One of the primary challenges of being an advocate for animal justice is what issue(s) to pursue and focus on.
.
As animals are abused and killed in so many different ways and for so many reasons, it is difficult to discern which are the areas in which to put most of our efforts, as well as evaluate where such efforts are likely to be most productive and effective.
.
Do we direct efforts towards the most egregious forms of animal torture and killing on global and national scale? Or, do we focus efforts more locally -- on issues pertinent to the community and more likely to meet with some modicum of success?
.
There is noted phrase from the Environment movement, "Think globally, act locally," to which I personally (and apparently, many others) ascribe.
.
Thus, in New York City, the three issues arousing most animal activist attention are carriage horses, the killing of cats and dogs in city shelters and (sadly, last on the list), the killing (or banishment) of wildlife from city parks and properties. (Personally, I don't believe that carriage horses clip clopping through Central Park belong on the list of major animal abuse issues in New York City, but more about that later.)
.
But, on wider scale, by far the greatest and seemingly limitless abuse of animals occurs on our nation's "factory farms" and slaughterhouses. And if we think that the confining, crowding, genetic manipulation and pumping with drugs, steroids and antibiotics of billions of farm animals is already bad, let us consider that the USDA, animal agriculture industry and top universities are working and pumping millions of tax dollars to seemingly make the torture and exploitation of these animals even worse:
.
.
Of course, the powers that be don't see what they do as abuse and torture at all.
.
Rather, scientists attempting to discover new ways to force cows, sheep and pigs to produce even more offspring than they already do, while cutting down costs and care, tell themselves (and the world) that they are merely trying to "solve the problem of feeding nine billion humans by the year, 2050."
.
Were they even minimally concerned over destructive impacts on the planet and contributions to climate change of animal agriculture or the compromising of the effectiveness of antibiotics through over-use on animals, they would be seeking modern and inventive ways to produce greater supplies of plant and grain foods, not more animals to abuse and slaughter for the sake of cheap and always available meat. Reality is that the latter is unsustainable over the coming decades simply from environmental destruction and contribution to greenhouses gases alone.
.
The above investigative article link is from the New York Times and published on the front page of the newspaper on January 19th. It concerns and describes a long list of grotesque animal experiments, starvation and neglect occurring on a meat animal research complex in rural Nebraska, funded with 24 million tax dollars. Though lengthy and disturbing, the article is a must-read for every American, but particularly those still eating meat.
.
The reality is that every dollar spent to purchase products of incalculable suffering and brutal slaughter of sentient animals is viewed as "support" of the egregious practices of the meat, egg and dairy industries and fosters continuing "consumer demand" of the products. -- In other words, it is in order to meet a "growing human population and demand for the products" that the tortures of the damned can and are inflicted upon billions of these animals. "Cruelty ends where profit begins" as the saying goes and no where is this more true than in the meat, egg, dairy, leather and suede industries. (Although the latter two are by-products of the meat industry, they still represent animal cruelty and slaughter.)
.
In 1977, I transitioned to vegetarianism when learning of the deprivations and cruelties inherent in factory farming. I and other Animal Rights advocates wondered then why farm animals were not included in and afforded the protections under the federal Animal Welfare Act passed in 1966 (and since amended over the decades).
.
Should not the animals most used and abused by humans be granted even minimal protections under federal law?
.
But, in those days it truly seemed a hopeless task to advocate, much less fight for such inclusion. Veganism was virtually unheard of and even vegetarianism rare. A vegetarian or vegan in those days pretty much lived on salads, pasta and french fries. We were more or less considered "freaks" of the human world.
.
But, it is thankfully a very different world today. Books, articles, organizational efforts and the proliferation of (mostly undercover) YouTube videos have brought the realities of factory farms and slaughterhouses into many American homes. Additionally, concerns for health and efforts to fight obesity and the diseases associated with it have prompted a diet richer in plants and grains and lower in animal products. Though the percentage of people identifying themselves vegan is still very low (7%), both it and vegetarianism have risen exponentially over the past three decades. That is not to even mention those uncounted millions who have lessoned meat consumption or switched to only purchasing organic, free-range products. (i.e. "humanely raised.")
.
Both the US government and the meat industry need to wake up to the new realities which are not now, what they were in the middle of the last century when few people had any insight as to how meat and other animal products ended up in supermarket cases or restaurants.
.
Walk into any supermarket today and one is apt to find almost as many vegetarian alternatives to meat and dairy as the animals products themselves. Obviously, these animal-free products (which have improved dramatically over the years) are selling as there is greater consumer demand for them.
.
With greater consumer awareness and demands for both, replacements to meat, as well as "humanely raised" animal products, it appears many in government and particularly those running the US Meat Animal Research Center in Nebraska are entirely out of touch with reality and living in their personal ivory towers in which anything they do to animals is acceptable to the culture and public they're supposedly "serving." Nothing could however, be further from the truth.
.
Proof of this delusion is readily observed throughout the New York Times article.
.
For example, despite the fact that lamb consumption in the US has plunged to an annual average of less than one pound per person from nearly 5 lbs in the 1940's, the mad scientists at the research center have devoted efforts to forcing sheep to produce triplets, rather than the average one or two lambs. Not only do such twisted actions fly in the face of dropping consumer demand for lamb, but they also result in far greater losses of newborn lambs due to maternal abandonment, starvation and predation due to lack of care and oversight. ("Easy care" lambs apparently meaning no care at all.)
.
In the voodoo "scientists" further twisted efforts towards producing twins and triplets in cows (cows normally only produce one calf at a time), cows have been surgically altered, doused with hormones and tethered to what are essentially, "rape racks" where they are mounted by multiple bulls over a period of hours to "test" bull libido. In one case described in the article one cow suffered broken legs and despite a denied plea for euthanasia by the observer, died hours later.
.
According to the article, even most ranchers aren't buying into the insanity, one of them astutely stating, "Cows weren't meant to have litters."
.
The time is past due for our legislators in Washington to consider, not how to pump more millions of tax dollars into conducting Frankenstein experiments on farm animals to produce cheaper and more plentiful meat, but rather to include these very animals under the protections of the federal Animal Welfare Act. (Currently, the law states: "Farm Animals are regulated under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) only when used in biomedical research, testing, teaching and exhibition. Farm animals used for food and fiber or for food and fiber research are not regulated under the AWA.")
.
That is what consumers and their constituents are really demanding with their comments to newspaper articles, pro-animal protection votes on ballot initiatives and petitions and most of all, their purchase dollars and consumer choices.
.
.
Finally, on the question of which issues of abuse it is most important for animal advocates to focus attentions on, that is something to ultimately be decided by individuals and their conscious.
.
I personally believe that on the larger, national or global issues such as factory farming, wildlife extinctions, climate change and others, it is important to let our consumer choices and purchase dollars do the talking and on the more local and community issues to take more direct and active charge.
.
But, that often means being able to draw lines and distinctions between "use" of animals and actual abuse as the two are definitely not the same as witness the carriage horse controversy in New York City.
.
It might be considered that going after and attacking those actions involving working or companion partnerships with animals is to actually and ultimately do the animals great harm, as well as damaging the credibility of the Animal Rights cause in general.
.
People may be willing to give up the option of steak or chicken seven days a week, but they are not going to so willingly give up the concept of keeping pets or taking a horse carriage ride through Central Park -- especially when they can clearly see well cared for animals doing what they seemingly enjoy doing and clearly excel at.
.
On the other hand, there is not a person with any sense of conscious or justice who would deem it proper and appropriate to attach animals to "rape racks", genetically and surgically alter them to produce more offspring and douse them with drugs just to see how much more we can force out of them.
.
The time to include all farm animals under the federal Animal Welfare Act is way past due and it is that which the American consumer is saying loud and clear with his and her purchase dollars.
.
That those in Washington and those defending these atrocities perpetrated on farm animals are blind to this new reality is ultimately to their own demise and peril. -- PCA
.
.
.
**********
