AV Magazine Issue 1, 2018

Page 1

AV Magazine 125 YEARS OF

2018 Number 1

Issues of the Day pg 4

Legacy in a Journal

pg 9

2018 Issue 1

125 Years of AV Magazine 4




Major topics throughout the decades have aroused concern and action. By Crystal Schaeffer and Jill Howard Church

8 Vintage Ads

9 Legacy in a Journal AAVS founder Caroline Earle White left her bold mark on history as well as on the pages of the organization’s signature publication.


By Crystal Schaeffer

1 First Word Sharing a treasure with the world.

You can judge a magazine by its cover(s)! See how our opening images changed through the years.

2 Briefly Speaking Animal Research Proponents Seek to Weaken Regulations; Innovation Has Its Awards; Controversy in Pet Cloning; AAVS Comments on Dealer Licensing. 22 Giving Life memberships do indeed save lives. 23 Tributes Special friends honored and remembered. 24 Members’ Corner Magazine impressions and member appreciation.

12 Cover to Cover

14 Presidents Have Their Say Three of AAVS’s notable leaders distinguished their tenures through their writings. By Katherine Lewis

16 Building Community

THe AV Magazine connected individuals and organizations, shaping a movement for animals. By Sue A. Leary

18 Magazine Memories A historian and former AAVS Executive Director recalls the magazine’s role during the busy 1980s. By Bernard Unti

20 The Natural World Celebrating wildlife has long been part of the AAVS magazine. By Katherine Lewis

Founded in 1883, the American Anti-Vivisection Society’s (AAVS) mission is to unequivocally oppose and work to end experimentation on animals and to oppose all other forms of cruelty to animals. AAVS is a nonprofit education organization using legal, effective advocacy to achieve meaningful, lasting change.



Animal ambulances and “hump” hooks were among the products advertised in early issues.



VOLUME CXXVI Number 1 ISSN 0274-7774

Executive Editor Sue A. Leary Managing Editor and Copy Editor Jill Howard Church Staff Contributors Jill Howard Church Chris Derer Sue A. Leary Katherine Lewis Crystal Schaeffer Art Direction Brubaker Design

AV Magazine (USPS 002-660) is published by the American Anti-Vivisection Society for the benefit of its members, and has been in continuous publication since 1892. Annual membership dues: $25.00. Office of Publication: 801 Old York Road, Suite 204 Jenkintown, PA 19046-1611 phone: 215-887-0816 e-mail: editor@theavmagazine.org



AAVS welcomes requests to reproduce articles that appear in AV Magazine. In all cases, we will require that credit be given to the author and to AAVS. The individual views and claims expressed in AV Magazine are not necessarily those of the organization. AV Magazine is printed on paper with 10% recycled content.

First Word IT IS MY GREAT PLEASURE to share with you this very special edition of our AV Magazine, which presents some exquisite writing of the past, and one-of-a-kind insight into animal advocacy as it has progressed over time. Launched in 1892 by AAVS Founder Caroline Earle White, with colleagues Mary Kat Lewis, Sue Leary, and Julie Sinnamon at Francis Lovell and Dr. Matthew Woods, the Temple University, home of the AAVS archives. magazine faithfully reported on a variety of issues involving animals. Originally titled the Journal of Zoöphily (and later, The Starry Cross), the publication remained a combined effort of AAVS and the Women’s Branch of the Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for its first 25 years. Since then, AAVS has been the sole publisher. Its launch brought praise. A review in a Philadelphia newspaper, The Evening Bulletin, had this to say: “BRIGHT with new ideas, new type and a new aim, the JOURNAL OF ZOÖPHILY comes to us from its parent society with a most attractive presence and the promise of great usefulness... [It is published by] energetic men and women of humane instincts, who know how to adopt a modern way of placing their views before a public only in too much need of their salutary influence... [It] will prove of untold benefit to the cause which it espouses. Through the letter-press lies the way to hearts and purse-strings in these latter days, and the society has done well to adopt such an avenue of approach to sympathizers...” —reprinted in the Journal of Zoöphily, April 1892 Combing through the pages of 125 years of our magazine has been a labor of love, and preparing this issue took us much longer than we ever imagined. I am deeply grateful to the AAVS staff, who sorted and sifted and found the gems that are in this issue. We shared so many moments of discovery—like looking through a family album—and came away enormously impressed with the eloquence and tenacity of our predecessors. We gleaned lessons from those who have gone before, and would be delighted to know what you think too. Please let us know! Because this is such a treasure, AAVS has ensured the safekeeping of our magazine and other historical documents by contributing them to the Urban Archives at Temple University’s Paley Library in Philadelphia. It is reassuring to know that scholars and others will find, for years to come, evidence of our long and proud movement for animals.

Sue A. Leary, President, American Anti-Vivisection Society

Briefly Speaking NEWS YOU NEED TO KNOW

Animal Research Proponents Seek to Weaken Regulations


pro-animal research consortium has released “Reforming Animal Research Regulations,” a report purportedly meant to help reduce the “regulatory burden associated with animal research.” However, it’s more of a self-serving proclamation geared toward weakening the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), the only law protecting animals used in research, by giving experimenters more control of what happens behind laboratory doors. The report contains no input from those concerned about animal welfare. Many of the recommendations in the report focus on reducing oversight, which means less transparency. The report calls for “an inspection frequency based on compliance history” instead of annual U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) inspections, as required by law. The consortium even wants to scale back reviews from within a facility’s own Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees to “conduct continuing reviews of activities…at least once every three years,” instead of annually. Without this oversight, it will be nearly impossible

for the USDA to uphold the 1985 AWA amendment to assure that humane standards “help meet the public concern for laboratory animal care and treatment.” Additionally, the report states that there should be more harmonization of the AWA, regulations, and agency policies. However, the report recommends doing this through bypassing the AWA in favor of adopting new agency policies that are not enforceable. Such reviews would be done by “an external advisory committee of experts engaged in animal research,” ignoring valuable input from animal welfare specialists. Relatedly, the USDA announced in May that “after carefully considering feedback from the public,” it won’t rely on third-party inspection and certification programs to determine how frequently a facility will be inspected. Additionally, AAVS has submitted comments to the National Institutes of Health regarding the 21st Century Cures Act agency directive to “reduce administrative burden” on animal research facilities. We will continue to keep our readers updated on these issues, so stayed tuned!




tify because their harmful effects sometimes do not manifest for years, and such tests use a large number of mice. Two ARDF-funded studies are using breast cancer tumors to create in vitro models of disease. Kim Boekelheide, M.D., Ph.D., of Brown University is developing a 3D model made of breast cancer tissue, while Thomas Sanderson, Ph.D., of the Institut National de la Recherche in Canada is creating an in vitro culture of hormone-dependent tumor cells; both can be used to detect the toxicity of chemicals that disrupt female hormones. Countless animals are also sacrificed as part of an inefficient experimental drug screening process that has a 90 percent failure rate. At the University of Michigan, Gargi Ghosh, Ph.D., is developing a can-

cer model to screen experimental drugs that can stop tumor growth by blocking their blood supply. Another model that screens for drugs effective in fighting an aggressive bone cancer is being developed by Aranzazu Villasante, Ph.D., at

Columbia University. Both of these alternatives have the potential to significantly reduce the number of animals used in drug testing. Since ARDF was established in 1993, it has awarded more than $3.25 million to studies developing alternatives.


IN 2017, the Alternatives Research & Development Foundation (ARDF, an AAVS affiliate), awarded nearly $200,000 in grants to five studies developing innovative research and testing methods to replace the use of animals. These Alternatives Research Grants were awarded to help find new technologies to replace existing ones that cause extreme pain and suffering for a large number of animals. For example, grant awardee Matteo Minghetti, Ph.D., at Oklahoma State University states that “in the United States alone, approximately six million fish are used every year” in environmental toxicity tests. Minghetti is developing an in vitro cell culture that mimics living fish gills, which can be used to analyze pollution in effluent wastewater. Chemicals that disrupt the work of female hormones can be difficult to iden-


Cloning companion animals reflects a misguided attempt to preserve their memories.

Earlier this year, Barbra Streisand shared that she had cloned her dog with ViaGen, a cloning company that has been featured in various news outlets. For the most part, these have been lighthearted stories that show a happy family, veterinarian, and puppy clone. The only downside mentioned is the cost: $50,000 for a dog and $25,000 for a cat. Although some news reports also raise the ethical issue of cloning pets when there are already millions of dogs and cats needing homes, most stories overlook concern for the welfare of all the animals affected by this science. The cloning process starts with removing DNA from a cell from the donor dog and then inserting the genetic material into a donor egg cell. “Once we have that cell line established, we will use those cells to produce cloned embryos that are transferred into a surrogate dog who has a normal gestation, and then you’ve got a puppy that is born that is a genetic twin to that original pet,” explains Melain Rodriguez, Client Services Manager for ViaGen Pets. “This brings up animal welfare considerations,” says James Serpell, Ph.D., Professor of Animal Ethics & Animal Welfare at the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. “There are also considerations for the egg donor animals and the surrogates. Companies often use purpose-bred female dogs as surrogates. And it’s not really clear what happens to them afterward.” Animal cloning is an imperfect science, and sometimes embryos are not viable. “Some may be destroyed, some may be deformed or disabled,” says Serpell. ViaGen states on its website, “Unfortunately, all forms of reproduction result in some unhealthy births.” Serpell warns that cloned animals are not actually the same as their original counterparts, particularly concerning behavior. “They may be genetically identical, but a lot can happen after conception, it’s classic nature versus nurture, and with dogs and cats, an awful lot is nurture.”

AAVS Comments on Dealer Licensing

Last November, AAVS submitted comments to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in response to its public notice regarding potential regulatory changes for licensing requirements for animal dealers. Overall, AAVS supports efforts to strengthen enforcement related to animal dealer licensing and renewals, as well as efforts to streamline the procedures for denying a license application, terminating a license, and summarily suspending a license. Based on our experiences monitoring animal dealers, we provided additional suggestions to tighten regulations. For example, the current automatic renewal process allows animal dealers who have violated the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) to stay in business, putting animals at greater risk. Instead, there should be an expiration of and reapplication for licenses, which should expire after no more than three years. During that period, the USDA should conduct no fewer than two unannounced, routine inspections of dealer facilities. License fees

currently range from $30 to $750 and are based on a facility’s annual dollar volume of business. These fees should not be decreased, and preferably should also include costs incurred by the USDA to enforce regulations. Current regulations allow dealers with suspended or revoked licenses to apply for another type of license. The USDA wants to close this gap, and AAVS agrees that such dealers should be prohibited from “engaging in other activities involving animals regulated under the AWA.” Licensees should also provide documentation of all their legal names, as well as criminal background checks, including any animal cruelty convictions or other violations of federal, state, or local laws, or regulations pertaining to animals. Another issue is facility privacy. In 2017, the USDA removed from its website a significant amount of information that was posted for public access. Although many of those records were restored, it is still difficult to monitor certain facilities. AAVS suggests that as a way to protect privacy, yet still give the public access to records, facilities should be licensed under their business names and not under their owners’ personal names. Further, AAVS believes the USDA should maintain a database that allows cross-referencing to assure that owners are not operating duplicate businesses or opening them under new names. AAVS agrees with previous audits that the USDA needs to streamline how it regulates and licenses animal dealers, but we believe it must do so without relaxing regulations.



Issues of the Day AV Magazine’s ongoing coverage made sure hot topics didn’t cool.

LAUNCHED IN 1892 by AAVS Founder Caroline Earle White and her colleague, Mary Francis Lovell, the AV Magazine has covered a wide range of issues affecting animals over the past 125 years. Originally titled the Journal of Zoöphily, the publication was jointly published by AAVS and the Women’s Branch of the Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, both led by White. Some hot topics arose on a recurring basis and provide insight into the debates of the time. Here we share excerpts of articles, essays, and letters to the editor discussing issues that were particularly concerning and/or important during those eras. The drawing above appeared on the cover of the March 1918 Journal of Zoöphily.



STRAY/STOLEN DOGS In 1893, a woman who lived in West Philadelphia wrote to AAVS regarding the issue of stray and

pet dogs being stolen and sold to the University of Pennsylvania’s Medical Department for experiments. Other residents reported similar problems. The issue was not new; concerns about dogs being used by the university dated back to at least the 1870s, when White refused to allow Dr. S. Weir Mitchell to take live dogs from the city shelter to use in “testing the power of a new medicine” and to study “obscure phenomena of diseased nerves.” As reprinted in the Journal of Zoöphily, an 1893 issue of The Philadelphia Times reported that “the vivisection department of the University uses from twenty-five to fifty dogs a week, and to keep the supply equal to the demand, advertisements were inserted in several papers offering 25 cents for a dog—a poor, thin dog—and 50 cents for a nice fat, plump, healthy specimen.” Some dogs were surrendered by their owners, but the paper said in other


By Crystal Schaeffer and Jill Howard Church

cases, “small boys began to gather in pet dogs and sell them to the University.” White corresponded with Edwin Stuart, then mayor of Philadelphia, and representatives from the university. Stuart promised to investigate, and although the university denied knowingly using stolen dogs, it did acknowledge that dogs “are bought by persons connected with the Medical Department of the University, for various purposes.” TESTS ON ORPHANS In June 1910, the Journal of Zoöphily voiced its outrage over findings from an investigation by The New York Herald about experiments being done on children in Philadelphia. The paper’s report, which was extensively recounted and expanded upon in the Journal, found that 160 “mostly very young children and even babies less than a year old” from St. Vincent’s Home for Orphans (run by the Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul) and the Blockley Almshouse hospital “have been used as human ‘material’ for purposes of experimental research by physicians at the William Pepper Clinical Laboratory of the University of Pennsylvania.” The experiments consisted of “instilling” tuberculin into the children’s eyes, rubbing it into their skin using ointment, injecting it subcutaneously, or likewise introducing a mix of human and bovine tuberculin. The results included “permanent disturbance of vision” or even “destruction of the eyesight” in the children, leading physicians associated with the Archives of Internal Medicine (published by the American Medical Association) to “render part of the practices unjustifiable in medicine.” The experiments caused such friction between the university and its Medical Department that the entire Board of Physicians resigned. The Journal noted that “for the first time it came to the knowledge of the citizens of Philadelphia that experimental medicine had been practiced upon helpless wards of the community, fatherless and motherless babies.” In the July 1910 Journal, Mary Frances Lovell— Vice President of AAVS—wrote extensively about the morality of doctors who “with no hint of shame” inflicted harm on these children. She said, “We think we may venture the guess that from the point of view of these doctors, the children had no inherent value at all, but were merely rather promising material for certain kinds of experiment.” She went on to reference the August 28, 1909 Journal of the American Medical Association in which “we find accounts of experiments on children by inoculating them with the contents of tumors developed in a disease known to the professional as molluscum contagiosum,” a virus that causes bumps on the skin.

But since vivisectors often defended using animals as a way to help people, she asked, “[W]e wonder, if experiment on animals has done so much to save the lives and health of children, why experiments are, after all, done on children?” HUMANE EDUCATION The importance of humane education has always been emphasized in AAVS publications by sharing news and reports, such as those from the Kindness Club, which started in the 1910s. “Every week hundreds of children are joining the Kindness Club....The boys and girls are not only trying to live up to their pledge of kindness and justice to all and to dumb animals, but they are teaching others to be kind.” By the early 1930s, 100,000 children were members. Eventually, the Kindness Club became known as the Miss B’Kind Club, and Associate Editor Nina Halvey took on the role of Miss B’Kind. The Club met monthly to learn about animals and why they should be treated kindly. The first meeting was held on January 6, 1934, where “[e]ach boy and girl attending the meeting was given a cambric bag full of grain which they took away with them to feed the birds in their home vicinity.” Miss B’Kind became quite popular, especially in the Philadelphia area, and was invited many times to speak at various events. In October 1936, in recognition of World Day for Animals, Halvey spoke on the radio, telling the story of St. Francis of Assisi, Patron of Animals. She encouraged the children listening to think, speak, and act “for their animal friends,” and to “be kind today…so that no one—no living creature—will be sadder tomorrow.” Halvey also spoke to adults, including a 1938 Woman’s Club meeting where she explained how to

A study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine in 1908 noted that children used in eye experiments exhibited “swelling and redness of the lids and cheeks, swelling of the caruncle, lachrymation and narrowing of the palpebral fissure.”



instill compassion in children. “Humane education is an important movement in which every woman should be vitally interested,” she said. “Educating the heart of a child is as important as the mind.” WAR ANIMALS An essay in the January 1919 Journal of Zoöphily reported that 4.5 million horses, tens of thousands of dogs, and thousands of pigeons were used by the Allied forces alone during World War I (19141918). These animals often worked on the battlefields; an article in the October 1914 Daily News and Leader claimed personnel on the frontlines said “that the sufferings of man and beast in this war are unparalleled.” Injuries included deep pressure sores from saddles, shrapnel and sabre wounds, and severe lacerations. To provide veterinary care for injured animals, the American Humane Association (with the approval of the War Department) developed a new program called the American Red Star Animal Relief, doing “for sick and injured horses what the American Red Cross is doing for the soldiers.” Veterinary base and field hospitals were created, not only to provide first aid and recovery care, but also supplies needed to perform surgery on wounded horses and other animals. Dogs in WWI were used to pull small artillery, carry messages through the frontlines, and find injured soldiers. In 1917, AAVS President Robert Logan met Adolf and Mina, two German shepherds who were given to the Red Cross Ambulance Corps. “They are now being trained for ambulance service prior to being sent to France…. It is their task to find the wounded upon the battlefield and lead the stretcher-bearers to them,” he said. “Slowly and patiently, day by day, they are being taught to fetch and carry…and to follow the scent of some article of clothing until they find the owner.” Throughout the war, stories circulated that demonstrated the devotion between soldiers and their working animal companions. One story recalled William Duffy, a soldier from Pennsylvania who was killed in France “when he went back to the field of fire to rescue a number of mules…that

were tied up and in their helpless condition sure to fall victims to the enemy’s heavy hands.” In 1915, a spaniel named Fend l’Air “followed his soldier-master…all the way from Algiers to Arras, in northern France, staying with him in the trenches, despite many attempts to remove him. When a German shell struck that poor master, blowing his right leg clean off, covering him with terrible wounds from head to foot and burying him alive under the terrible debris of earth and shrapnel, the dog managed to dig him out, bring assistance and save his life!” POUND SEIZURE In the early 1950s, the issue of whether pounds and shelters should be required to relinquish unclaimed cats and dogs for use in experiments was the subject of legislation in various states. An editorial in The Christian Science Monitor on February 25, 1952, said forcing humane shelters to turn over animals “would compel these societies to act as partners in a business for which they were never intended,” and would also betray the wishes of those who donated money in support of finding homes for those animals. The AAVS’s Owen Hunt, whose tenure as president was often distinguished by his political arguments on behalf of animals, weighed in frequently on the pages of The A-V magazine. In the April 1952 issue, Hunt wrote about The Dog Pound Seizure Act in Baltimore, which resulted in 1,754 of the 16,244 stray dogs taken in by the city that year being “turned over to the medical institutions for vivisection purposes.” Hunt said that pound seizure “did not reduce one iota the stealing of dogs from homes,” and that people were turning their unwanted pets loose on the street rather than take them to a pound where the animals might be given to labs. Hunt told the incredible story of a television broadcast on WBAL on February 19, 1952, sponsored by the Maryland Society for Medical Research. It featured four doctors performing “emergency” surgery on a stray dog who supposedly—or conveniently?—just happened to be injured moments before the show and needed an artificial kid-





Contrary to reports at the

ney. Hunt saw through the time, it was later learned that Laika died within hours of ruse and called them out. being launched into space after her capsule overheated. “This entire incident serves as a grand example of the contempt in which the medical profession hold the American public,” he wrote. “Not only are the public required to believe this type of hokum, but disbelievers are quickly accused of heresy….How anyone in his right mind could believe that an accident happened to a dog and exactly in the right place at the right time is beyond human comprehension.” The issue of pound seizure continued to be hotly debated, and many attempts to allow it were rebuffed. In October 1961, The A-V printed a report from the Kalamazoo Gazette noting that a Circuit Court judge in Michigan had ruled that a county board of supervisors did not have the authority to sell dogs from the local pound to a dealer who resold them for vivisection. It said, “A wave of public indignation, led by anti-vivisection minded citizens, caused the supervisors to delay instituting the sales” that were ultimately halted altogether. SPACE PROGRAM On November 3, 1957, the Soviet Union launched a dog named Laika into space orbit aboard Sputnik, the first spacecraft to circle the Earth. The threeyear-old Husky mix was among three stray dogs taken from the streets in Moscow and trained for Mercury capsule. He was nicknamed Ham—short the flight, which the Soviets knew she would not for Holloman Aerospace Medical Center, where survive. Many years later it was revealed that after he and 39 other chimps were held and trained launch, Laika’s heart rate more than doubled, and for space use. Some descendants of the so-called when the temperature control system failed and “space chimps” are among the government-owned her tiny compartment overheated, she was dead chimpanzees still kept in U.S. facilities today, within hours. awaiting sanctuary. Outrage over the planned death of a dog was What becomes evident in reviewing 125 years directed at the Soviets, although both they and the of the AAVS’s magazine, whether it was called the United States had used other animals in space-relat- Journal of Zoöphily, the Starry Cross, The A-V, or AV ed experiments before. In the October 1957 issue Magazine, its editors and contributors were faithful of The A-V, Nina Halvey wrote an essay about and fervent reporters on the animal issues of their Laika, and comparing her fate to that of other time. The magazine has been a comprehensive animals used in experiments with far less public source of news and information about the strugexposure. “Now when the dog in space is callgles of animals, bringing readers unique voices and ing forward the sympathy and understanding of a passion for the cause. all decent people, let us stress the point—that in As today, the topics it featured were not usually our world there is no place for the cruelty and the “over and done” in a month, or even a year or more. heartlessness toward a living creature who has no Rather, the magazine has served to keep its readers choice about her ride through space… This act of informed and motivated for however long it takes Russia has focused the eyes of the world on to effect change. AV CRUELTY. Let us emphasize that behind the laboratory doors is much cruelty as well.” In 1961, it was the United States that took a Crystal Schaeffer, M.A. Ed., M.A. IPCR, is the three-year-old chimpanzee captured in West Africa Outreach Director for AAVS. Jill Howard Church, and launched him into orbit in a specially designed M.A., is Managing Editor of AV Magazine.



Vintage Ads The Journal of Zoรถphily attracted unique advertisers in its day.

June 1902, Volume 11, No. 6

October 1903, Volume 12, No. 10

January 1901, Volume 10, No. 1

October 1903, Volume 12, No. 10

September 1897, Volume 6, No. 9

September 1897, Volume 6, No. 9



October 1918, Volume 27, No. 10

Legacy in a Journal by Crystal Schaeffer

CAROLINE EARLE WHITE was nearly 60 years old when she launched the Journal of Zoöphily with her colleague Mary Francis Lovell. She had already helped to establish the Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Women’s Branch of the SPCA, and AAVS. Her activism is well documented in the century old pages of the Journal, and reflects White’s legacy: the belief that any cruelty is immoral, regardless of who the victim is. FIGHTING CRUELTY White was pragmatic and strategic, focusing her efforts where she felt they could have the most impact and potential for lasting, meaningful change. It will generally be admitted, I think, that I am one of the prominent anti-vivisectionists of this country, and it is well-known that I, together with a friend, founded the first anti-vivisection society in this country, besides having labored assiduously in the cause ever since. Some years, though, before [AAVS] was ever contemplated, I began to work against the cruelties of cattle transportation, a subject which has occupied much of my time ever since.… [T]he Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals introduced into Congress a bill providing that cattle and other animals should not be confined in cars connecting lines of railroad for more than twenty-eight hours without being taken out for food, water, and rest…. I decided to go to Washington…to see Senators…and make known to them the sufferings and consequent loss in weight of the cattle brought from the far West to our Eastern cities.… Our efforts were crowned with success, and…the act was passed.…

AAVS Founder Caroline Earle White

I agree with you that the suffering of animals in transportation, and also in slaughtering, is greater than that in a large amount of the vivisectional experiments practiced in physiological laboratories, and for that reason I have almost entirely given up the eating of meat.… A thousand times the money we now spend would not stop [the shipment of cattle]. It will always go on while human beings use beef as an article of food, but it is practicable to diminish it, and that we are trying to do. The charge you make against us that we hate science with a mediaeval hatred is too absurd, as well as false, to be worthy of a moment’s consideration. We hate cruelty, not science. –March 1899, Vol. 8, No. 3, Pg. 27 SPEAKING TO THE TOP In White’s days, pet dogs were at serious risk of being stolen and lost/stray animals at pounds were in danger of being collected by labs and used in experiments. With few laws or policies protecting animals, White urged top government officials, such as Philadelphia Mayor Edwin Stuart and President William Howard Taft, to take urgent action. [To Stuart:] Is it not an outrage that the inhabitants of West Philadelphia are subjected constantly




to the danger of having their pet dogs stolen from them and taken where they will be tortured for hours and perhaps days until death ends their suffering? Who that appreciates the beauty of a dog’s nature, that recognizes his intelligence, his fidelity, his undying devotion to those around him, can help sympathizing with those families in their distress at the thought of what their much loved pets have endured? –January 1893, Vol. 2, No. 1, Pg. 6 [To Taft]: I am impelled to address you by the astonishment and, I may say, horror with which I have been inspired by the recent news from Washington that…dogs in the pound shall be given over…to the Bureau of Animal Industry for purposes of what is euphemistically termed “research;” in reality, vivisection… . [C]ruelty…would be the result of the enforcement of this order and of such disgrace to our Government as this would imply and as such a desecration of our legislative power…. The inoculation of the animals with different diseases is almost always accompanied by severe suffering. You will, I trust, excuse my urgency in this matter when I tell you that I was the first person to start the movement against vivisection in this country. Assisted most kindly by my friend Miss Adele Biddle, daughter of Nicholas Biddle, so well-known in connection with the United States Bank, we organized the [AAVS] twenty-seven years ago. May we hope that you will exert your power and influence to prevent the order…from going into effect, and that the Almighty God will reward you if you do this for the sake of the poor, ill-used animals…. – September 1910, Vol. 19, No. 9, Pgs. 100-101



RESPONDING TO OPPONENTS Criticisms of White and others who opposed animal experiments were often strident, referring to anti-vivisectionists as “crank[s]” who have “gone daft by nurturing a fad,” while the New York Medical Journal called them “insane” and “know-nothings.” We pity the writer of this article, almost more than we condemn him, because he knows so little of what he is writing about, and because his grey matter appears to be in such a hopelessly muddled state. [W]hat we protest against is the long-continued torture of millions of innocent, helpless creatures for an extremely doubtful gain…. We wish that the editors of various journals in the United States were better informed upon this subject. –December 1893, Vol. 2, No. 12, Pg. 184 Are we insane because we wish to stop such experiments as those of Dr. Phelps in the study of ankyloses of the joints, when he took dogs, and, twisting one of their legs over the backs in a cramped position, sealed them up in plaster-of-Paris, preventing their regaining a natural state and causing, as he himself admits, great suffering? Are we insane because we seek to prevent such atrocities as those of Dr. Castex in Paris, when, according to his own account, he beat dogs with a heavy wooden mallet or stone jar and refrained from giving them any anesthetic because, as he says, he could tell better by their moans and the efforts to escape how much they were bruised…? –June 1897, Vol. 6, No. 6, Pg. 67 Dr. Grammer says at the beginning of his paper: ‘Nor is vivisection cruel. It is the essence of cruelty if pain be inflicted for no worthy purpose, but make the motive great enough and the pain becomes justifiable.’ But who, I will ask, is to be the judge of the purpose and the motive? Are a few powerful men united in the pursuit of any object, who claim that motive sanctifies their action, to be allowed to inflict atrocities upon helpless creatures, either human beings or the lower animals?... We know that the higher animals have nerves, muscles, blood-vessels and bones, and the sensation is conveyed to their brains just as it is in our care. What reason, then, is there to suppose that they suffer less than we do?… Does anyone who has ever had a nerve touched

in the dentist’s chair and almost jumped out of the seat believe that in the experiment called ‘recurrent sensibility,’ where a nerve is laid bare in a dog or cat and then stimulated with electricity without the administration of any anesthetic whatever, the pain is not the most intense one could imagine? No, there is nothing on earth more cruel than vivisection…. – March 1906, Vol. 15, No. 3, Pg. 27 BUILDING A MOVEMENT White recognized the importance of engaging children to nurture compassion, and encouraged animal advocates to work together to create a better world for animals. From humble beginnings has sprung an immense, encircling atmosphere of mercy, justice, and compassion covering nearly all of the United States and extending even to the territories. To gain this longed-for and glorious end, a great amount of work has been necessary from a number of earnest devoted souls, and one of the greatest aids to the march of humanity has been the education of the children in kindness, not alone to the lower animals who they are taught to love and protect, but to every living creature, to their parents, teachers, schoolmates, friends, and to every unfortunate, afflicted member of the human family. –October 1910, Vol. 19, No. 10, Pg. 116 ‘An Unaccountable Fact!’ We have a complaint to make of the lukewarmness of the old and early formed Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals on the subject of anti-vivisection. A vast amount of work for the anti-vivisection cause has been and is being done, but it is the work of other and more newly formed organizations. These are mostly owing to the work of women; that is, their foundation has been, but of course they have been greatly assisted by men. May all these organizations, old and new alike, preserve the divine spark which has led them to enroll themselves in the battle against vivisection, and which we pray may lead them to fight on until this monstrous cruelty of torturing God’s helpless creatures with agonizing experiments be done away with forever! –June 1916, Vol. 25, No. 6, Pg. 83 AV Crystal Schaeffer, M.A. Ed., M.A. IPCR, is the Outreach Director for AAVS.

AAVS WAS FOUNDED BY CAROLINE EARLE WHITE in 1883, precipitated in large part by early experiences as President of the Women’s Branch of the Pennsylvania SPCA, which she established 14 years earlier. The story is recalled several times in the Journal of Zoöphily: “The first thing necessary to do was to build a new ‘pound’ and one comfortable for the dogs in every respect…. We had scarcely advanced in our humane attempt any farther than this, when one day the President [Mrs. White]…received a visit from Dr. Horatio C. Wood, saying, ‘I have come, Madam, to ask you to let us have some of the dogs you have taken, for our experiments at the University [of Pennsylvania].’” “‘I shall have to decline,’ replied the President calmly, although shaking with excitement. ‘We could give up our dogs for no such purpose.’” [Later], “a note came from Dr. S. Weir Mitchell containing the same petition for animals for experimentation at the University.” [In reply], “saying that as the Society of which she was the head was “I HAVE COME, opposed to cruelty to animals, she could not consent to give up dogs MADAM, TO ASK YOU TO LET US HAVE SOME to the very same treatment they were opposing.”


[However], “The doctors did not yield. They at once applied to City Council, asking that body to force the Society to give up the dogs.” [But officials agreed that] “it would be the height of inconsistency for an organization that had been formed to prevent cruelty, to aid in the very object it had been formed to prevent.” There was “an idea that we could unite on a compromise Bill with the doctors who were opposed to us… . We decided upon a Bill that we and also a deputation of the doctors were to take up to the [Pennsylvania] Legislature.” “We declined making any speech [before the Legislative Committee], as we had supposed that there was an entire agreement… . What was our amazement when [Dr. Wood] made no mention of it whatever, but at once launched out into a perfect glorification of vivisection, telling of how much benefit it had been to mankind.” “I felt dissatisfied...and I introduced” in 1887, at one of the meetings, “a resolution” that would not allow future compromises, and set the organization as “in favor of the abolition of all experimentation upon animals… .”

“Since then our Society has worked on in the greatest discouragements, and in the face of insufferable obstacles.”



COVER TO COVER The covers of the AAVS magazine have evolved over the decades, but what’s inside has always sought to inform, educate, and motivate.





Presidents Have Their Say by Katherine Lewis

In the 125 years of the American Anti-Vivisection Society’s periodical, whether it was the Journal of Zoöphily, The Starry Cross, The A-V, or AV Magazine, the organization’s presidents have served as editors. Their writings conveyed the message of our cause and inspired members of the organization and the public to make a difference for animals in labs. We’ve selected some of our favorite columns below.

Man’s world is triple. However much we may seek to escape the painful process called Thought, life forces us to do some thinking. Thinking, Feeling, Doing are the three sides of our triangle, length, breath, and thickness of our souls…. Anti-vivisection…has these three dimensions. To some, the philosophical or mental side of anti-vivisection or of humane


true, the greater will the action be when it takes place. Vivisection is itself triple. It is a philosophy, an attitude, and an organization, Mentally it is a statement that ideas are paramount and owe us consideration to ethics or conscience. Emotionally it is an indulgence in domination and selfish indifference. In action it is a great interlocking system of medical monopoly, scientific prestige, and laboratory endowments. Each of us…has a part to play in combating this distortion of thought, this perversion of feeling and this misdirection of activity, and no one of us can do the work alone. We must recognize each other’s contributions and we must try so to adjust our efforts that each type shall find its best expression without thwarting the other. Let some of us combat the fallacies of vivisectional thinking with a sounder logic; let some of us pour out our hearts in tenderness and pity against the pride and callousness and ruthlessness of the vivisector, and let some of us organize and gather facts and put up posters and raise money and urge legislation. So shall we work together for the good of all and the certain progress of mankind. OWEN HUNT Owen Hunt followed Robert Logan and served as AAVS President for 28 years. He placed a high value on reaching out to the public to gain supporters and to educate them about the brutal world of vivisection so that people might want or demand a change. In the January 1960 issue of The A-V, Hunt wrote his “Principles Stated” to readers:

work in general seems so much energy wasted, so much subtracted from the time given to us for some concrete accomplishment. …(V)ivisection has numerous and powerful defenders—the To others the enthusiasm and vivid feelings and generous exploAmerican Medical Association, huge drug companies, now one sions of the emotionally sensitive seem to be just so many discor- of the largest sections of industries in this country, with gross dant notes that do not make a chord, much less a symphony.To sales of more than four billion dollars a year. many others, both the theorizing and the sentimentalizing seem Against us are also the huge batteries of propaganda controlled pitifully ineffective and remote from the goal of action, from the by the science which relates especially to the medical and drug reality of things accomplished. interests. Science has become a cult, with findings which the All these temperaments are right, yet in failing to recognize laity are expected to accept without question. each other’s value all are wrong. Feeling is the source of thought Our society advocates the final and complete abolition of and only thought creates action... . vivisection. We are not to be led astray by such proposals as There is, therefore, a mixture of thought, feeling, and action “regulation” or “official inspection.” Such measures have been in all of us, in all we are and do, and the difference between us is abundantly proved to be worthless. in emphasis. The greater the emphasis on the thought side, the Our efforts must be directed to education—or propaganda, if longer will the resultant action be delayed, but if the thought be anyone prefers that word. The purpose must be conversion of




ROBERT LOGAN By 1929, Robert Logan had already served as President of AAVS for 18 years. At this time in his tenure, he had already initiated a great deal of public education outreach and embraced international alliances. Logan’s writings often addressed both philosophical and practical matters that pertained to the anti-vivisection cause. In the April 1929 issue of The Starry Cross, Logan wrote:

From left, Robert Logan, Owen Hunt and William Cave.

enough men and women—children, also—to understand the evil which we seek to abolish, and to support means to do away with it. We advocate legal measures to achieve this end, but such legislation is not likely until strong backing of aroused citizenry has been attained. In the meantime, we have a record of fighting adverse proposed legislation, such as dog-pound seizure bills. To achieve such results, we must have a definite continuity, such as regular publications. The public must know who and where we are and what we do. Spasmodic or restricted efforts in such a cause as this often do harm to a public movement rather than good. The only hope for success against so strongly entrenched evil as vivisection is in keeping up an unremitting educational campaign. This we plan to do.

tive, immoral and misleading, and therefore must be abolished. At no time in the past ninety-nine years has there been any deviation from the stated purpose of the Society, either on the part of its managers or its loyal supporters. Doubtless our founders, the handful of people who proclaimed the right of animals to be spared from scientific torture, would be stunned could they have foreseen the scope of vivisection today. Yet I believe this would not have deterred them. The Society’s motto, “You cannot do evil that good may result,” is an ever-present reminder that what is right and true will prevail. At the beginning of our second century I see many signs of encouragement. Scientists in increasing numbers are coming round to the view that the use of animals in research and testing is not the last word, and are becoming involved in developing procedures not using whole live animals. The cosmetic industry WILLIAM CAVE is funding such research as an alternative to the infamous Draize William Cave served as AAVS President from 1978 to Test. Some of the pharmaceutical manufacturers, e.g., Smith1990. He became a leader in the promotion of alternatives Kline Beckman, have publicly stated their intention to reduce and advanced AAVS’s education program. animal use in their testing and have given examples of changes In the January 1983 issue of AV Magazine, Cave already made. wrote his “President’s Message” to members about the Our objectives are beginning to be realized. Each day brings organization’s 100th anniversary: more evidence that people are in sympathy with our point of view and will not support a form of research which claims to This issue of our AV Magazine marks the start of the onefind health and well-being for humankind at the expense of its hundredth anniversary of The American Anti-Vivisection Society, fellow animals. AV the oldest such society in the United States. As many, but not all, of our members know, the basis for its incorporation was the Katherine Lewis, M.A., is Associate Director of Animalearn, a conviction of its organizers that vivisection is cruel, unproducdivision of AAVS.



Building Community by Sue A. Leary

COAST TO COAST The magazine included news of regional efforts; here are two reports, the first in a letter regarding an anti-vivisection ballot measure in California: A Word from California2

Nov. 10th, 1920 My Dear Mrs. Halvey: Well, the election is over and we did not win. But personally I am not at all disappointed as I have been in the work too long not to realize the tremendous odds that we are up against, and I never looked upon our bill as anything but an AAVS ANNUAL MEETING, 1956: Recipients of Certificates of Merit (left to right) Mrs. Mildred McDowell, Mrs. Sarah Swinford, Mrs. Victor F. Lecoq, Mrs. Marie Olson, Mrs. Caroline Niedospial, and Miss Virginia W. Sargent.

educative measure. I did not think it was humanly possible to win the first time. No great reform has ever done that. Look at woman’s suffrage, prohibition, etc. However I think we did fairly well considering all things, and I was really surprised that we got as far as we did. We are not at all discouraged and will keep right on. Our cause is right and MUST and SHALL win in the end. Faithfully yours, Venia Kercheval Los Angeles Tea in New York3

The New York Anti-Vivisection Society is “at home” the first Monday of every month, when the members and their friends gather for an hour’s discussion of the work they are doing and a friendly cup of tea... . Mrs. Diana Belais, President of the Organization, was the first hostess of the season and...Miss Nellie C. Williams the second. It has been planned to have a speaker for each occasion and Miss Williams invited Mr. Robert R. Logan, our editor, to address her guests.... A real spirit of working together for the coveted goal of Abolition of Vivisection abounded... . Mrs. Diana Belais introduced Miss Williams, who is somewhat a stranger in the New York ranks, having been, until recently, an earnest worker in the Baltimore Society. Miss Williams...then presented Mr. Logan to her guests, and he spoke for about half an hour on the cruelty and moral aspect of vivisection. ...[E]veryone was then asked to talk informally and help one another with their ideas. When we saw the success of that afternoon, we were tempted to hurry our plans...for just such afternoons here.... [W]e hope many societies will follow the New York lead in this new plan of theirs, so that every month many friends of our Cause may meet socially, yet with earnest thoughts, to discuss over the tea-tables ways and means to reach the people so that a great many more shall unite their efforts with ours in behalf of those who suffer in the laboratories throughout the world. —N.H. [Nina Halvey] THE RICH AND FAMOUS Celebrities attracted interest for AV Magazine readers in days past as much as they do today. These three news items went beyond vivisection to address other issues of animal cruelty. For example, in 1929, former Maine governor Percival P. Baxter was compelled to write to the magazine to set the




BEFORE THE INTERNET, there was the AV Magazine. In these pages, people who cared about animals in an uncaring world found each other, and found ways to speak out against animal suffering and injustice.The intent of the magazine was to inform and empower readers. It was also to build the community of advocates for animals, learning from shared strategies, successes, and setbacks. This is how our movement was built: on the passion of individuals and organizations, networked across the miles. The community was very much in evidence when dozens of tributes were received and published after the death of AAVS founder and leading humanitarian Caroline Earle White in 1916. In a special issue,1 the magazine shared pages of messages. The California Antivivisection Society wrote, “Though separated by the space of a continent, and never having met her face to face yet the spiritual bond existed, and we are ever loath to lose those to whom we have been drawn by the tender ties of an unselfish desire to alleviate suffering and distress...”

record straight about his stance on hunting. The following letter...has been recently received from Ex-Governor Baxter—a valued member of our organization:4

October 30th, 1929 To the Editor of The Starry Cross 3234 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Penn. Dear Sir: The accompanying brief statement explains itself and I thought you might like to use it in The Starry Cross. I felt that it was incumbent upon me to make this statement in view of the position I long have taken in regard to hunting. Believe me, Faithfully, Percival P. Baxter

Mrs. Betty Schmidt, founder, past president, and Chairman of the Membership Committee, Wisconsin Friends of Animals, since 1965. “She and a hard core of fellow workers have distributed more than 100,000 pieces of our anti-vivisection literature at conventions, fairs, and shopping centers.”

Write to “stars” and protest against all this needless suffering. Remember, we cannot teach children kindness in the classrooms and let them go after class hour to see their “hero” of the screen lasso, jerk, pull, drive and beat helpless animals... . Letters of protest, such as our good friend suggests, can be addressed to the “star” himself, Tom Mix, at Hollywood, California.

Former Governor Baxter, of Maine, is not a hunter

Portland, Maine, October 22, 1929 In the Maine newspapers of October 21st last there appeared a despatch from Bangor, Maine, entitled, “EX-GOV. BAXTER BRINGS OUT HIS DEER.” This statement is without any foundation and in justice to me and the humane cause for which I stand, should be corrected. I have not been in the Maine woods during the hunting season this year nor for twenty-five years past and would not be guilty of shooting such an innocent, beautiful and harmless a creature as a deer. No one loves the woods of Maine more than I do, and the slaughter that goes on there each year during the open season distresses me. I hope the time will come in Maine when human beings will find some more humane and worthy manner by which to amuse themselves than through the death and suffering of these timid, warm-blooded creatures of the wild... —Percival P. Baxter

Editorial Comment6

Editorial comment was made in the Philadelphia Inquirer of May 7th which heartened humanitarians and made them take a real pride in a Philadelphian, now Princess Grace of Monaco. It was titled “Saving the Pigeons,” and it told the story [of ] the Princess having been able to persuade Prince Ranier “to discontinue the shoots compelling the sportsmen with the fancy artillery and the quick trigger fingers to get along as best they can without the mass murder of helpless birds in demonstrating their talent with firearms.” This brought to our mind the many, many times when our late President and Editor, Robert R. Logan, wrote letters to the Philadelphia press and made all sorts of efforts to legislate against pigeon shooting from a Club near his country home... .

Cruelty in the Movies5

…[A] member of the American Anti-Vivisection Society who has been in active service in our ranks for years asks most earnestly for our help in urging that letters of protest be sent from all animal lovers to the moving-picture star Tom Mix, “who has recently,” according to a newspaper account, “accepted an honor conferred upon him by the motion-picture exhibitors of California, and will lead the rodeo to be held by the Raisin Growers’ Association at Fresno, California, on April 30th [1920].” At this celebration all forms of cruelty have been promised—steer-throwing, roping, bulldogging, etc., with Tom Mix as star and countless animals as the sufferers... . Let us register a protest at once to these wild west players... . Let Tom Mix and his kind...feel the power of national protest... . Work for the animals of the plains, and start to work at once. The animals are in dire need of your help today. Will you not aid them?

In today’s ever-growing global community, emails, social media, and petition websites give us news from all corners of the world, and facilitate calls to action. Those who have gone before us in these AV Magazine pages would be amazed, and would likely urge us to carry on with these new tools for a new era. Go to aavs.org and make sure you are signed up for our monthly e-newsletter to stay informed! AV Sue A. Leary, M.S., is President of AAVS. Journal of Zoöphily, September 1916 The Starry Cross, December 1920 The Starry Cross, December 1920 4 The Starry Cross, November 1929 5 The Starry Cross, April 1920 6 The A-V, June 1960 1 2 3



Magazine Memories by Bernard Unti


he AV Magazine must have been one of the first movement publications I saw when I was starting out as an animal advocate in the mid-1980s. I know for certain that I was in contact with AAVS and the people on the editorial team by autumn 1985; back then it was Michael Ware and Bill Kelley, supported by William and Eleanor Cave, who were so unselfishly dedicated to managing the organization in those years. I’ve been a life member and thus a subscriber ever since. Later, I helped to write and edit the magazine, and every now and then it’s been my pleasure to contribute additional content. I still read it with great attention, not with any sense of nostalgia but rather with a keen interest in current content. Looking through some of the issues from the 1980s is like turning back the pages of my own life story, and my shared experience with countless others involved with animal protection since that decade. The names, the places, and the details come back, and it reinforces my sense of pride in what the organization was doing, and what the animal rights movement has made possible. If you are part of a generation born before 1975 or so, and thus likely to have been a reader, a few things should really strike you about The AV, or any activist publication from that period. First, this was a heady time in the history of our




Bernie and his pal, Thurgood

cause, when the tailwinds of animal rights philosophy and values were creating a new and beneficial pressure on many long-established organizations. Second, it’s clear that our understanding of the value of magazines, journals, and other publications has been reshaped by the internet and the many online channels for sharing information, knowledge, and opinion. The alerts that we now send out for instantaneous landing in supporters’ email took longer to develop, were less complex, and needed days or weeks to reach recipients. Those alerts used to come out on a weekly or monthly basis, at most—not at today’s manytimes-per-day schedule. Thus, our advocacy took place at a slower pace, and perhaps, less efficiently. Still, we managed to advance our cause. In the 1980s, there were a handful of publications associated with animal organizations, but very few came out on a monthly basis, as The AV Magazine did. The Animals’ Agenda was arguably the most independent of publications in the field, unharnessed as it was from any particular organization. But The AV—for its timeliness, its functional utility in reaching advocates, and its distinctive combination of historical essays, natural history content, subscriber contributions, and news of the field—was special. For a few years, I worked at The AAVS and especially valued my participation with the magazine. I liked working with editors Bill Kelley and Robert Hudson because they were among the first editors who examined my writing with a critical eye. Their editorial scrutiny and encouragement provided useful life lessons about the relationship between writers and those who prepare their work for sharing with a broader audience of readers. I remember crying like a baby when Bob passed away in 1989, and I am pleased that Bill, for whom I have the highest regard, has remained a friend all through the years. The AV carried pieces on zoos, on wildlife concerns, on companion animal subjects, and on farm animal welfare. Also, the editors reprinted useful work by journalists that would have otherwise gone into the newspaper morgue and not lived much beyond their initial publication. Bill Kelley, Len Lear, and other Philadelphia journalists were contributors to The AV whose work also appeared in the regional newspapers, which encouraged me about the potential for getting the word out to a broader audience. I wrote one or two opinion pieces taken up by the Philadelphia Inquirer and other publications, which made me proud. The AV, operating with a small staff, relied on advocates in a lot of ways for content develop-

experimenter Robert J. White. There were also early successes with alternatives. Locally, in Philadelphia, there was Ruy Tchao and Joseph Leighton, champions of the CAM test as a specific alternative to the Draize Rabbit Eye Irritancy Test. AAVS also gave Resusci-Dog, a cardiology teaching mannikin, to several veterinary schools. Looking back from the vantage of 30 years, I remember how I enjoyed reading the historical content in the AAVS magazine, usually produced by the Irish writer Liam Brophy, but sometimes written by Ted PanDeva Zagar and other advocates. Brophy, who was part of the organization Catholic Concern for Animals, produced a column every issue, weaving together anecdotes and insights concerning many of the prominent individuals who had rallied to the cause in the past. Another thing I liked about the magazine was that you could read some bracing pieces attacking experimentation with animals on the basis of its actual value and cost-benefit, by people like John McArdle, Brandon Reines, or Steve Tiger. The best critic for my money was Robert Sharpe, an English chemist whose book The Cruel Deception LOOKING THROUGH SOME OF was smart and pointed in its criticisms of animal use. There THE ISSUES FROM THE 1980s… were other examples in my life of scientists who delivered cool REINFORCES MY SENSE OF and serious explanations of the PRIDE IN WHAT THE limitations of animal research, but Robert was my personal hero ORGANIZATION WAS DOING. in that group. In my late teens and early twenties, I was like many young section and animal protection in the mid- to late people anxious about my future and especially 20th century. In the 1980s, you could read about about my future employment prospects, and I the Baby Fae baboon heart controversy, the Silver recall my father saying something to the effect that Spring Monkeys case, the scandalous experiments “anyone who can write well will have no trouble at the University of Pennsylvania Head Injury Clin- earning a living.” I didn’t give it real weight at ical Research Center, and other flashpoints. There the time, but as someone who does make a living was a lot of whistleblowing at that time, and you (largely) with his pen, I have come to regard my knew that people working in these places wanted to father’s observation as both caring and prescient, get the word out. It kept you going in your passion just as I can look back on my experience of The to see animals receive a measure of justice. AV as writer, editor, and reader as formative in Pound seizure was a hot war. There was the my own journey as a writer and an advocate. The fight over animal patenting in the aftermath of the chance to reflect on that experience is a source of decision in Chakrabarty v. Diamond. There was joy and pride, and I am confident that The AV has 15-year-old Jenifer Graham, who refused to dissect been influential in the lives of others, human and a frog in biology class, making national headlines. nonhuman, too. AV The great primate defender Shirley McGreal was weathering the threat of a lawsuit from an Austrian Bernard Unti is the Senior Policy Adviser and Special vaccine manufacturer. Readers’ Digest published a Assistant to the President & CEO of The Humane piece by the bizarre monkey head transplant Society of the United States. ment. People sent in reams of newspaper clippings to keep the editors apprised of events and issues around the world. Vi Moffett and Marty Rosenthal were great favorites of mine, long gone now, who used to do that, as senior citizens with a strong commitment to activism. (To this day, they are the kind of people I think about when I consider how important it is to keep working in support of the cause with whatever time one has left.) The AV Magazine is the direct descendent of a pioneering publication, the Journal of Zoöphily, which was a serious organ of discussion and debate in its era, and an immensely valuable historical source in ours. I relied heavily upon the Journal for my own Ph.D. dissertation on the history of concern for animals in the United States. In its pages, one can assess not only the founding legacy of Caroline Earle White, but the activism of her close colleagues, including Mary F. Lovell and Margaret Halvey. One day (if it’s not already happening), people will rely on the AV Magazine in the same way; its pages chronicle the headline events of anti-vivi-



In addition to publishing articles directly related to vivisection, the AAVS magazines often included pieces that celebrated animals in the natural world. These three contributions, compiled by Katherine Lewis, are among our favorites.

Bird Artists

THAT THERE IS A CONSCIOUSNESS of beauty on the part of birds is plainly shown by the manner in which many of them decorate their nests and surroundings, and, in some instances, themselves. Perhaps it may not be too much to claim that all birds have an artistic sentiment, and that, while most of them are artistic in effect, many are artistic in both intention and effect. Sometimes the exhibition of artistic feeling is carried so far as to confound belief. Were it not for the corroborative testimony of scientific travelers, we might well doubt the tales that come to us of the baya of Farther India. The baya is one of the weaver-birds, whose peculiarity is that they build their nests by skillfully weaving into the desired shapes long strips of grass or other material. The nest is a beautiful and ingenious piece of work, and is as compact as felt, with a long rope-like neck which is attached to the limb by a skillful knot, and with the entrance and exit by two holes in the bottom. The bird



So-called “weaver” birds create nests that are works of art.

is very sociable, and in Burmah [sic] delights to build under the eaves of human habitations, where it is rarely disturbed. Often as many as 30 or 40 of the curious, bottle-shaped nests may be seen hanging about one house and swaying gently to and fro in the breeze. These nests are ingeniously planned, the upper portion being divided into two chambers, one for Mother Baya while she is sitting, and the other for Father Baya when he finds time for rest, while below is a large general living-room for the whole family as soon as the young Bayas grow strong enough to leave the upper chamber. But the baya does not stop there. Now that creature comforts are provided, there is leisure to gratify his sense of the beautiful. Hardly has Mother Baya settled down when her husband, having put the finishing touches to the nest, hurries away in search of fresh lumps of clay, which he affixes to the inner walls of the nest. Then off again, before the clay has time to harden, to catch one of the fireflies of which there are myriads in the tropics. The living lamp is secured to the lump of clay, and lights up the little chamber with its phosphorescent glow. But even more wonderful are the miniature house and grounds of the gardener-bird, hidden away in the depths of some forest in far-away Papua. One traveler declared the work of the gardener-bird to be one of the most extraordinary facts in natural history. According to this naturalist—DeBessari—the bird artist selects a level spot on which is growing a shrub with


The Natural World

a stalk about the thickness of a walking cane. This is made the central pillar of the edifice, and serves, at about two feet from the ground, to fasten the framework of the roof to. It is held firmly in place by an embankment of moss built up around the root. After the framework is formed, other stems are woven in and out until a waterproof roof is made. Then a gallery is constructed, running around the interior of the edifice. When completed, the whole structure is three feet or more in diameter at the base, is tent-shaped, and has a large arched opening for a doorway. Around the house are artistically arranged grounds, made green and lawn-like by being covered with patches of moss brought hither for the purpose. Bright-colored flowers and fruits and fungi are disposed about the premises; and even brilliant-hued insects are captured and placed here and there on the grounds to add to their attractiveness. The inner gallery of the house is also decorated with these bright objects, which are removed and replaced as they fade. Moreover, and with evident design, the material of which the house is built is a species of orchid which retains its freshness for a very long time. From “Bird Artists,” by Frank H. Sweet in Lippincott’s Magazine, reprinted in the Journal of Zoöphily, November 1897.

The Little Brothers

Now always we should cherish beast and bird, The harmless, gentle things of wood and wold; Not harry them with misery untold— To track a rabbit—is that not absurd? The fish that swim and play in the silvery gleam Beneath the water—let them live their lives; Happy that man, who, willing good, deprives No creature of its weal—wood, field, or stream. So let us live in love to one and all; And let us do no harm, and not molest The furry, feathery, finny folk—and blest Shall be that one who answers to this call. Joyous the creatures then will be to know Man is their friend wherever he shall go. Coralie Howard Haman The Starry Cross, 1929

Quizzy the Red Squirrel

AT SQUIRREL HAVEN, a patch of woods leading to deeper woods beyond, I have often heard a red squirrel chatter, or caught a flash of red as I raced into the pine tops. Having once seen a photo of someone sitting on a log with a red squirrel on her knee, I wanted to be like that person. I began tossing out nutmeats every day as I walked through the woods, and within a week noticed that the squirrel was waiting for me. She no longer fled to the treetops, but peered from lower branches. If I stayed awhile, she became fidgety, dashing up and down trunks with scolding chirps, apparently asking me to leave. One day I did not leave. Instead, I spread a trail of nutmeats along a log and sat down. The nutmeats led to my lap. Quizzy the Inquisitive jerked her tail, chirped and dashed here and there. After awhile she jumped to the ground and began to circle me with little pounces, chirping to test my attention. As I paid her no mind, she grew bolder. Before long she ventured to the end of the log, grabbed a nutmeat, and sat there to eat it. She kept one eye on me, and gave a Quizzy responded chirp now and then to see if I would notice her. I stayed perfectly still, except to gifts of nuts with for speaking in soothing tones. “many a small chirp of satisfaction.” Quizzy became a bit tamer every time I saw her, and by the second week she was eating on my lap, giving many a small chirp of satisfaction and companionship. I always talked to her in a low voice, and she answered with birdlike noises and twitters. Although Quizzy came to trust me, she did not relax her native caution. Ever alert to danger, she watched and listened. One October day Quizzy and I sat companionably eating together (I nibbled a nutmeat now and then) when a large hawk alighted on a stub just above us. Before I was aware of the hawk, Quizzy had dashed under a brushpile. She huddled there motionless for five minutes while the great bird scanned the area. As soon as he flew away, Quizzy scampered back to my lap. For three years Quizzy and I enjoyed our comradeship. I never violated her trust by trying to grab her. She never tried to bite me. One day no twitter answered my call, and Quizzy did not appear. She may have reached the limit of squirrel age, about 12 years, or have been the victim of accident, disease, or predator. In her memory, I have started other red-squirrel relationships, using similar methods, and have been rewarded with memorable friendships. AV Hope Sawyer Buyukmihci, The AV, December 1983




For the Animals. For Life. YOU CARE ABOUT THE SUFFERING of animals in labs. Do you think that will ever change? If your compassion for animals isn’t likely to fade, you have what it takes to be a Life Member of AAVS. Already, as an AAVS contributor, you have demonstrated your dedication to the organization’s mission by supporting our important work very generously, for which we sincerely thank you. Given your devotion to the cause, please consider a lasting commitment through Life Membership.

And while AAVS will still need and appreciate your financial support, your Life Membership will make renewal notices a thing of the past. AAVS will continue to work until animal research is ended—we’re committed for life, and we welcome you to join us; just call 800-SAY-AAVS or email Chris Derer at cderer@aavs.org. Saving lives is what being a Life Member of AAVS is all about, and your support will keep our programs going strong for years to come.

From Life Members I enjoy reading your publications and appreciate all that you do. I’ve been a member for a long time–since my early 20s, and I’m now 84. —Dorothy Holtzman I think AAVS has improved very much since I joined in 1941. Keep up with the good job! —Betty Bragg

For information on planned giving, leadership gifts, recurring gifts, or other support, contact Chris Derer, Director of Development & Member Services, at 800-SAY-AAVS or cderer@aavs.org. When including AAVS in your estate plans or sending a donation, please use our legal title and office address: American Anti-Vivisection Society, 801 Old York Road, Suite 204, Jenkintown, PA 19046-1611. EIN: 23-0341990. AAVS is a notfor-profit 501(c)(3) organization to which contributions are 100 percent tax-deductible under federal and state law.




As an AAVS Life Member, you’ll be an integral contributor to our organization, and enjoy the following benefits: • Lifetime subscriptions to AAVS publications (AV Magazine and Activate for Animals newsletter) • The annual LifeLines newsletter, exclusively for Life Members • Full voting rights at AAVS annual meetings • Eligibility for nomination to the AAVS Board of Managers


HONORING LOVED ONES You can honor or memorialize a companion animal or animal lover by making a donation in his or her name. Gifts of any amount are greatly appreciated. A tribute accompanied by a gift of $50 or more will be published in AV Magazine. At your request, we will also notify the family of the individual you have remembered. All donations are used to continue AAVS’s mission of ending the use of animals in biomedical research, product testing, and education.

In honor of Sheba, my most loving Labrador. She spreads comfort and joy with her warm, furry hugs and tail wags. Kilbee Brittain Los Angeles, CA

In memory of Skipper, the dearest, sweetest dog ever. Died of cancer at age 7 1/2. Monique Consolazio Little Falls, NY

In memory of Lucky. Dorothea Michaud Manassas, VA

In memory of Buster, my cat. Catherine Wray Trainer, PA

In memory of Bella and Luna, the sweetest rat sisters and my darling daughters. I loved them more than life itself. While they passed on, their unlucky relatives still need our help. This tribute is in hopes of sparing the suffering of another precious, innocent soul. I will always remember my babies and cherish what little time I had with them. Rest in peace, my loves. Jordan Lynn Grand Prairie, TX

In memory of Chuck Brumley, a beloved friend. Karla Brieant Paul Smiths, NY

In honor of my love, Brian. Darlene McFarland Gardnerville, NV In memory of my beloved blue-crowned conure, Polly. You were my best friend for almost 28 years. You meant the world to me and I will miss you for the rest of my life. You gave me the greatest gifts of unconditional love and total acceptance, for which I will always be grateful. Sharon Bradley Alexandria, VA In memory of Patrick. Kevin McGuire Deal, NJ In loving memory of my father, Joseph Anderson. Karen Anderson Glendale, AZ Charles, thanks for all your help through the years. Larry Frey Stahlstown, PA

In memory of Speckles. Speckles was my best friend, and he was a really loyal companion whom I miss very much. Richard Theiss, Jr. Parma Heights, OH In memory of Smokey. Larry Schnieders St. Louis, MO In memory of Barbara Schurman. To my mom, who taught me many life lessons, most importantly how to treat animals with love, respect, and kindness. God bless you, Mom! Robert Schurman Paramus, NJ In memory of former AAVS President William Cave. Richard Abbott Santa Paula, CA In honor of all animals. LaVonne K. Schott Kirkland, WA In memory of my dog Barney. Stephen Fezer North Tonawanda, NY In memory of Alice Anne and Ted Bibby. Kathleen Britt Glen Rose, TX

In memory of Daniel Sherman, former attorney of the AAVS. Renee Sherman Strauss Bryn Mawr, PA In memory of Tom Regan. Gentle man, teacher, and friend, who gave the world a new way to think about animals. Sue Leary Ambler, PA In honor of Mark Lieberman, in recognition of all he does for animals. Adam Glenn Jackson, NJ In memory of Tom Regan, Ph.D. Denise Kennedy West Chicago, IL In honor of Page Hurwitz. Best wishes from one animal lover to another! Love, Mom. Arlene Hurwitz New York, NY In honor of Sour Patch. You have more equanimity than any kitty I have ever met. It was nice to spend the nights with you. Stay cool. Love, Joyce. Joyce LiBethe Charlotte, NC In loving memory of sweet Britty, cherished companion of Fred and John. She was truly a wonderful dog. Frank Krafchik Philadelphia, PA In honor of Esther Gleeman’s Bat Mitzvah. Mazel Tov! Frank Krafchik Philadelphia, PA In memory of Judy Winfield. Mom, your work for animals and gentle spirit will always be remembered. I love you. Dara Winfield New York, NY



Members’ Corner THE WRITTEN WORD REMAINS DATING BACK TO 1943, The Written Word Remains was a recurring feature within The A-V, in which articles were reprinted from old editions of The Starry Cross and the Journal of Zoőphily. There is a great wealth of history to be gleaned from reading the extensive archives of AAVS literature—I could page through the bound volumes in our office all day, every day. In contemporary times, we are inundated with information, and knowledge is readily available at our fingertips. However, the dissemination of data was drastically different in the pre-internet age. And for those seeking enlightenment about the evils of animal research, AAVS’s magazine was the pre-eminent publication. Since the beginning, AAVS has sought to educate the public by presenting facts and truth, combatting the propaganda of the research establishment. In The A-V, columns such as Heard And Read, Here And There, and Gleanings, AAVS members learned of animal research statistics, problems with medicines, Happy depictions of animals always helped balance the values of a vegetarian diet, the development of alternative research methods, more serious issues covered in the magazine. and other varied subjects of interest both domestic and international. These columns also regularly featured grisly descriptions and images of animal experiments sourced from medical journals. The past pioneers wisely recognized threats to both animals and people, including radical medical treatments, quackery, factory farming, corporate consolidation, and powerful lobbyists. And while exposing and opposing animal research has always been the core mission, AAVS also condemned trappers, hunters, bullfighters, dog sled racers, and other animal abusers. Given my volunteer work with wildlife, I was delighted to discover profiles of many varied species amid the pages of The A-V. In particular, I enjoyed “Nature’s Feathered Garbagemen” (April 1963) about my beloved vultures, and “In Praise Of Bats…” (December 1963), highlighting the important ecological role of those flying mammals. Occasionally, the The A-V included content which one today might deem mundane, such as descriptions of routine clerical processes. However, those passages provide fascinating glimpses into other eras. I could readily empathize with “Daemon Ex Machina” (April 1960), Dorothea Cooper’s lament over the frequently malfunctioning addressograph machine. I may one day share my similar tales of woe regarding the automated paper inserter! In a tradition that continues today, AAVS members have helped the cause by distributing literature and leaflets—in past years, some volunteers mailed hundreds a week. While perusing old issues of AV Magazine, I was amazed to find familiar names in lists of new members, as well as below letters and tributes dating back several decades. Most incredibly, many of those members are still with us. The longtime devotion and support of AAVS members is truly remarkable— we wouldn’t still be here without you! Over the years, AAVS leaders have keenly embraced advancements in media technology, and promoted the cause through newspapers, radio, television, and the internet. However, throughout the past 125 years, AAVS magazines have remained a constant and reliable source of information, with which we may also connect to the past.

Chris Derer Director of Development & Member Services




For the animals,

One act of kindness can be your legacy, too. In 1883, AAVS was founded by social visionary Caroline Earle White. Knowing that small acts of kindness can make a difference for animals, she tirelessly worked to improve the lives of those who were in need of loving homes, labored on city streets, and suffered in laboratories.

Make her legacy yours. You can help ensure that Caroline Earle White’s vision and the work of AAVS continues far into the future. For information on estate planning and becoming a member of the Caroline Earle White Society, please visit aavs.org/CEWS, or contact Chris Derer at cderer@aavs.org or 800-SAY-AAVS.



The American Anti-Vivisection Society 801 Old York Road, Suite 204 Jenkintown, PA 19046-1611 U.S.A.


Non-Profit Org. U.S. Postage PAID Hamburg, PA Permit No. 102

Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.