Houston; and in 2005, some 10,000 lab animals drowned when hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. Scientists contacted by Reuters say there was a double whammy. Flooding that overwhelmed the basements drowned some animals, while toxic fumes from breaches in the diesel fuel tank and lines that supplied back-up generators killed others.

Taking one giant leap backwards, NASA has called on researchers to submit funding applications for projects which may involve the use of primates, dogs, cats and other animals, provoking condemnation from NAVS and ADI.    The purpose of the research is to study how the environment in space affects biological processes, enabling NASA to develop “a safe, productive human presence in space for extended periods”.


Unwanted monkeys slaughtered

A BUAV investigation has uncovered the appalling slaughter of hundreds of monkeys at the Noveprim primate breeding farm in Mauritius. Shocking images show discarded dead monkeys stacked in piles on the floor or dumped in bins like garbage. Other images show mutilated bodies in a skip awaiting incineration. This is taking place on the holiday island of Mauritius where ­monkeys are plucked from the wild then exported to UK firms, which pay up to £260 for each one they buy. The barbaric slaughter is set to continue throughout October and November, allegedly because overseas laboratories are requesting primates weighing less than 3.5kg. The majority of monkeys being killed are adult males weighing over 4kg although the BUAV has learned that Noveprim is also killing pregnant females and baby monkeys because the farm no longer has a use for these animals. Noveprim is a major exporter of monkeys to the UK, Spain and the USA. The company is approved by the UK Home Office to supply monkeys to UK laboratories. The company is 47% owned by CovanceUK, a research and vivisection organisation based in Harrogate, North ­Yorks.  Official figures show that in 2011, 518 monkeys were ­exported to the UK from Mauritius. In 2010, that increased to 1,059. Only the US bought more. Thousands of live tests are carried out each year in UK labs. 75% of the monkeys are used for toxicology tests on new drugs. Despite this slaughter, Noveprim continues to have traps for wild monkeys. BUAV is calling upon the Prime Minister of Mauritius to take immediate action to halt these killings and for the monkeys to be released back into the wild where they belong to live out the rest of their lives freely. They also demand the UK Government to ban the import of monkeys from Mauritius. A major investigation carried out by the BUAV in September 2010 obtained shocking evidence of the cruelty and suffering involved in the trapping and breeding of the wild monkeys on the island.   TAKE ACTION!  1. Write to the Prime Minister of Mauritius urging him to stop the slaughter: Dr. The Honourable Navinchandra Ramgoolam. Prime Minister of the Republic of Mauritius, New Treasury Building, Intendance Street, Port Louis, Republic of Mauritius Email:  2. Write to Mauritius High Commission in the UK calling for the slaughter to stop: His Excellency Mr Abhimanu Kundasamy, Mauritius High Commission, 32-33 Elvaston Place, London  SW7 5NW. Email:  3. Write to the UK Home Office calling for a ban on the import of monkeys from Mauritius: Lord Taylor of Holbeach, Parliamentary Under- Secretary of State, Home Office, Direct Communications Unit, 2 Marsham St, London SW1P 4DF
Email:  Also go to:


Opposition to animal use growing

Public opposition to the use of animals in medical research is growing and trust in both scientists and the rules governing the controversial practice is falling, new government-funded research shows.  37% now class themselves as “objectors” to the practice. Their number has been rising steadily since the 29% recorded in 2006 and 35 % seen in 2010, though is still lower than the 39% found in 2002, according to the latest research into public attitudes on the issue by Ipsos MORI. Objectors either do not support the use of animals in experimentation because of concern for animal welfare (32%) or believe the government should ban experiments on animals for any form of research (21%), or both. They are more heavily female (41%) than male (33%) and more likely to be those aged 15 to 24 (55%) and also those in the lowest socio-economic class ranked as DE (51% compared to 23% of ABs). That hardening of attitudes is part of what Ipsos MORI called a “significant” shift away from people endorsing the need for use of animals in such projects.

While 85% of the 1,026 Britons aged 15 and older questioned “conditionally” support the practice, this is down from the 90% found in 2010, according to the poll, which the Dept for Business, Innovation and Skills paid for.  “In 2012, the public are less trusting of scientists not to cause unnecessary suffering in the animals involved (47% now, 54% in 2010), but are also less alert to the possibility of experiments being needlessly duplicated (51% now, 61% in 2010).” While 54% trust the government’s inspectorate and 53% think Britain’s rules governing animal experimentation, 43% do not trust the regulatory system – down from 56% in 2010. But overall 40% said they wanted to know more about animal experimentation before forming a view. The findings have prompted scientists, medical research charities, drug firms and universities to pledge to be more open about the use of animals in experiments in a bid to gain more widespread public support.

Professor Sir John Tooke, president of the Academy of Medical Sciences, said they were “concerned” at the poll’s results. Stephen Whitehead, chief executive of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, said that, while two-thirds of people still accepted the use of animals for medical research, the 10% should be “a wake-up call”. Britain’s life sciences community need to be “more forthright about the fact that without animal research, the bio-pharmaceutical sector cannot continue to innovate new treatments”, he added. Sir Mark Walport, head of the Wellcome Trust, Britain’s biggest charity, denied “complacency” among scientists had led to falling public support. He blamed a continuing “environment of intimidation” which, at its most extreme, constituted “terrorism”, he said. Whitehead said crashing of websites and other illegal tactics had deterred some people involved in conducting or helping animal experimentation.

The poll also found that 9% believe it is acceptable for protestors to occupy research facilities or disrupt firms providing services to such research centres, 8% see roadblocks as acceptable and 2% and 1% respectively see destroying property and physical violence in the same light. David Willetts, the science minister, confirmed that talks are going on with airlines and ferry companies about resuming the import of some live animals which are specially-bred overseas for use in trials into conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease. “The government is committed to working to reduce the use of animals in scientific research, but we do recognise that there remains a strong scientific case for the careful regulated use (!!!) of animals in scientific research and that this does play a role in ensuring new medicines are safe and effective”, he added.

Responding to this drop in support for the use of animals in research in the UK, the country’s leading research universities, medical charities and drugs companies launched a new transparency initiative aimed at winning over members of the public to the need for animal research. A total of 15 universities, 4 pharmaceutical firms, and groups such as Cancer Research UK, Parkinson’s UK and the Motor Neurone Disease Association issued a declaration on openness in the use of animals in medical research. “Where possible, we use cells grown in a lab, computer models and human volunteers. When this isn’t possible, research may involve animals,” the declaration reads. “When we need to use animals, we strive to reduce the number needed, and seek to develop viable alternatives.” Penny Hawkins, of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, said: “If the scientific community really wants to address these concerns, it will have to be more honest about the harms caused to animals – which can be very severe – and not just talk about the potential benefits of research.” “Talk is cheap. It’s time to deliver.”


The University of Connecticut paid $12,429 in fines last month for animal welfare violations, the U.S. Dept of Agriculture announced. The fines are for 10 violations observed during inspections between 2008 and 2010, mostly involving the treatment of rabbits at a research facility at the UConn Health Center. 16 Oct


Animal-rights activists are targeting UC San Francisco over testing of a lab monkey who was kept in a medical study for more than 23 months after developing complications due to a surgical procedure, in violation of the federal Animal Welfare Act.  From 2008 to 2010, a female rhesus macaque named Petra was the subject of neurological studies aimed at learning more about Parkinson’s disease. But according to a federal inspection report, the primate suffered for months after hardware removal surgery failed to extract a small piece of drug-injection apparatus from inside her head. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals now wants UCSF to return $2.1m in federal grant funding from the National Institutes of Health, in accordance with the agency’s own policies. “NIH has an opportunity to make a clear statement that grant recipients cannot engage in noncompliant activity and expect to keep federal tax dollars,” PETA’s letter states. The agency has yet to respond to PETA’s request. This is not the first time UCSF has faced scrutiny over animal issues. In 2007, a committee of physicians sued the school over about 75 U.S. Dept of Agriculture citations it received between 2001 and 2003.

The school characterized the sanctions as minor, and ultimately the suit was dismissed by a San Francisco judge who said federal regulators – not judges – are in charge of monitoring animal experimentation. In the case of Petra, UCSF documents indicate that the situation required intensive monitoring as the monkey removed her own fur and continually irritated the surgical incision by picking at it, at times causing bacterial infections and leaving dried blood in her cage. After a federal inspector photographed the monkey during a routine check in Oct 2010, the USDA issued an order to the lab Jan. 5 telling it to rectify such animal practices within 3 months. But by that time, Petra already had been euthanized.

UCSF spokeswoman Jennifer O’Brien declined to say whether UCSF would willingly return the public grant money.  She said the university “takes very seriously its responsibility for the humane treatment of the animals it studies.”  She added that researchers were concerned about the monkey’s problems and kept the condition “largely under control without ever fully resolving it.”  O’Brien said experiments on the monkey yielded progress in the field by leading to the development of a human gene therapy clinical trial for Parkinson’s disease. She said Petra had always been slated for euthanasia following the tests.


Thanks to Sue at the SP.

Slovenia: A ‘Slaughterhouse for Bears’ – Please Act – Petition Etc.

Slovenia is year to year becoming a slaughterhouse for bears, which are considered as endangered species. This is unacceptable. What you can do immediately is to contribute your voice to bears and wolves.

We have prepared a petition that you can sign on the link

You also can write to the Government of the Republic of Slovenia on the attached mails.

Petition has been translated into German, English, French, Russian, Spanish, Croatian, Serbian and Italian and can be found on our website with the intention to inform the widest possible world public about what is happening at us.

On behalf of the animals, please inform acquaintances, friends, clubs, groups around the world, in order to collect as many signatures as possible.

Stanko Valpatič, president

Society for the Liberation of Animals and Their Rights
The Society for the Rights and Liberation of Animals, India
Ostrožno in Ponikvi 26, 3232 Ponikva
Tel.: +386 (0) 3 303 5763, Mobile: 031 709 306 Martin
The association is entitled to grant 0.5% of personal income.
Tax number: 68844930
Bank account: 02011-0253228311
International account: IBAN: SI56 0201 1025 3228 311
The Association has the status of a society acting in the public interest.
Together we are building Slovenia, friendly to animals, nature and people. ·




Walter and ‘Chop’ – “I just wish some humans learn to do the same”

Photo Captures Attention and Hearts All Over the World

Walter Daniels and Chop have spent almost twenty years together; he was rescued as a puppy. 

It’s hard for Daniels to talk about their time together because 19-year-old Chop is nearing the end of his long, happy life.

“What he means to me? I can’t put into words.”

He suffers from arthritis and has trouble sleeping, so to ease his pain, Daniels takes him swimming and Chop will fall asleep in his arms.

“Not too many more times are we going to be able to do this.  So every time now it’s a pretty special feeling….the buoyancy it gives him in the water relieves the pain, or at least some of it to the point where he’s relaxed,” said Daniels with Chop by his side.

“You give love and that love will return ten fold, that’s what I want people to get from this photograph,

“I just wish some humans learn to do the same said Daniels.




England: IMPORTANT UPDATE – From 17/11/2012 We Are Now At:

Please note that with immediate effect we have now changed our domain to the following:


This is shorter and easier hopefully for you and for us.

Even if you select us using the old address of  you will still be redirected to our site; but please add our new address to your favourites and visit us as normal.

The new ‘.comcomes into immediate effect from today – 17/11/2012.

We hope this new address will be easier to remember, especially when you give it out to all of your contacts !!


Regards SAV.