NO EXCUSE FOR ANY TESTS ON ANIMALS

Over 85% of Australians do not want products they buy to be tested on animals before sale for human use. The scientific excuse for animal experimentation is that animal skin reacts in the same way as ours. Yet when the moral issue is raised, whether it is right to use animals in this way, the argument is that animals are not like us.

In the words of Professor Charles R Magel, "Animal experimentation rests on a logical contradiction.”

Cruelty by humans to any type of animal is so wrong the wonder is the subject has to be discussed at all. Yet pharmaceutical and chemical companies, universities and government bodies have failed to accept animal experimentation as cruel. Nonetheless, when tested chemicals react on living tissue to the extent of poisoning, burning and blinding the animals, then the cruelty factor is glaringly obvious to all but the most compassionless person.

Leading international cosmetic companies, Johnson & Johnson, Dove, Herbal Essences, Clinique, Estée Lauder, to name a few, still subject animals to these shameful practices before shipping their products into Australia. In China, where the majority of products come from, it is still a requirement by law to trial cosmetics and toiletries on animals before they can be accepted as safe for human use.

While Australian cosmetics are not tested on animals, it is still not illegal to do so. Also many imported ingredients used in their manufacture are known to be animal-tested.

But now two women in Parliament, Green's Lee Rhiannon and Labor's Tanya Plibersek are  working to ring in the changes for animals, with the introduction of a private member's bill to ban all sales and imports of cosmetics carrying animal-tested ingredients, and the setting up of a national consultation with industry, scientific researchers, and high profile groups such as Humane Society International, Cruelty Free and Humane Research Australia.

Meanwhile the Body Shop has removed its products from China's duty-free shops, since the consumer group Choice found their products in Beijing and Shanghai airports, where authorities randomly run post-market tests on animals.

- Patricia Edwards

This article was published in the "Voices for the Earth" column in The Daily Examiner on May 5, 2014.

MINING LOBBYIST CLAIMS ENVIRONMENTALISTS ARE ECONOMIC VANDALS

The mining industry and environment movement have long been at loggerheads, but conflict has escalated in recent times with the rapid world-wide expansion of the unconventional gas industry.

The growing animosity reached a new high, when Stephen Galilee (NSW Minerals Council's head) published an extraordinary personal attack on two young female conservationists, accusing them of “economic vandalism” and calling for them to be jailed for their actions in opposing coal and gas mining (The Australian , 14^th April).

The claim of vandalism by a mining industry lobbyist against conservationists is a “bit rich”, given incidents such as the recent coal mine fire at Morwell in Victoria where a failure to undertake required rehabilitation and removal of fire-fighting equipment saw the fire burning out of control for weeks, spewing toxic smoke over the township, forcing inhabitants to flee their homes to escape the health risks. The real social and economic costs of that incident are unlikely to ever be determined.

The Maules Creek coal mine, protests against which triggered Mr Galilee's article, is owned by Whitehaven Coal, itself the recipient of multiple fines for environmental vandalism, as has Santos, the owner of the Pilliga coal-seam gas operation, with the latest $1500 fine, imposed for polluting an aquifer, not even covering the investigation costs. Again the potential long-term economic costs of those pollution events will probably never be known.

Mr Galilee's vicious attack focusses on two courageous conservationists, Georgina Woods and Carmel Flint, describing them as “professional activists” because they have represented other environmental organisations in the past. However, while occasionally being paid for their work, their remuneration would pale into insignificance beside that received by Galilee, who apparently fails to see that he too is a professional activist, lobbying on behalf of the mining industry, with a long history working as adviser to various government ministers on mining matters.

The only difference, other than their salaries, is that Mr Galilee lobbies on behalf of the mining industry and its share-holders, while the girls lobby on behalf of all humanity, and those that have no voice, our wildlife.

- John Edwards

This article was published in The Daily Examiner (under a different title) in the "Voices for the Earth" column on 28th April.

Carmel Flint's work for the environment was recognised by the Clarence Valley Conservation Coalition (CVCC) in 2010 when she received the CVCC's ReWeavers' Award.  Since then Carmel has continued her work for the environment, notably campaigning for improvements in environmental flows in the Murray-Darling Basin and also in campaigning against coal seam gas mining, particularly in the Pilliga. 

CHLAMIDIA VACCINE TRIALS BRING HOPE FOR KOALAS

Chlamydia is a serious debilitating disease that can be fatal to koalas. In the Clarence Valley the most common symptom of the disease is ocular conjunctivitis, where one or both eyes become watery, gummy and increasingly inflamed, to a point where the koala is blinded by the swollen membrane. Urine-stained wet fur around the tail-end is also a sign of a urogenital form of the disease, which is related to infertility, uterine and ovarian cysts in females, and death.

All koala populations carry the chlamydia bacterium: however the actual onset of disease is triggered by chronic stress. Each year large numbers of koalas die through vehicle collisions, domestic animal attacks, habitat destruction and fragmentation by land-clearing and logging; and from starvation and thirst where moisture and nutrients are removed from eucalypt leaves by drought. However any koala that survives the initial trauma will inevitably suffer an onset of chlamydia, sounding its death knell if left untreated.

This means that if chlamydia can only be targeted and eliminated, koala populations will have a much better chance of stabilisation and survival in the wild (Rhodes et al., 2011). To target chlamydia therefore is the obvious option, and research has been underway for some time in developing an effective vaccine.

Now the outcome is looking excitingly positive. While some work still needs to be done, vaccinations performed on both healthy and diseased koalas are providing strong evidence that a chlamidial vaccine will be successful.

Vaccination trials currently underway in SE Queensland will shortly be moving outside that state, and from captive animals to wild koalas. These will include koalas taken into care by wildlife care groups within NSW. Dr Adam Polkinghorne of Queensland University of Technology states that the work and collaboration of the latter groups will be essential to the success of this koala chlamydia vaccine.

Happily this will mean that koalas brought into care by Clarence Valley WIRES will also be taking part in this exciting, groundbreaking research to save our iconic marsupial.

- Patricia Edwards

Koala in care.  Rusty brown fur indicates poor health.