Written by PETA
you've ever read one of PETA's "Piense
Antes de Comer" leaflets or seen actor Constance Marie's spay-and-neuter
billboard—or any of our countless other Spanish materials—you're already familiar with our outreach to Latinos.
But at Mama's International Tamales in downtown Los Angeles yesterday, we
celebrated a groundbreaking moment with the official launch of our newest
outreach division, PETA Latino! And the stars were out to celebrate with us. Television star Marco Antonio
Regil hosted the event, and actor Patricia
De León unveiled her new pro-vegetarian ad, reading (in Spanish), "Eat
Your Vegetables. They're Very Tasty." Hollywood beauties Daniella
Alonso and Mayte
Garcia were also there to show off their PETA ads and sample the delicious
and Patricia both gave impassioned speeches about the importance of reaching
out to the Spanish-speaking community and adopting a meat-free diet for
animals, human health, and the planet. And PETA's vice president of communications,
Lisa Lange, rounded out the afternoon with some words on PETA's ongoing
commitment to the Latino community and anyone who wants to live a compassionate
lifestyle, no matter what language he or she speaks. "Our goal," she
said, "is to make PETA Latino an indispensible resource for everyone in
and Patricia mingled with the dozens of supporters and reporters who came out
to share this groundbreaking moment for animals and even stopped to snap a
picture with their matching Pure bracelets
(made of all-vegan materials, of course!),
made by Energy Muse, which is donating a portion of the sales of the stylish
bracelet to PETA's lifesaving campaigns.
the fun didn't end when we were done munching on delicious vegan taquitos,
tamales, and pupusas. Back at the Bob Barker Building, we
got back to work strengthening PETA Latino with new Spanish outreach materials,
videos, and content for PETALatino.com. Check it out!
Written by Michelle Kretzer
high school sophomore has developed a device that may help doctors better
detect cancer in its early stages without invasive
and painful biopsies—and he did it without harming a single animal. PETA awarded Daniel Suh, a student at Los Angeles' Palos Verdes
Peninsula High School, a $1,000 prize and our Special Award for Humane Science
for his nanowire device that detects circulating tumor cells.
Director Justin Goodman presents Daniel with a framed plaque and $1,000 prize.
worked with researchers at the University of California–Los Angeles' California
NanoSystems Institute on the screening device, which can detect breast and
prostate cancer cells in the blood. Doctors can then harvest the cells for
analysis and test potential cancer treatments.
who presented his work at the Los Angeles County Science Fair, joins a forward-thinking group of
students who have earned recognition from PETA for showing the scientific community that
modern non-animal research
methods are advancing medical science much more than hurting animals ever could.
Last night at The Ebell of Los Angeles, PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk
kicked off her Naked Truth U.S. speaking tour to a
packed house that included Sam
Simon, Jennifer Tilly, Christian
Serratos, Tony Kanal, and host Kevin Nealon.
And listeners were moved.
While others come in bodies
different from our own, we're all the same inside," Ingrid said. She asked
the audience, "Who are they, and who am I, that I should live and they should die?
While others come in bodies
different from our own, we're all the same inside," Ingrid said. She asked
the audience, "Who are they, and who am I, that I should live and they should die?
The goal of the tour is to show
audiences that animal rights isn't just about "pets," pelts, or
veggie burgers—it's about persuading people to view all animals as fellow
citizens worthy of our respect. And the way that we accomplish that is by doing
exactly what Ingrid went on tour to do: Speak. When we do, "we fail
to reach some people sometimes, but when we don't try, we fail to reach
everyone," Ingrid explained.
Determined to start speaking up, yesterday
I suggested some activities that my friend could do with his daughter instead
of taking her to SeaWorld.
And tonight, I'm taking
my date to try vegan sushi.
That I can do. We all can. As Ingrid maintains, fretting won't win the animal
rights battles, but activism will!
She is known for giving powerful,
motivational speeches, so if you can make it to see her on the tour (tour dates to be added soon), please do, and take
someone else with you. But if you can't, the one thing to remember is that the "naked
truth" about advancing the animal rights movement, is simple.
Los Angeles Animal Services (LAAS) recently announced that its
shelters had a "no-kill December," a month during which the
department reportedly "did not euthanize any treatable or healthy animals
in its care." While this certainly sounds
wonderful and is what every animal shelter strives to achieve, one blogger explains
what the numbers really
translate into and how the welfare of animals is disregarded when statistics
become more of a focus than the animals themselves.
Longtime friend to animals,
Phyllis Daugherty, examined what "no-kill December" really meant for
animals who found refuge at LAAS last month and asked, "Are we really to
believe that with no other changes but a change of mind, suddenly all the least
desirable animals were swept from the shelter into 'forever' homes, or even
just to somewhere that they can be assured a humane life?"
While LAAS announced a 90 percent "live-save" rate
for December, this does not mean a 90 percent adoption rate. The term "live-save" means only that the
animals left the shelter, not that they went to qualified, screened homes. As
Daugherty explains, "Often the pet is merely taken to another shelter by 'transport,'
and possibly transported many times to different shelters in different areas in
the country if [he or she] is not adopted. Once the animal has left the L.A.
shelter, [his or her] impound (ID) number may be changed many times, so we
really don't know what ultimately happens to [him or her]."
Just days after Daugherty's article was posted, humane and sheriff's
officials in Oregon raided a self-purported "rescue" where more than
140 dogs were found starving, stuffed into tiny stacked travel carriers amid
their own waste and without access to water, after being "saved" from
euthanasia at an open-admission animal shelter in California. Many were found
with their eyes sealed shut with mucus and pus, and urine and excrement were dripping
onto them from the cages above. One dog was found in a carrier so small that "he
was unable to lie down, sit or stand up." The
Oregonian reported, "Some of the
dogs were in such an advanced state of starvation that technicians will have to
use a 'refeeding program' to reintroduce small amounts of easily digestible food."
Regarding LAAS, Daugherty rightfully asks, "Is this a
sustainable or desirable solution?" When the focus shifts from protecting
animals to playing a numbers game, animals pay the price, bounced around like
rubber balls and often ending up in situations so cruel and harsh that being
"saved" becomes a fate far worse than a painless exit from a world
that has already betrayed them once.
And unlike rubber balls, animals become confused and distressed
when bounced around, often developing severe separation anxiety and other
behavioral symptoms as they are moved from place to place. PETA has
investigated and exposed many hoarder "rescue" facilities—places such as Caboodle Ranch, Angel's
Gate, All Creatures Great and
Small, and other hellholes—where animals end up languishing in criminally cruel
conditions after they have been "saved" from open-admission shelters that
are desperately trying to fend off criticism from an ill-informed public misled
by the "no-kill" movement.
LAAS reports on its Facebook page that during the December effort, compassionate "volunteers
complained that [LAAS was] keeping too many animals. And it did get crowded."
We have to ask why the humane community is so quick to tolerate the suffering
and danger inflicted on animals who are the victims of the "no-kill"
As PETA has stressed for decades—and put its money
where its mouth is by spaying and neutering nearly 90,000 animals at low or no
cost in the past 10 years—the only way that we
can truly hope to become a "no-kill" nation is to work at the roots,
not at the "feel good" treetops. We must first become a no-birth nation through
aggressive spay/neuter initiatives—only then we can truly save lives.
Written by Paula Moore
last night's Golden Globe
Awards, the hot topic on the red carpet was the cold snap in L.A.: Temps had dropped to
37 degrees. But not one of the
nominees (and no other celebrity we could find) wore fur. Hollywood has had quite the animal-friendly makeover over the past generation
with PETA on the scene!
majority of fur today comes from fur farms, where animals slowly go insane from the intense confinement. Many animals on fur farms circle frantically in their
cages, a sign of severe psychological stress.
only was the glitzy event fur-free, it also showcased a few of today's most
vibrant vegans! Jessica
Chastain—PETA's reigning Sexiest Vegetarian Celebrity—and previous champ Anne Hathaway nabbed the top actress awards.
Written by Jeff Mackey
For its outstanding advances in behalf of animals over the past 12 months, Los Angeles has been chosen as PETA's City of the Year for 2012. The Los Angeles City Council will receive a commemorative certificate, along with a letter signed by PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk, in recognition of its achievements.
In a state that has been a trailblazer for animal-friendly legislation—including bans on foie gras and shark-fin soup and the passage of a law that
raises the standards of animal welfare on factory farms—the City of Angels continued to raise the bar in 2012, with accomplishments that include:
But these aren't the only reasons why L.A. has drawn PETA's notice in 2012. In July, Dodger Stadium took the fifth spot on PETA's annual list of the Top 10
Vegetarian-Friendly Major League Ballparks. L.A. is also the hometown of PETA's 2012 Person of the Year, the fabulous Anjelica Huston.
And, hmm, it seems like there was something else … oh, yes: In March, PETA held the grand opening of its Los Angeles offices in the freshly inaugurated Bob Barker Building. Coincidence? Think it over while Ella takes you on the grand tour.
We hope you'll join PETA in thanking the members of the Los Angeles City Council for their compassionate actions over the past year—and encourage them to keep up the great work in 2013 and beyond!
Los Angeles has been on a roll lately (ever since PETA's new Bob Barker Building opened there—coincidence?). First, the city banned pet stores from selling puppies, kittens, and rabbits from breeders, and then it became the first major city to embrace and endorse Meatless Monday. Now, the City of Angels is considering a ban on cruel elephant acts.
Here's what's going on: The City Council's Personnel and Animal Welfare Committee proposed a measure that would ban circuses and other traveling exhibits in L.A. from forcing elephants to perform.
If the council passes the measure, Ringling Bros. and other circuses that abuse elephants will no longer be allowed to haul them to Los Angeles in cramped, stifling boxcars or trucks in which they're kept chained for up to 100 hours at a time. These circuses will no longer be allowed to drag elephants into an L.A. arena and force them to stand on their heads or balance on balls, with the ever-present bullhook looming threateningly nearby. In L.A., they would no longer be able to deprive elephants of the right to be elephants.
Ringling Bros. is already blasting the measure with both barrels, so the L.A. City Council needs to hear from every single person who has elephants' welfare at heart. Please write—even one line—to the council and encourage it to support the ban on cruel elephant acts. Get everyone you know to do the same so that L.A. can continue to serve as a role model for cities across the country.
peta2 turned Los Angeles'
101 highway into the freeway of love for turkeys. A group of precocious pilgrims and one tenacious turkey asked rush-hour drivers to bury
Show turkeys some love this
Thanksgiving. Drop the pedal and go, go, go get yourself a delicious Tofurky roast.
Great news! The Los Angeles City Council has passed the ban on selling dogs, cats, and rabbits from breeders and puppy mills in pet stores. Those stores will now be required to adopt out homeless animals from shelters instead.
This is a heaven-sent victory for homeless animals in the City of Angels—let's hope it inspires more compassionate decisions across the country!
Originally posted August 13:
Los Angeles may soon take a huge stride toward reducing the number of homeless animals—the City Council is expected to vote soon on a measure that would ban pet stores from selling dogs, cats, and rabbits obtained from any source other than an animal shelter or rescue group. The proposed regulation has already been endorsed by the Los Angeles Times editorial board.
PETA, at the forefront of efforts to curb animal homelessness and overpopulation—by offering low-cost to no-cost spaying and neutering, promoting adoption, and discouraging people from buying animals from breeders and pet stores—is understandably psyched about the possibility of the country's second-largest city taking such a major step toward ending animal homelessness.
If the proposal passes, Los Angeles will join a growing number of cities that are showing that they're serious about stopping the animal homelessness crisis—and the cruel puppy mills that fuel it—by putting laws in place to block animal sales in pet stores.
It's standard practice for puppy mills to keep animals in cramped, crude, and filthy conditions without proper veterinary care or socialization.
If you live in L.A., please politely ask your councilmembers to vote in favor of the proposed ordinance. And if you live elsewhere, urge your city council to pass a law to protect animals from the cruelty caused by their breeding.
PETA has asked the Los Angeles Mayor's Office to immediately
release records related to the city's decision to allow the Ringling Bros. circus to force ailing elephants to perform during its recent stint at the Staples Center despite expert advice
to the contrary and despite apparently breaching the city's own laws.
When Ringling came to L.A. this summer, the city brought in
an independent elephant expert to determine whether the elephants used by the
troupe were fit to perform. Dr. Philip Ensley—associate veterinarian for the Zoological
Society of San Diego for 29 years—issued a critical report after inspecting the elephants.
He advised, among other things, that two of Ringling's
elephants "should be removed from performing" since "Karen and
most likely Nichole as well, suffer from arthritis, which results in chronic
pain, impaired limb function, and are in effect crippled" and that five
other elephants should be removed from performing if Ringling failed to improve
their standard of care because of their histories of foot, toenail, and
musculoskeletal issues, including at least one elephant who "suffers from
… ongoing chronic foot problems."
Dr. Ensley concluded his report by noting that the inspected
elephants "suffer unneeded existing detrimental medical conditions and
should not participate in forced, non species-typical behaviors that are
repetitive rigorous physical activities"—in other words, typical circus
routines—"under the current standard of care and living conditions."
Los Angeles law prohibits the city from issuing a permit to
any circus with animals unless it has first conducted an investigation and
determined "that animals will not be subject to needless suffering,
unnecessary cruelty or abuse" and that the circus will not violate any
state or local law. Los Angeles regulations also prohibit keeping crippled or
painfully diseased animals in the city.
What's more, California law requires that animals who are
"unfit for labor" are not to be used in any way, including in
performances, and prohibits subjecting any animal to needless suffering. But
despite these clear guidelines and Dr. Ensley's unequivocal findings, the city
issued a permit to Ringling and allowed it to illegally force these suffering,
unfit, crippled elephants to perform.
Less Than Full
In an effort to determine why this decision was made, PETA
submitted a public records request to the Mayor's Office. After delaying a
response, the office provided some records but withheld an undisclosed number
of records. PETA believes that the withholding of at least some of these
records may have been unlawful since the reasons given for not releasing the
records don't apply when the public interest favors disclosure.
The reasons for approving a permit for Ringling to use
elephants—whom the city knew from its own
expert to be unfit and suffering from chronic pain—against city
law are clearly of interest to the public, especially at a time when the Los
Angeles City Council is considering legislation to protect elephants used in
circuses. This information is also of interest to PETA, whose campaigners are working
nonstop to end Ringling's abuse and exploitation of animals, so the group has
demanded the release of the improperly withheld records and will consider
taking legal action if denied.
What You Can Do
Even animal-protection laws as seemingly clear as Los
Angeles' don't always do the job. Please start a legislative effort to completely ban circuses and other traveling exhibits in your town or county.
And if a circus with animals is scheduled to perform in your town, make sure that you're ready.
you have a general question for PETA and would like a response, please e-mail Info@peta.org. If you need to report cruelty to
an animal, please click
here. If you are reporting an animal in imminent danger and know where to find the
animal and if the abuse is taking place right now, please call your local
police department. If the police are unresponsive, please call PETA
immediately at 757-622-7382 and press 2.
Follow PETA on Twitter!
Almost all of us grew up eating meat, wearing leather, and going to circuses and zoos. We never considered the impact of these actions on the animals involved. For whatever reason, you are now asking the question: Why should animals have rights? Read more.