The Darley Oaks Farm in Newchurch, which bred guinea pigs for medical research, has been forced to close after years of intimidation by animal rights activists. The activists have kept up a campaign of abuse including death threats, arson attacks, hoax bombings, vandalism and even the theft of the remains of the owners Mother-in-law from a graveyard, which still have not been returned. Personally I think that this disgusting. The behaviour of these activists is despicable and they, in my view, have done nothing for their goal of animal rights.

What are your views?

Source: BBC

I read about this, I think it's the main story on BBC News though. I think that this is horrible. I mean, if the animal rights activists had decent grounds to debate apon and a strong argument then why would they have to stoop to such low levels to stop the business through pure indecency? Here they are protesting for animal rights whilst harming humans. Hmmm.

Those people were going to such extremes for animals that they were willing to hurt other human beings? It seems sort of backwards...not that I don't love animals but you'd think that people with such compassion for animals would have some for their own kind as well.

Not to go off topic but do you believe in medical testing on animals? I think it is entirely necessary in order to save lives. I don't think that animals should be used to test shampoos and whatnot, but if they can figure out a way to cure horrible diseases I think it's okay. I wonder if these animal rights activists would feel so strongly about this if they had a loved one with cancer who could be saved through such animal testing...just out of curiosity.

I can't believe these people. They're guinea pigs ffs! I'm sorry, but humans > guinea pigs every single time. Don't get me wrong, I love animals, but Christ, to value their life over a humans and to deny the use of human superiority over animals and all that entails, if it conveys life-saving benefits, is ridiculous. All that will happen now is that the guinea pigs will be imported from countries where their living and transportation conditions are far worse than those bred in the Darley Oaks Farm. So, to all those animal 'rights' Nazis, well-f*cking-done.

*slow clap*

Hunt them down and shoot them, now that fox hunting is illegal.


I mean the animal rights activists, not the guinae pigs.


Digging up dead peoples remains and (supposedly) destroying them? I'm not one for religion, but even I find that utterly distasteful.

If I remember rightly, this is the same farm where the activists actually seeked out people that deliver to the farm (e.g. a local milkman) and bombarded him with threats.

I find it disgusting, hypocritical, and ultimately maddeningly frustrating. I don't mind peaceful protests, but sadly these were entirely devoid.

Trouble is, now that the farm has shut down, the likes of Animal Aid (a group of activists who's members have, in the past, been involved in violent protests, despite an obvious pro-peaceful advertised outlook) will take this as a personal victory - and move onto the next area to fight against.

And don't get me started on the RSPCA (a charity I once believed was operating in the best interests of both the public and the animals)...

I'm thinking that their opinion of ethics (the activists) and the opinion of the law doesn't exactly match up.

I'm generally against animal testing for useless stuff like shampoos and stuff where the same research can be carried out in other ways.

I think when animal rights activists are causing harm to people and disrespecting human life then they are being hypocritical - afterall humans are technically included in the category of animals.
In some ways this could be seen as similar to the way in which terrorists operate - putting people in danger to cause/force them to stand against something they would otherwise be neutral about. It's hard to stop people from protesting but if the [insert organisation here] is shut down the threats of violence will stop.

Maybe once again this sort of activity is caused by that well known plague of society - extremists who always seem to overshadow the non-violent people who support the same cause?

[edit]Fargh! This'd be moop forgetting to check who he was logged in as once more.[/edit]

Oh for Cliffs sake. I live in a town near there and every time I have gone to work for weeks, my town centre has been blocked up by people either protesting the M6 extension or protesting against this Guinea Pig farm, my friend will be happy about this, she went on one of the protest marches, but isn't a vigilante.

I think its bloody stupid. If they disagree with the farming, they have entirely legal means to protest, which are more useful, and disturbing the remains of the dead in protest? What exactly have they done with them, I want to know. I mean, surely they're against the display of dead animals, so they must have just moved the remains and buried them again. What's the point. That's worse than desecrating war tombs, at least they leave the bodies alone.

Animal rights activists are people I have no problem with, although I disagree on several points, but activists who seem to forget humans are also animals and think it is okay to harrass them need putting through a sausage making machine.

Someone on another forum suggested that anyone who is guilty of militant animal rights extremism should forever be refused any medical treatment that came about from testing/experimentation on animals.

See how they like them onions....

Gah... I know a lot of scientists who work for medical research companies who get this sorta shit a lot. The point is, it's not their fault. It's actually illegal to sell drugs without lab testing. I bet none of those activists were volunteering to be tested on in the animals' places. Go harrass the government for a law change, and volunteer for the testing, then I'll believe you give a damn.

A political opinion is not a crime of which one can be guilty.

Surely if they are against the animal research, then they should make a stand - and set an example - by refusing to use such treatments/products.

People cannot be found guily of political opinions, jonman, but these protesters will keep harassing other facilities and people to get what they want. Political opinions keep points of view heard, but there are more legitimate and productive ways to protest. Digging up that woman's remains was absolutely disgusting, and making this guinea pig farm shut down will make these protesters more confident and more willing to behave badly to other people with whom they disagree. I agree that animal testing for silly things like pimple cream is unnecessary, but an animal phase in testing can save human lives. I don't mean to come across as cruel, but guinea pigs don't live for very long anyway. They may as well be used for something useful that will really help people. These protesters cannot be punished for having an opinion but it would be great if they could be told every time they benefited from a product or medical treatment refined by animal testing. Maybe if they were really helped then they would stop stupid protests like these.


I have to agree. If the protesters care so much then they should put themselves at risk to save the guinea pigs.

True, but you can be guilty of harrasment, and threatening behaviour etc. in the name of animal rights. Which is what he meant I think.

I'm just agreeing with everyone else on this one. Animal testing is nessesary for medical research, not for cosmetics. Harrasing people involved in animal testing is wrong. Basically.

Exactly. Animal rights is a political issue upon which you can have an opinion. Extremism is acting on that opinion outside of what's deemed acceptable by society.

Just a nitpick, but extremeism doesn't have to involve action. I could have extremeist views, that doesn't mean I need to act on them.

And simply having these opinions isn't a crime, inless you are the Thought Police.


Yes, I'm bored. Can you tell?

Gothic Angel----You say i don't give a damn because I'm not volunteering myself for experimentation but i was only voicing my opinion like every other person in here. I didn't say that i entirely disagree with animal testing. I think that if these extreme animal activists had a loved one with cancer or some disease that could be helped with treatments that had been tested on animals they would probably feel a lot differently about it. I only said that i disagree with animal testing when it is for cosmetic purposes...there are plenty of products that specifically say on them "not tested on animals"...so I'm not sure exactly what you thought I was saying.

These sorts of activists are the same as the ones who let out all the mink into the countryside a few years back- an act which now has many indigenous (sp?) creatures egding closer and closer to extinction. I agree with the sentiments agains animal testing, and I personaly make an effort not to use animal-tested products (being a veggie also makes me feel a little lesss hypocrytical). But, as has already been pointed out, it is ridiculous to get as extreme as to dig up someone's remains.
I hate how people go that bit too far when protesting-ok it gets it media coverage, but it doesn't really give animal rights proteters a good image. (I'm talking about the ones who don't ruin things but do things behind the scenes to get the law changed).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was taught that products that say 'no animal testing done' still had to be tested on animals at some point (as in accordance with FDA, I believe), just not by that particular company.

[/end me being curiously nitpicky]

The truth is, there are no real alternatives to most types of animal testing.


All Animal Rights Activists are extremists. They believe animals should have rights jsut as you and I. I believe that they cannot have rights, as they do not ahve the mental capacity to.

I am an Animal Welfarist, I believe that animals should be treated with respect, and I hope we achieve that goal through higher standards and better monitoring, not through propaganda and total disregard for the human interest.

Also, to have rights, you must havethe responsibilities that go with them. Animals cannot do this. Animals cannot make a choice not to kill or whatever. To have rights you have to keep to the responsibilities that those rights give you.

I have to agree about rights always being paired with responsibilities. Animals cannot take on the responsibility not to hurt anyone or any other animals. They cannot take on the responsibility to keep the ecosystem balanced. Thus, I do not think that they can truly have any rights other than the very basic right not to be uselessly killed or tortured without good reason. A good example of how to violate that right would be white people mindlessly killing herds of buffalo for fun; the Indians honored that very basic right by respecting all the parts of the buffalo and using it productively. I don't think that animals really have any rights other than that. Animal testing is an important step in making medical treatments safe for humans, and it is a productive use of the animal. As long as the animal is not treated with *unnecessary* cruelty, then there should be no problem with testing. (Unnecessary to me being beating, abusing, or starving the animal for fun.)