28,000 objections to beagle farm plan
TENS of thousands of new objections have been received to plans for a beagle breeding facility in East Yorkshire.
The bid by B&K Universal to expand its site at Grimston was rejected by East Riding Council in June on transport grounds.
-
OUTRAGE: Campaigners outside County Hall in Beverley protest against B&K Universal plan to expand it's beagle breeding farm.
But the company appealed and the case is now being considered by the Planning Inspectorate based in Bristol.
The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV) has submitted a petition with more than 28,000 signatures. It says the number of dogs used in experiments may increase if plans are approved.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Friday, May 31 2013
BUAV chief executive, Michelle Thew told the Mail: "The BUAV urges the Planning Inspectorate to refuse B&K's appeal to build a beagle breeding farm.
"There is widespread public concern about the use of dogs in research which is reflected in the large number of people who have signed the BUAV's petition objecting to B&K's plans. The breeding industry is nothing short of a production line, the dogs are treated as products, bred to suffer and die in laboratories.
"Allowing such a facility to go ahead is likely to increase the number of dogs used in research because they will be more readily available.
"This is at odds with public opinion and the recent Government pledge to reduce the numbers of animals in experiments. There is a range of non-animal research techniques that provide a modern, humane approach to science which should be used instead."
The objections lodged in Bristol follow 6,500 submissions received by East Riding Council about the application.
In June, councillors voted against the bid after officers said the company had not given enough information about traffic safety measures. But the planning committee pointed out moral issues about animal experiments were not planning considerations.
Immediately after the decision, B&K Universal general manager Roy Sutcliffe vowed to fight on to secure permission. The company hopes to demolish the majority of its existing site and construct four new buildings to house the dogs.
The Planning Inspectorate decision is likely to take several months.
Comments
by CT007
Wednesday, September 14 2011, 9:14PM
“dontwo, thank you for your comment very amusing, no argument put forward only an insult reinforces my statement regarding overly emotional reflex responses.
Once again thank you, you're a star:-)”
by dontwo
Wednesday, September 14 2011, 8:30PM
“CT007 likes to deal in cold hard facts does he/she. Sounds more like a cold hearted b@stard to me.”
by bazza_12
Wednesday, September 14 2011, 11:35AM
“unbelievable.. can humans alter any other animal.. (said in sarcastic tone) why on earth would anyone think.. "oh i've got a good idea. i'll make this cat glow in the dark to help it incase it gets a cat version of AIDS!" firstly.. who is bothered about cat versions of AIDS? and secondly how hypocritical to be sooooo bothered about a saving cats when MILLIONS of animals are routinely murdered every year for our taste buds.. we are sick sick humans..”
by CT007
Wednesday, September 14 2011, 12:42AM
“Serious stuff out of the way lets have some fun see this link http://tinyurl.com/6jhkcfz for a fantastic new concept for cat lovers you need never lose that moggy in the dark again, also many practical applications ideas welcome:-D”
by CT007
Wednesday, September 14 2011, 12:35AM
“debvegandeb, You may be surprised to hear that the decision on the approval of a new drug is not based solely on animal testing, (this is gross miss conception), but in fact on human based clinical trials. The problem generally is that human trails are not large enough to provide a statistically sound model of all the intricacies of the human spices.
Vioxx is good example of this fact see item 2 on this link http://tinyurl.com/6j9zc47 also check out the other points at this link you may be surprised.
I would recommend that you draw your information from more reliable sources than media articles whist informative they rarely give the full picture and all the facts, hype/sensationalism sell papers.”
by CT007
Tuesday, September 13 2011, 11:47PM
“debvegandeb, in reply to your question regarding a review on this subject, you may be surprised to hear my answer is yes but why?
The argument is not about animal testing, (e.g. testing a new drug on an animal to see if it is safe), but about animal based research tools. That is to say that animals are used to aid in a discovery be that historically how insulin is produced or in the future a discovery of a genetic attribute which humans do not have but a differing species may.
You must take note that any review will most certainly result in the continuation of the valuable work conducted on animals in the field of research.”
by bazza_12
Monday, September 12 2011, 9:47AM
“Hi Len5ter. haha.. respect.. fella”
by workinghard1
Monday, September 12 2011, 5:55AM
“I wonder how many of the 28,000 objections are real ? I bet that they a few made up names. You ask people in the street where B&K Universal, Grimston is and they won't have a clue. A lot of people don't care about this but just jumped on the band wagon for a chance of their picture in the Media.”
by debvegandeb
Monday, September 12 2011, 1:02AM
“CT 007 There are 51,442,100 UK internet users . so lets assume that 99.9% of the population are against testing on animals, the Guardian results on the Guardian reader was 67% against animal testing, and 83% of doctors would welcome an independent enquiry on evaluation, why are you so keen to pull this down, "rs" what are you getting out of this?,”
by debvegandeb
Monday, September 12 2011, 12:53AM
“CT007 may i ask are you a scientist, or just someone who "believes" animals have been worth while in testing, would you agree to an evaluation done "independently" comparing animal testing versus non animal testing techniques in research, should be done, YES OR NO, no body can argue the facts that 10 thousand people die through adverse drug reactions, these are tests found safe on animals yet failed in humans, and killed them, companies set to up to "fight the false facts by animal rights protestors" should consider why they need to use such arguments, I listened recently to BBC radio humberside with Roy Sutcliff stating "These animals right protestors" what childish outdated use of an idea, people are wide to it now, move on, what he did not realise is it seemed to be directed at the Dr who also gave an interview, tell me when you read articles about the good its suppose to of done, its all been about "then" "did" "was". vaccines was produced after the main killers was at an all time low in any case, "someone jumped on the band wagon" cleaner water and better living did the trick, oh here is some links too, http://tinyurl.com/3ytmowj 60% risk of greater heart failure, even though its been reported in the us as been dangerous, research company scared to lose finance , its all about money , and you know it,”