Skip to content or view screen version

Proof of the impact of the SHAC campaign

Spectre | 30.10.2009 15:12 | SHAC | Animal Liberation

For anyone who doubts the validity of the "SHAC method", this page of the Plymouth report should cast away any uncertainty.

Examples of Animal Rights Impact
Examples of Animal Rights Impact

The Plymouth report is a document compiled by an independent legal company and was commissioned by HLS (Huntingdon Life Sciences) as part of their decision making process in regards to a proposed by-out by their CEO Andrew Baker.

Unfortunately for HLS, when their management agreed to the buyout, they had to file this document in the public domain, albeit with heavy redactions. As has been mentioned previously (and in depth on the SHAC website), this report demonstrates just how close to bankruptcy HLS were in early 2009, and effectively states that if they are not bought out by their CEO they will fold.

As a result of a lawsuit by several of HLS' shareholders (who are set to lose a lot should this buyout go ahead), HLS have had to reveal more of the Plymouth report than they had ever intended, and when you see what it contains you can see why the original version had these bits missing. The page attached is probably the most revealing.

**Please note this has been posted by a SHAC supporter, not SHAC itself.

- Homepage:


"Anonymous" lender...

30.10.2009 15:20

... is Fortress Investment Group, visit the SHAC website ( for more info.



Hide the following 14 comments

"Violence. Harrassment. Threats." ....SHAC is a legal campaign.

30.10.2009 17:33

SHAC is a legal campaign. Huntingdon Life Sciences have a criminal record - falsifying test data, animal cruelty, breaking the Good Laboratory Practise, sex crimes and so on.

There are also other campaigns dedicating time and effort to closing Huntingdon Life Sciences [HLS], Animal Aid for example.

I think it's very misleading to use "Harrassment violence and threats to cite as proof that SHAC is working.

Thousands of people were outraged by the channel 4 documentary about HLS and this has led to a public outcry and possible attacks against HLS but not all these people against HLS are SHAC or have anything to with SHAC.

There are other militant groups, SMASH HLS for example and Militant Forces Agianst Huntingdone Life Sciences.

To say that violence by SHAC is what's closing HLS is dangerous and misleading.


Great News

30.10.2009 19:10

Great job!

I do often wonder how much impact SHAC actually has, as the campaign has been going on for some time and I don't look in to it much to be honest, but it does look like you are making things very hard for HLS!

Good luck making their lender pull out - maybe that will be the final nail in the coffin.


Still killing.

30.10.2009 19:34

It's almost 2010 and HLS are still making profit and killing more animals than ever before.


Don't take this report for granted.

30.10.2009 19:59

This report should encourage activists to build up there campaign, really hammer HLS because one morning we will wake up and HLS is closed. HLS and the government are synonymous - there is so much going on behind the scenes with the Home Office. HLS closing will seriously fuck their industry.

HLS is europe largest research laboratory and plays a pivitol role in the UK's economy. Ten years for a campaign may seem long, but this corporation has been around since the 1950s, ten bad years is a serious injury.

Good luck to all activists, keep up the good work. stick it to them.


SHAC is a lawful campaign

30.10.2009 21:23

'You cloaked your activities in what was a hypocritical sham pretence that Shac was a vehicle for legitimate lawful protest. It was nothing of the sort."

Yeah - we all believe you SHAC

Justice Butterfield

Who cares...

31.10.2009 15:47

If HLS closes the "work" will just go somewhere else.Why? Because the public want vivisection.Why do they want it? Because they believe they'll die, without it.And their's not been any serious education on them.There just bypassed for a megaphone confrontation with multiple companies every week.And after all that, why would any of the public wanna engage with us?

One lab closed wouldn't end vivisection and the lives in there would be transported elsewhere.And as a prominent shac activist once told me "We don't believe HLS will close. Just that it would be bought out by a bigger company and be subsumed into that." Thats a victory??

The Cause:

If the majority of people were on our side then companies that support HLS wouldn't even do so.For fear of losing business from the public they rely on.And HLS wouldn't even exist as there would be no market for animal tested products.The consumers ultimately decide this.


So what's better shouting and intimidating at the sympton(companies) or speaking to the cause(the public)?

whole picture

Why did they choose the pseudoname "Atlantic" and not "Atlantis"?

31.10.2009 17:11

Surely that would have been a more appropriate and honest pseudonym for HLS to hide behind?

The tide is coming in and HLS are going to drown, this is their fate and as always it simply remains a matter of long is down to the acts of the individual, and if more people act it will happen quicker, but there seems to be enough action that their closure is simply a matter of time.

Despite vicious state repression, sponsored by an industry in peril, SHAC will achieve it's aim of forcing HLS into liquidaion....there can be little doubt of that.


I believe that.....

31.10.2009 17:48

the government will just bail them out. It will cost the government far too much to let HLS close down. Someone on here said we need to get the public on side......they have a point.....

Respect Life

Some points

31.10.2009 19:25

Respect Life: SHAC sought legal advice many years ago regarding the possibility of a financial bailout from the government. It cannot happen.

Whole Picture: No member of the public I have ever spoken to (ie anyone without a vested financial interest) who has watched any of the undercover footage from HLS wants them to stay open. Yes we need the public on side - I was always impressed with how active Natasha and others at pre-raid SHAC were in vegan outreach, and from what I have seen this has been continued by post-raid activists. However we can never have enough stalls etc... so get yourself a pasting table, some leaflets and get to your local high street! Stalls, letters to local papers, flyposting etc... are all easy to do so if you have an issue with public support (or lack thereof) get of Indymedia and go do some outreach!
If you read the Plymouth report you will see that no larger companies want to buy out HLS - hence why the only person willing to do so is their own CEO.

Justice Butterfield: Weren't you one of those trolls telling us that targeting Barclays and Fortress was pointless? And didn't your cronies also say that the Plymouth report showed SHAC was ineffective?

Brian: HLS are killing less animals then ever, hence their income is down. A company $70m in debt (soon to be over $100m more) cannot really be claimed to be profitable. Seriously - read the Plymouth report - it is linked off o the SHAC website and you will see any claims of HLS being in anything but a dire situation are beyond laughable.

Clare: This page of the report shows the impact of ALL AR campaigning, so the first bullet point is about the underground campaigns rather than SHAC, however the SHAC strategy is clearly covered with reference to the lenders, customers, shareholders etc... Only one bullet point on that page directly references direct action campaigns, most of the rest relate to SHAC.


bail out unlikely

31.10.2009 19:36

2 years ago the government would have bailed them out, but right now the British government is pandering to 2 bigger industries - the banking and the arms industry, this is where all the money is going.

Simple fact the bankers have more weight in Government than the animal testers... beside wasn't animal rights activity dealt with and finished in 2007 ;) that's what NETCU told the government. How silly that statement looks at the end of 2009.


To Observer

31.10.2009 22:52

I'm on about vivisection as a whole.And the public would support any atrocity(as they so often do) if they believe babies in hospital wards are saved because of it.If people were really really unhappy with vivisection it would of been done away with.Consumer demand(our individual choices) decide if it stays or goes. End of story.

The SHAC campaign is more about confrontation with companies,feeling big and macho,then getting the public on our side.I've experienced this first hand.Ordinary people,who fund vivisection,are completely secondary.The campaign,and the arrogant activists in it,have given the movement a bad name.But who cares so long as the shac-tivists get a name.

Btw "Observer" one message on indymedia doesn't preclude me from being out there doing activism.

More and more people are becoming disgruntled with doing AR the shac-style way.Seeing that its the most obnoxious,counter productive and ego oriented way there is.

Bigger picture

Great - All over by Xmas then

01.11.2009 08:43

If this is right there is no way that HLS will be able to survive into the new year - all it will need is one final push.

It will all be over by Xmas

End Result

Bigger Picture...

01.11.2009 09:39

No one is telling anyone else they have to be involved in SHAC or their style of campaigning. SHAC is one campaign, if you don't like how they do things then do them different. If you are effective in vegan outreach, or PR or whatever it is you feel is the best way then it should be irrelevant what SHAC do, as you will have the public support for your campaigning. I have spoken to many "members of the public" who love SHAC, and others who don't, I have spoken to many members of the public who love the RSPCA, and others who don't, I have spoken to many members of the public who love PeTA, and others who don't. Just because someone doesn't like the RSPCA, doesn't mean it has stopped them signing my SHAC petitions or taking SHAC leaflets...

And End Result, you are clearly a SHACwatch troll who keeps saying "it will be over by xmas" just so on December 26th you can then say "HA, SHAC said it would be over by Xmas"... You lot are weird.


whole picture: I don't think you are seeing the whole picture ;-)

01.11.2009 20:31

whole picture: I think ironically you fail to see the whole picture, assuming you are genuine and not just a troll:

Direct action and education are complementary, not mutually exclusive.

No-one ordinarily wants to hear someone drone on about how vivisection is scientific fraud - this is dry and boring. But the demonstrations done by SHAC ( and illegal direct action done by others get the topic out there in the media so people like you can come in and take the opportunity to educate us all with your scientific points.

So please, celebrate all sides of our beautiful, compassionate and effective movement, and focus your anger on the filthy animal abusing scumbags who deserve it.

This exposed Plymouth report is dynamite - it shows exactly how the SHAC campaign has has massive knock-on effects throughout the entire vivisection industry and throughout the whole world.

Remember that Huntingdon Life Sciences are the ones punching beagles and force-feeding them weedkiller and other chemicals, not to mention the monkey, rats, mice, fish, birds etc. that are also abused in similar ways. They are the scum that deserve all the shit they get.