May, 2009

...now browsing by month

 

Abuse

Sunday, May 31st, 2009

I just saw this post from the Change.org Animal Rights blog about animal abuse. Stephanie Ernst makes the point that all animal farming is inherently abusive to animals.

Artificial insemination

Artificial insemination

Please read her post: Defining Abuse (Yes, All Farmed Animals Are Abused).

I would add that unnaturally confining animals and not allowing them to indulge in natural, instinctive behaviours is abusive. This includes keeping waterfowl like ducks and geese indoors where they can’t swim, removing baby animals from their mothers, and castrating animals without anesthesia.

This of course leaves out the unnecessary killing of the animals.

Our response to the Greenest City Action Team’s preliminary report

Saturday, May 30th, 2009

A month or two ago, LBC, in conjuntion with several other groups, sent a letter to the newly formed Vancouver Greenest City Action Team, asking them to make recommendations that Vancouver residents reduce their consumption of animal products to help the environment.

The Team just released their preliminary report (PDF) which made no mention of meat reduction.

Roger, one of our directors, has posted a response to the report, asking why they would leave out what should be an important part of any greenest city plan.

The Georgia Straight was kind enough to let us post both items on their blogs. Check it out and leave a comment.

Debunking animal activists

Thursday, May 28th, 2009

I just came across this article about an event in Ohio:

Sutton-Vermeulen will focus on the myths and misinformation from animal rights groups that are out of touch with today’s agriculture and putting our food supply at risk. He is well-know for working with non-governmental groups to help them become animal agriculture activists.

The June 19 workshop is open to all interested people who want to be spokespersons for animal agriculture and its importance to our country. Threats are coming from the Humane Society of the United States that they are coming to Ohio with a program to restrict sound, approved livestock practices. Such restrictions, if imposed, would reduce our food supply and increase the cost.

So, it sounds like he’ll be talking about how we animal rights activists don’t know about how animals are raised on farms. Maybe he’ll explain how well the animals are treated on farms and that animal protection groups just don’t know this, but everything is already plenty good for the animals.

But, actually, here’s the big threat: “HSUS wants certain animals to be able to stand up, lie down, turn around and spread their limbs without touching another animal or any part of their enclosure.” This is the threat to our “safe and affordable food supply.”

Based on the results from California’s vote on Proposition 2, I would think that many people think that animals deserve to be able to stand up, turn around, and spread their limbs. Many people probably think that animals already have this amount of space, even though they are wrong.

So, this event is really training in smokescreening the way animals are treated on these “farms.” I wonder what sorts of excuses he’ll be making for why we need to cram animals so tightly that they can’t stand up or turn around, let alone ever see the sun or engage in any natural, instinctive behaviours.

Sustainability is just a start

Thursday, May 28th, 2009

I often hear of sustainability referred to as an end goal, as if when we reach a level of sustainability, then everything is good.

foie gras protest at a restaurant praised for sustainability

foie gras protest at a restaurant praised for "sustainability"

In this way many questionable activities, like the seal hunt, like fish farming, like intensive farming of animals, are excused as being sustainable.

However, I think that sustainability is really the baseline of what we should all be doing. After sustainability comes ethics, humane treatment, caring and kindness. Sustainability is really all about meeting our essential needs without destroying the planet. Our responsibilities extend far beyond sustainability.

Often when restaurants get protested because they serve foie gras or veal their supporters excuse them by saying how great they are because they serve local foods or sustainablly caught fish. But how is this reason for praise? Isn’t this something everyone should be doing?

To me it sounds like praising someone for taking care of their family or keeping their job. Like praising them for doing something that every responsible adult should be doing.

Full stomachs, tired feet – EAT! Vancouver wrap-up

Sunday, May 24th, 2009

This weekend was the big EAT! Vancouver food and cooking show. It is a big show at BC Place with vendors giving out samples and selling their various products, restaurants selling food, and cooking demonstrations.

The crowds

The crowds

I initially was really nervous about going. I was worried about arguments or conflict from the audience and from some of the vendors. But, strangely enough, we only had one negative comment over the whole weekend.

Our display

Our display

We had a small booth, paid for by a very generous donor. The display largely focused on factory farming and the environment, but we also had Farm Sanctuary’s “Recipes for Life” booklet, which was very popular. We gave out over 300 copies.

Neda at our booth

Neda at our booth

Me, Layne, and Neda (sorry it's so blurry)

Me, Layne, and Neda (sorry it's so blurry)

A lot of people were happy to see us there. The Vancouver Humane Society was there too, with their battery egg display. It was really nice to see the animals represented.

The hardest part of the weekend was that we were placed next to a pig farm. They turned out to be very nice people, and we talked before the show opened and tried our hardest to avoid conflict. We shared a lot of laughs when people would remark on the strange irony of an animal rights group being next to a pig farm.

They are experimenting with selling directly to the public for the first time ever, and have a free-range type farm, where the pigs are kept in an open space on sawdust rather than on concrete in small pens. We talked a bit about consumer perceptions and the unwillingness of people to spend more for meat that costs more to produce. Lots of people want animals to be treated better, but are unwilling to pay the extra cost. I can see how this is a real challenge. It will be interesting to see how this farm manages.

I was really glad to meet them and talk to them. Sometimes I get insulated in my little animal rights world, where I forget that “they” are real people who are trying to do the best they can within their own values. There are always real lives on the other side, and this weekend served to remind me of that. Yes, we are on opposing sides, but we can also treat each other with respect.

What would animal rights look like?

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

What if we were to grant rights to animals? All of them, not just chimpanzees or whales and dolphins….

What about my rights?

What about my rights?

Let’s say we grant the right to life and the right to freedom to the animals who share the planet with us. What would we be doing differently? How would this affect our everyday life?

I’ve been really curious about this question for some time. We spend a lot of time working to promote animal rights, but do we have a clear idea of what this would actually mean if fully implemented?

Well, right off the bat we’d all be vegan. No more stealing milk and eggs and flesh from animals. The grains and soy and water that are now used to raise animals would be used to grow food for humans, with much more efficiency. Animals would no longer get dumped in the trash because they are too small or “surplus.”

The land with soil that we can’t utilize for crops would be returned to wildlife. We would have to go to great lengths to ensure that our farming does not impact habitat or animal lives. This might mean enclosed farming or indoor farming.

In place of manure we would be utilizing green manure systems, composting, seaweed, etc. All methods would be veganic. These methods are currently being practiced by various farms around Europe and North America.

Quite likely most of the animals that we now raise for food would no longer exist, unless in sanctuary-type settings. They have been bred to a point that they will likely not be able to survive on their own. Some of them, chickens for example, don’t actually exist in the wild. During the transition period they would have to be cared for in sanctuaries until they all eventually die.

We would no longer use animals for entertainment – unless perhaps filmed from a distance. No more of Disney’s staged “wildlife” films. No more rodeos. We would not be taking our children to “learn” about animals at zoos or aquariums. Instead, children could learn about them via films or even by taking carefully planned trips to where the animals live.

Likely our architecture and transportation systems would be different. We would have to build to preserve habitat to the greatest extent possible, not just when it’s convenient or good public relations. This would mean keeping to the smallest footprint possible, and including animals and their habitat in our plans.

I picture buildings that are a part of the landscape, that allow for animals to migrate through our cities and towns. Instead of right lines scored against the earth, our building would follow natural patterns. We would have to observe and fully understand the impact of new construction on the lives of any inhabitants before building.

Highways or trains could be elevated or underground. I doubt that we would have cars as we know them now. Possibly electric cars, solar powered maybe.  One thing that would be definite is that our environmental efforts would have to be real, because damaging the environment would be the same as dumping garbage in someone’s house. Real care would have to be used to ensure no harm is done.

Quite likely we would lead simpler lives, with fewer posessions, traveling less, consuming less. This would be no utopian system, but we would act with more consciousness of the impacts, and extended impacts, of our actions.

Scientific research would be different, and I would bet more efficient and quite improved. Instead of expending so much energy on ineffectual animal tests (and developing the animal models required for those tests), researchers would be have to develop working alternative systems for testing. Of course, we would never think of conducting any tests of consmetics or household cleaners on animals. We probably wouldn’t even be using a lot of those potentially toxic chemicals anyway, due to the risk of negative impact on the environment.

This is less of a concrete view of what the world would look like if animals had rights than I had wanted it to be. It is difficult to be that speculative, especially with the state of animal rights today.

What I think is quite clear is that we wouldn’t really have to give up much, except for our pointless pleasures, the things that used to be considered gluttony. We would actually have to take care of the world around us, instead of burning it out like we’re doing now. We are certainly capable of living more harmoniously with the other inhabitants of this planet than we are now.

Humpback whale rescued from prawn trap lines

Tuesday, May 19th, 2009

Recently a humpback whale was rescued after becoming entangled in the trap lines of a prawn fisherman.

A new Fisheries unit formed to save marine mammals is boasting one of its first successes after rescuing an exhausted and distressed humpback whale in Knight Inlet on the central B.C. coast.

A prawn fishermen called in an alert Monday when the humpback became entangled in his trap lines.

Workers with the Department of Fisheries’ Marine Mammal Response Network, the Canadian Coast Guard and several other Fisheries employees who were in the area sprang into action attempting to save the young whale.

Source.

It is wonderful to hear that these groups all responded so quickly to save this whale. I was also very happy to hear that the fisherman reported the whale who was caught.

I have to think, though, that this whale would not have gotten caught up in these lines if there were not an insatiable appetite for prawns. If this whale had died, how much responsibilty would be on each person who takes part in the spot prawn “festivities” that happen every year around this time?

This “harvest” may be touted as sustainable, but we have now seen that it has the potential to harm some of the most magnificent endangered animals in our part of the world.

Foie gras – part of the larger debate

Sunday, May 17th, 2009

A week ago the Ottawa Animal Defense League got some media coverage about their foie gras campaign. One article, Foie gras ban does little to address cruelty by Joanne Chianello ran in The Ottawa Citizen on May 10, 2009. While this was a reasonably balanced article, the closing couple of paragraphs seemed somewhat odd to me.

In the grand scheme of groceries, outlawing foie gras is a marginal gesture, unless it leads to a wider — and, frankly, unlikely — candid conversation about where the rest of our meat comes from.

The real question, then, is: Will the possible disappearance of foie gras mark the beginning of a big debate, or the end of a little one?picture-2

This confuses me because the beginning of the article does actually mention that many of the restaurants are “[committed] to using more ethically raised meat.” This in itself would seem to indicate that the debate is already happening. If it weren’t, why would these restaurants even be using words like “ethical” and “humane” or be trying to source locally and organically?

Additionally, the author ignores (or neglects to see) the debate over meat production in the United States, with the passing of Proposition 2 in California and other states moving to enact similar legislation. Proposition 2 will essentially prohibit the use of battery cages, veal crates, and sow stalls. This resolution was passed by a 2/3 vote.

Michael Pollan’s book, The Omnivore’s Dilemma, has been on the NY Times bestseller list for about 90 weeks. The debate about food sources has led to the growth of farmers markets in cities across the country.

Additionally, the environmental impacts of animal agriculture are becoming much more well known and discussed in the mainstream media.

Foie gras campaigns are simply a part of the larger debate. One only has to look at the campaigns of larger organizations like Farm Sanctuary and The Humane Society to see that this is indeed the case.

Perhaps Ms. Chianello was just trying to make a point about the small amount of impact campaigns against foie gras may have? If so, she is certainly letting her own opinions colour her reporting. How genuine was her question?

Our Boycott Procter & Gamble event

Saturday, May 16th, 2009
The view from across the street

The view from across the street

We held an event today in honour of International Boycott Procter & Gamble Day. In case you don’t know, Procter & Gamble is a giant company that conducts huge amounts of testing on animals. Much of this testing is on cosmetics, soaps, cleaners, toothpaste, etc. Almost nothing that P&G makes can be considered a necessity.

For more information, check out the In Defense of Animals website.

There are many alternative products that are not tested on animals. Have a look at Peta’s list of companies that don’t test on animals. Also look at AAVS’s list of companies that have signed on to their Leaping Bunny program and don’t conduct animal tests, commission any animal tests, or test ingredients on animals.

We had a fantastic turnout to the event, with 19 volunteers! Joanne did a great job with slogans for the signs. I love the Ivory one. We gave away over 500 leaflets and had a very positive response from passers-by. Plus the weather was nice so it was a really good day!

picture-018

Awesome team!

picture-020

Anne, Andrea, and Layne

Me and Roger

Roger & Me

Leafleting the people walking by

Leafleting the people walking by

And more leafleting

And more leafleting

EPIC wrap-up

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009

Finally getting around to posting about our final day at EPIC. I think for the next event, unless I have a lot to tell, I’ll just wait and do one post per event.

Next weekend is EAT! Vancouver which will hopefully be uneventful. I say hopefully because there are a lot of “organizations” there who may be bothered that we are there. We’ll see. The plan is be low-key and focused mostly on the environment and respect for animals.

Anyway, the final day of EPIC was good. I got some more delicious free coffee from Salt Spring Coffee. Yum.

Good coffee!

Good coffee!

One of the best things about being at this show was that so many people were friendly and either already veg or moving in that direction. Many people stopped by and said they were reducing the amount of meat in their diet. Lots of people expressed real concern for animals.

We gave out hundreds of leaflets (including over 125 copies of Peta’s Vegetarian Starter Kit and almost 100 of Farm Sanctuary’s Guide to Veg Living). 138 people walked away with our new environment leaflet. I was actually worried that we might run out of information to give out!

Lee - always smiling

Lee - always smiling

Lee answering some questions

Lee answering some questions