250 Puppies Dead – Maximum Sentence For The Dog Killer Beast – Petition and Others.

Known as “The dog killer beast”, Villegas must be processed by the electrocution of more than 250 puppies in the Canine Control Center of Tláhuac.
Criminally prosecute “The dog killer beast”
Addressed to: Head of Government of the CDMX José Ramón Amieva

One month after the “electrocution of more than 250 puppies” by Laura Barajas Villegas, Director of Canine Control of Tláhuac and known as “The dog killer beast”, as well as the joint responsibility of Arturo Medina, Delegational Chief in Tláhuac. In the face of these brutal and inhumane acts, we demand the full application of the “Animal Protection and Welfare Law”, established in the Political Constitution of the CDMX and other applicable regulations, which punish with “Prison sentences between 8 months and 2 years and fines of 30,000 to 60,000 thousand pesos, to those who injure animals for cruelty and abuse.” That no official is above the Law!

Petition link – https://www.sosvox.org/en/petition/we-demand-that-the-authorities-prosecute-this-woman-what-she-did-is-a-crime-and-must-be-punished-with-prison.html?utm_source=highlight&utm_medium=title&utm_campaign=campaign-p140618&uid=fd376f375efd72ffbb9b53f8573be892


Some other petitions to support:

Open a petition against the killing of stray dogs in Russia!


National Geographic Must Avoid Broadcast Programs of Animals Huntings


Stop using plastic for bottles and packaging


Boycott the tourism of Brazilians to Spain while there are bullfights


Give answers and solutions about the animal crisis in Venezuela


View ALL petitions at  https://www.sosvox.org/en/petitions.html

14/6 – Today Is The Day – The Fight To End Global Live Exports.

Today is the day that people all around the world are uniting around a single goal – to end the long distance live transport of animals. We are sickened by the cruelty inflicted upon farm animals during these long and dangerous journeys. This is a global problem that deserves a global response.

Campaigners in over 30 countries are taking action, from Brazil to Australia, from Israel to Mexico. We’re thrilled that so many Compassion supporters are staging events today or at the weekend. If you’re not already on your way, it isn’t too late to join an event! And, even if you can’t be with us in person, you can still take action for farm animals.

You can take selfies wearing the downloadable animal masks and post them online using #StopLiveTransport

And don’t forget to share the petition against cruel live exports from the EU.

You can spread the word to friends and family using ciwf.org.uk/EULiveExports


Thialand: “Tiger Selfies” – A Cruel Trend Driving A Captive Wildlife Industry.


Tiger selfies: Chinese, Indian tourists lead cruel social media trend that’s driving Thailand’s captive-wildlife industry

As tourists flock to venues such as Tiger Kingdom in Thailand in quest for ever more audacious photos to post on Facebook and Instagram, animal-rights groups claim the internet craze is the cause of a ‘lifetime of suffering’ for the felines

On the shabby outskirts of a seaside resort in Thailand, a Chinese couple in beachwear lean across the back of an adult tiger. The big cat yawns with weary insouciance as two handlers cajole it around its pen and prod it with bamboo sticks. In a smaller enclosure, another couple giggle as they dangle their infant son over a juvenile tiger. Nearby, a tourist in his 20s poses as if in mid roar over two dozing young tigers before – prompted by the handlers – grabbing their tails and putting them up to his mouth, as guffawing friends watch on.

This is the disturbing new face of wildlife tourism in Thailand, where tigers are hand-reared to provide social-media images for foreign visitors. Every day, busloads of tourists are whisked away from their sunloungers to spend an hour or so posing for pictures with unchained, surprisingly docile tigers. By the time they get back to their seaside hotels and settle down for sunset cocktails, many will have already uploaded pictures of themselves with the animals to Facebook and Instagram, to impress – or appal – their friends back home.

Tiger Kingdom, in Phuket, is one of more than a dozen “tiger selfie” attractions that have sprung up across the Southeast Asian country in recent years, driven by booming numbers of package-tour arrivals from mainland China and India, and the desire for ever more audacious social-media shots.

Along with elephant-riding venues, they provide bite-sized encounters with captive wildlife – albeit at a price. Tiger Kingdom charges 900 baht (HK$220) per person to pose with a small tiger, plus 500 baht should you need an in-house photographer to take pictures, and offers encounters with newborn tigers for 2,500 baht and with a “giant tiger” for 2,000 baht.

The attractions appear hugely popular with tourists from across the globe, although TripAdvisor posts suggest it is an experience some regret immediately afterwards.

“[It] is a tiger jail […] Tigers looked like [they] were drugged,” one Italian tourist wrote after visiting Tiger Kingdom last month. “Never, ever in my life again.”

An April visitor from Britain called the attraction cruel, also remarking: “Tigers kept mostly in concrete-floor cages. All seemed dopey almost like they [were] drugged up […] Not impressed when asked [by handlers] to pull tiger’s tail […] This is degrading to a beautiful powerful animal […] Disgusted – had to walk out in anger.”

For many others, however, getting up close to a tiger is clearly a highlight of their holiday and the largely positive reviews praising the “awesome experience” and “lifelong memories” of parks such as Tiger Kingdom – which categor­ically denies drugging its tigers – has triggered a campaign by Hong Kong-based Animals Asia Foundation to get TripAdvisor to stop listing the venues.

More than 40,000 people have signed a petition by the charity calling on the world’s largest travel website to stop hosting animal attractions featuring elephant rides and tiger selfies, which, they say, promotes “the exploitation of many thousands of wild captive animals in Asia and elsewhere”.

For its part, TripAdvisor says that delisting such places would be counterproductive, arguing that tourists who are forewarned are forearmed.

Another charity, World Animal Protection, estimates that there are now more than 800 tigers “posing” for selfies in venues across Thailand, and says they endure “a lifetime of suffering starting with early removal from their mothers followed by unrelenting handling and stressful interactions with visitors”.

As they grow, the animals are confined to small, barren cages, chained and subjected to harsh training, the charity says in a report. It also estimates that captive tiger numbers grew by more than 200 between 2010 and 2016 because of the booming popularity of big-cat selfies.

“When they visit tiger venues, people seem to think it’s a great experience for them to take a selfie with a tiger and use the photo on their social media,” says Somsak Soonthornnawaphat, head of campaigns for World Animal Protection Thailand. “They don’t understand the cruelty behind the scenes.  “They do it for a fun photo, but the baby tigers have been taken away from their mothers from a very early age and live in a cage often with a chain. We did a poll and 93 per cent of tourists say they want to experience wildlife tourism because they love animals. They don’t know how they are trained and treated.”

Somsak says most visitors from China and India come with group tours.

“They buy a package and it includes different activities, and one of the top activities is visiting a wildlife venue like a tiger park,” he says. “Popular parks like Tiger Kingdom have very good marketing in the country where the tourists come from. They offer good commission to the tour opera­tors and guides, and even taxi drivers as an incentive to bring people to the venues.”

Why 1,800 tigers are in a rundown China park: to be made into wine

World Animal Protection has launched educational campaigns in China and India, to discourage tourists and tour operators from patronising parks in which captive tigers and elephants are used for entertainment, but Somsak says the scale of the industry surrounding such operations presents a massive challenge.

“In China, there is a very big population and a huge number of tour operators, but only four tour operators have agreed to cooperate with us so far,” he says. “There is still a long way to go for them to understand and offer only animal-friendly venues to their customers.”

Even seasoned observers such as Somsak struggle to understand why the tigers are so passive when they are hugged and tugged by tourists in the selfie parks.

“It’s not natural behaviour,” he says. “Tigers are very strong animals and very active, and don’t usually behave the way you see them behaving in tiger venues.

“We don’t know if they use drugs or not, and we don’t have any evidence that they do. But when they are in the wild, tigers hunt in the nighttime and sleep in the daytime. In captivity, they mostly feed them chickens, and when they are full they don’t react.”

Thailand’s relatively lax animal welfare laws mean there is no mechanism for checking on the health of the animals kept in entertainment venues.

“It is the Thai government’s responsibility to oversee the operation of public zoos, including all the tiger parks, but they don’t visit regularly or check on the tigers’ health,” says Somsak. “They only look at licence issues.

“The zoos need to register and renew their registration every five years. They do checks but mostly they just check the enclosures and the condition of the venue. Then they make a decision on whether to continue the licence.”

TripAdvisor introduced an animal-welfare policy in 2016 and stopped selling tickets and issuing “certificates of excellence” to attractions such as Tiger Kingdom, which still proudly displays its 2015 certificate next to the animals’ cages. The travel company has also introduced a paw logo to indicate listings featuring wild animals, with links to expert advice on animal welfare from organisations including World Animal Protection.

Somsak believes TripAdvisor – which launched a Chinese site, DaoDao.com, in 2009 and expects China to soon become its biggest market – should go further.

“They should issue stronger advice to tourists about the venues,” he says.

Animals Asia’s animal welfare director Dave Neale has held talks with senior TripAdvisor officials to make the same case, and to present a petition calling for listings of attractions such as Tiger Kingdom to be removed altogether. He says the online giant is “floundering” on the issue.

“TripAdvisor says this should all be self-regulated by the public,” Neale explains. “They say it is better to have them on TripAdvisor with a bad review so people know, but in reality that isn’t working. They are getting very high ratings. They get occasional bad reviews but, generally, the ratings are good because people are ill-informed.

“The public aren’t always aware of animal-welfare issues, and some of these places go out of their way to try to make it sound like the animals have all been rescued and are being looked after. We investigated a swimming-with-dolphins place in Bali. On the way out, tourists are told the dolphins are free to go out to sea at night and come in during the day to interact with people. Obviously, that couldn’t possibly happen, but people believe it and think, ‘Wow, it’s lovely that the dolphins just love to be here.’ It’s easy to pull the wool over the eyes of the public when in reality animals are suffering and being made to do things they don’t want to do.”

Neale describes the craze for tiger selfies as bizarre.

People do seem to leave their common sense behind when they get on a plane sometimes,” he says. “Imagine if someone rocked up in Oxford Street, in London, with a tiger and tried to get people to have their pictures taken with it. No one would go near it.

But get on a plane and people lose their heads and think if everyone’s doing it, it must be OK. And then, when everyone sees their pictures on social media, they seem to think it must be all right.”

The placid behaviour of the tigers in the parks is “quite amazing”, Neale concedes. “Drugging used to happen a lot and then it got exposed. Whether places are still drugging them and hiding it, I don’t know. A lot of the animals seem fully aware of what’s happening and seem uninterested in the public. I guess it is just due to the fact they hand-rear them. But that doesn’t make it right from the animal’s point of view.

“The fact you have to have someone standing around with a stick says a lot. It isn’t giving the animal free choice. It has to be there or be subjected to physical abuse.

“Rather than just taking pleasure out of having your photograph taken with the tiger, you should find somewhere they are in a natural setting and watch them being tigers.

“People should consider where they are kept when the places are closed. They are generally kept in small cages and the likelihood is they spend 16 hours a day in a very poor environment with limited ability to carry out any natural behaviour and interact with other animals.”


Chick. The Reality of Boys Not Wanted.

Vegan Faces




International: 8/6/18 Is World Oceans Day.

World Oceans Day takes place every 8 June. It has been celebrated unofficially since its original proposal in 1992 by Canada’s International Centre for Ocean Development (ICOD) and the Ocean Institute of Canada (OIC) at the Earth Summit – UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.[1] The Brundtland Commission, i.e. the World Commission on Environment and Development, provided the inspiration for a global oceans day. The 1987 Brundtland Report noted that the ocean sector lacked a strong voice compared to other sectors. At the first World Oceans Day in 1992, the objectives were to move the oceans from the sidelines to the center of the intergovernmental and NGO discussions and policy and to strengthen the voice of ocean and coastal constituencies world wide.


Read more –  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Oceans_Day



Ever since the United Nations declared June 8th to be World Oceans Day in 2002, people and groups from around the world have used the occasion to celebrate the ocean and take steps to protect it. Now, with the ocean facing more threats than ever, it’s time for all of us to come together to protect our treasured marine environment.


Eco Watch – https://www.ecowatch.com/world-oceans-day-make-a-difference-2575124896.html






We celebrate World Oceans Day to remind everyone of the major role the oceans have in everyday life. They are the lungs of our planet, providing most of the oxygen we breathe. The purpose of the Day is to inform the public of the impact of human actions on the ocean, develop a worldwide movement of citizens for the ocean, and mobilize and unite the world’s population on a project for the sustainable management of the world’s oceans. They are a major source of food and medicines and a critical part of the biosphere. In the end, it is a day to celebrate together the beauty, the wealth and the promise of the ocean.

Action focus for 2018: preventing plastic pollution and encouraging solutions for a healthy ocean


Plastic pollution is causing tremendous harm to our marine resources. For example:

  • 80% of all pollution in the ocean comes from people on land.

  • 8 million tonnes of plastic per year ends up in the ocean, wreaking havoc on wildlife, fisheries and tourism.

  • Plastic pollution costs the lives of 1 million seabirds and 100,000 marine mammals per year.

  • Fish eat plastic, and we eat the fish.

  • Plastic causes $8 billion in damage to marine ecosystems each year.

Change starts with you




UK: It Banned Fur Farming In 2000 – Now Will It Ban ALL Animal Fur Imports Into The UK ?




Is it ever ok for people to buy and wear fur?

Britain’s parliament is adding its voice to the discussion.

The UK’s top legislative body is debating a ban on the sale of animal fur, after a petition calling for an end to fur imports into the UK collected nearly 110,000 signatures, triggering today’s hearing.

Parliamentary debates don’t lead directly to changes in law, but they can influence decision-making and raise the profile of a campaign.

In this case, the campaign reflects a larger movement that seems to keep gaining momentum. In the past year, major fashion brands like Gucci, Michael Kors, and Versace have said that they’re no longer using fur in their collections. Meanwhile, the city of San Francisco banned all sales of fur, and both Norway and the Czech Republic announced plans to end fur farming in their countries. In the UK, London’s popular Camden market banned sales of fur as of March.

Opponents of fur believe that farming and trapping is cruel and unethical. At the same time, technology has produced faux furs so good that even the fanciest of luxury brands, such as Tom Ford, see them as viable substitutes—giving rise to the argument that, at this point, using fur is simply outdated. “Do you think using furs today is still modern?” Gucci CEO Marco Bizzari said to Business of Fashion last year (paywall) when talking about the company’s decision to stop using fur. “I don’t think it’s still modern and that’s the reason why we decided not to do that.”

Not all shoppers agree. In China and other parts of Asia, sales of fur items, such as coats, remain strong. There are still plenty of buyers for fur in places like Europe and the US, too, especially when the fur is used as a trim. Canada Goose parkas, with their hoods edged in coyote fur, are a common sight in the colder parts of America. And not long before Gucci ditched fur, it had a sales hit with its kangaroo-fur-lined loafers. They were one of the items that proved the brand was back on the upswing after its new creative director, Alessandro Michele, took over in 2015.

The UK itself prohibited fur farming in 2000, but still allows fur imports, which is where the dispute before Parliament now lies. The petition that prompted the debate says imports are coming from countries that aren’t safeguarding animals.

Mike Moser, CEO of the British Fur Trade Association, called it “seriously flawed,” in a statement issued by the group. The petition “erroneously states that much of the fur imported into the UK comes from countries ‘that have very weak or no animal welfare laws at all’ as justification for a fur import ban,” he said. “In fact, all fur farms, wherever they are, must be licensed by authorities and independently inspected in order to operate.”

But critics of the fur industry point to investigations that keep turning up cases of animal abuse, despite regulations. Last week, 50 veterinarians and animal behaviorists sent a letter (pdf) to Michael Gove, the UK’s secretary of state for environment, food, and rural affairs, saying there are “severe animal welfare deficiencies inherent to the fur trade.”

They supported Humane Society International UK’s call for a ban on fur imports to Britain.



Pay Your Rent People !

Or are you prepared to accept