When animal advocates want to measure how far we’ve come as a movement, I can think of no better barometer than the burgeoning field of animal law, which works to stop animal cruelty and suffering through legislation and litigation. Once considered a niche area of legal practice, animal law has expanded over the last 20 years to become one of the rising stars of jurisprudence. Consider, for example, that 10 years ago students interested in animal law had only a handful of schools to choose from. Today, there are more than 100 animal law classes being taught at colleges throughout the United States and Canada. Some of the biggest news concerning animal cruelty is coming out of the US Supreme Court, which earlier this month heard arguments regarding free speech and animal fighting videos ― it’s the first case involving animal cruelty the high court has considered since 1993, when, by the way, only seven states had felony-level anti-cruelty laws; now 46 states do. Even China, where animal welfare is not given much value (the country is notorious for its widespread and indiscriminate killing of dogs, for example), recently drafted its first law to protect animals from abuse. And of course the high-profile Michael Vick dogfighting case did much to push the importance of animal law into the public discourse.

So it was a genuine privilege for me to speak at the 17th-annual animal law conference at Lewis & Clark Law School in Portland, Oregon, last weekend. I was on a panel with Bob Roop of the Humane Society of the United States; Bob spoke about secondary trauma, which he described as the stress caregivers such as shelter workers experience, and I addressed the issue of activist burnout. The session attendees were very engaged in this topic, and it felt good to discuss such an important issue.

The rest of the time I got to take in what was, for the most part, a terrific event: great vegan food, excellent speakers, and a schedule that was extremely well organized. And, of course, you can’t beat Portland, which ranks as one of the best vegan cities anywhere. In keeping with the theme of this year’s sold-out event, “The Links,” the conference explored animal law and its connection to other areas of the law and professional disciplines, philosophies, and social justice movements, including domestic violence, the environment, international trade, religion, and the media.

Scott Heiser, director of ALDF’s Criminal Justice Program, offers tips for persuading prosecutors to pursue animal-cruelty cases.

I found three panel sessions to be particularly interesting. The first was “The People v. Animal Cruelty: Criminal Prosecutions,” led by Scott Heiser, director of the Criminal Justice Program for ALDF, and Heidi Moawad, deputy district attorney for the Multnomah County, Oregon, district attorney’s office. Heiser and Moawad, both highly experienced animal attorneys, offered advice for motivating district attorneys who are reluctant to prosecute animal abusers (e.g., go to the press, use social media), and they emphasized the link between cruelty to animals and other forms of violence. “People who abuse animals are five times more likely to commit a violent crime against humans,” said Heiser. He noted that public opinion is very important to prosecutors, so writing letters to editors applauding their good work on behalf of animals makes a real difference. Moawad, meanwhile, stressed the need for citizens to report cases of animal abuse or neglect. “Get involved,” she said. I appreciated that the panelists offered suggestions that anyone can do.

Next up, animal law experts Katherine Meyer (partner, Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal) and Bruce Wagman (partner, Schiff Hardin LLP) presented a number of “Hot Topics in Animal Law,” including the aforementioned US Supreme Court case, better known as the United States v. Stevens, which will decide whether video depictions of animal cruelty are expressions of free speech and thus protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution. An appeals court had ruled that the government did not have a compelling interest in the animal cruelty shown in dogfighting videos produced and narrated by defendant Robert Stevens, and that “Preventing cruelty to animals, although an exceedingly worthy goal, simply does not implicate interests of the same magnitude as protecting children from physical and psychological harm.” Although Meyer feels the Supreme Court is likely to rule that the ban on such videos, as currently written, is unconstitutional, she said, “The good news is they may say the Third Circuit [Court of Appeals] was wrong when they said the government does not have a compelling interest in protecting animals.”

In his segment of the panel session, Wagman said that as a lawyer, he tries to put himself in the animal’s place, asking “What would they want?” He highlighted seven current cutting-edge animal law issues, including species-specific legislation (e.g., dogfighting statutes); exotic animal ownership; horse abandonment, which has gotten worse in this down economy; animal hoarding; shelter practices (no-kill vs. humane euthanasia); understanding the opposition, which tries to marginalize our interests; and farmed animals. Of the latter, Wagman said, “They’re born into misery, they live in misery, and they die in misery. There’s no moment in their lives when they’re not being mistreated in some way.” Bruce closed the session by suggesting a “compassion revolution,” emphasizing that advocates need to keep their eyes on the prize and promote kindness. “It is emotionally crushing to do this work,” he said. “It’s an effort to redeem our species from eternal shame.”

Finally, “Killing with Keystrokes: CITES, African Elephants & Internet Trade” featured Special Agent Ed Newcomer of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Paul Todd of the International Fund for Animal Welfare. Not surprisingly, the Internet has helped fuel trafficking in wildlife items, including animal skins, endangered butterflies, elephant tusks, and exotic birds. According to Todd, the US is responsible for two-thirds of the worldwide illegal trade, which represents at least $20 billion a year. Only illegal drugs and weapons are bigger markets, he said. Todd gave a great case study that showed how online auction site eBay has finally banned ivory sales in compliance with the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES) treaty, an agreement among 172 nations meant to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival. Elephant parts account for 73 percent of the world’s illegal trade in animals, said Todd, and a whopping 98 percent of that is ivory.

Newcomer, a former state prosecutor, draped several confiscated animal skins across a large table at the front of the room. The skin of a dog imported from China was particularly haunting; two almond-shaped holes where the eyes had been gave the skin an eerie, Halloween mask feel. The skin had been expertly dyed to resemble that of a leopard, and it lay between a genuine leopard skin and a tiger skin. Neatly folded beside the dog skin was a large swath of elephant hide, which was passed around the room. It felt surprisingly soft — though I’ve never touched an elephant ― and Newcomer explained the skin is often used for pillow cases. The Internet has had a devastating impact on wildlife, he explained, because it has created a demand in the market for illegal specimens. He used the online sale of an endangered Asian elephant head as an example. “Five people bid on something and one person wins. What do the other four people do? All of a sudden, they need to find themselves an Asian elephant head or some other body part!” Poachers and smugglers are using Skype and online newspaper posts to aid their crimes, but Newcomer said Craigslist is the worst. “It’s the wild west of animal trafficking,” he said.

Newcomer’s final comment, made as an aside, caught my interest. He explained that agents with USFWS get their enforcement authority from the Lacey Act, which prohibits trade in wildlife, fish, and plants that have been illegally taken, possessed, transported, or sold. But something else falls under the Lacey Act, he said: preventing animal enterprise terrorism. “Fish and Wildlife Service is the agency responsible for enforcing the Lacey Act. There are no agents in Fish and Wildlife interested in the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, but the FBI is all over it!”

I have one minor quibble with “The Links,” and having considered this blog post for several days, I have to be candid. While the conference was motivating, informative, and very well executed, it featured one panel that was, in my opinion, a mistake — or at the very least, poorly handled. “The Role of Animals in Indigenous Cultures” was little more than a forum for justifying the exploitation of animals by Native American tribes and criticizing groups working to protect animals. Attendees sat dumbfounded as Native American activist Se-ah-dom Edmo and professor of law and tribal judge Robert Miller, a citizen of the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma, discussed why Native Americans have a right to kill animals for food and religious purposes. It was clear that the two panelists were as uncomfortable as their audience when no one laughed at their playful swipes at the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. Though I recognize the value of understanding everyone’s legal rights, I had to wonder what these clearly intelligent speakers thought they were accomplishing by addressing a roomful of animal advocates. I’m neither an attorney nor a law student, so perhaps the significance of this discussion was lost on me; however, during the lunch break that followed this panel, many attendees complained that such a presentation had no place at an animal rights gathering. This isn’t the first time I’ve attended an AR conference that featured exploitation apologists, and my suggestion is that if such sessions are allowed, they should be moderated debates that allow ample audience participation. All questions at this panel had to be submitted in writing. A session arguing the need for killing animals and poking fun at activists only leaves attendees at these otherwise uplifting events feeling disempowered.

That criticism aside, the Student Animal Legal Defense Fund (SALDF) of Lewis & Clark Law School, which hosted the conference with the college’s Center for Animal Law Studies, did an extraordinary job. The sessions moved like clockwork, speakers were well prepared, and the subject matter was highly relevant. Kudos to the unflappable Liberty Mulkani, who coordinated the three-day event with confidence and a smile. My sincere thanks to the conference organizers for inviting me to speak this year.

As with many animal activists, my path to advocacy has been crisscrossed with life-changing intersections and punctuated by important milestones. One of the most influential landmarks in my road to activism was Carol J. Adams’ The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory, which compares myths about meat-eating with myths about what it means to be a man. Reading Carol’s book, it is impossible to ignore how a patriarchal society has marketed eating animal flesh as manly and debased women along the way. She’s also the author of many other books, including Living Among Meat Eaters: The Vegetarian’s Survival Handbook, and co-editor of The Feminist Care Tradition in Animal Ethics: A Reader. Recently, I had the pleasure of speaking with Carol about animal activism. Our conversation ranged from using social networks to whether activists need to watch disturbing undercover video footage. Not surprisingly, Carol began with a topic that’s close to her heart.

“We’ve got a problem with sexism in the movement, so that the people who traditionally have cared, who are women, are not always heard as well as male philosophers are,” she said. “The male philosophers the animal rights movement has held up are really wonderful people, but they draw on a male-based philosophy — that of rights or Utilitarianism — and this assumes the individual is autonomous, and it’s a male model, emphasizing rationality over caring and autonomy over interdependence. One thing the animal rights movement needs to do is to become more alert to incorporating feminist attitudes throughout the movement. So instead of having nearly-naked women saying, ‘Stop harming animals,’ we should have a variety of people saying, ‘I care about animals, and I’m a better person for that.’ Not, ‘I’m a better person than you, but maybe a better person than I was.’ Instead of being absolutely confrontational, so that we allow other people to take their unease with emotions and bring it out of themselves and blame us for making them feel uncomfortable, we can find a variety of ways to help people sit with their feelings and learn how to listen to those feelings.”

Carol, who has devoted much of her writing to exploring the links between species oppression and gender oppression, said the animal rights movement often disowns women and disowns emotions that are equated with women. “So I feel like we have to evolve the movement to lift up caring and lift up the people who care — i.e., women — rather than sexualizing them, and appealing to socialized men who have been taught that maleness equals not caring.” She believes that when it comes to animals, many otherwise caring people keep their feelings at arm’s length. “When someone tells me, ‘I don’t want to know what’s happening to animals; I’m afraid to care,’ I often say, ‘Tell me about your childhood relationships with animals.’ I want to know what kinds of scars there are from a time when they might have cared and what happened to that caring. I’ve looked at how families handle the death of a pet in the United States, and they do it really terribly — ‘Oh, it was only a pet,’ ‘We can get a new one,’ ‘Oh, stop crying’ — so that part of the movement to adulthood is putting down the feelings that are associated with being a child. But those are really good and honest feelings. That’s why in my own writing I’ve written prayers that speak in the voice of a child who’s lost a beloved companion animal to provide a way to show that grief is part of what we are going to feel if we care about animals, and to model how to move through grief.”

Yet in responding to the plight of farmed animals, Carol said, female animals are often overlooked. “It’s this abuse of female reproductivity that disappears from the radar so often. I mean, I know that animal rights groups are lifting it up more and more, but I still think that the fate of the dairy cow and the egg-laying hen is one of the most serious issues for us to address. If we eliminated forcing cows to get pregnant, you’d eliminate 50 percent of hamburgers, too.” She noted that meat-eating would not exist if female animals were not exploited. Yet, she observed, meat-eaters still manage to take credit for the presence of animals on Earth. “Meat-eaters argue, ‘Well, the animals come into life, into existence, because we want to eat them. The animals owe us their lives.’ No, the animals come into existence and owe their mothers their lives. It’s the mothers who are being the most oppressed because they’re going through constant pregnancy.”

As our conversation turned to the use of hidden cameras to capture graphic images that can be used to educate consumers and activists alike, Carol said she worries that the animal rights movement might focus too narrowly on these upsetting videos. “I think that sometimes that’s not necessarily going to be the best way to change people. I don’t want to just shock people. I know some people are changed that way. I remember when I used to go to AR conferences they’d have this one room that just showed a film with one horrible image after another. The young people coming out of that room were weeping and feeling so powerless. In terms of change, I know there’s a new Mercy For Animals video that’s tied to the egg industry. I appreciate their work, but I can’t watch these anymore, and I think it’s OK to say to people, ‘You don’t have to watch these. What we’re looking for is consciousness.’ We don’t need, necessarily, to have these images burned on our retinas.”

When I mentioned that some activists feel we owe it to the animals to watch such videos, she said, “Again, it’s a male model of change versus a feminist model of change. It’s not about owing. It’s about asking, ‘How can I nurture the best relationship possible for all animals?’ I’m an animal, too. I do not need to inflict suffering on myself if the consciousness of what’s going on is already there. I think women often are going to be more obedient to these exhortations because, again, of the sexism in our society. But if a lot of women already are socialized to care, then our experience of those videos may be drastically different, and I think that needs to be acknowledged. Extraordinary expectations do not need to be laid down on animal activists. We’re already there. We should ask, ‘What’s the best I can do as an individual linking up with others?’ Everyone answers that differently, but our answers become part of a chorus that’s the same.”

Carol J. Adams

Besides videos, then, what tools for change does Carol recommend? “In Living Among Meat Eaters I ask, ‘How do we know how change happens? Why do we think there’s one model for change?’ I think we fail to recognize that the right brain can also bring about change. That you can incubate and you can be stimulated by art to change. I think because activists are often more likely to be left brained and rational, they fail to take account of the way the right brain can be enlisted to help people change. In the book I say that meat-eaters are perfectly happy eating vegan meals, as long as they don’t know that’s what they’re doing. What I mean by that is people hate being self-conscious about what they’re eating. Eating is supposed to be directly experiential — it’s not supposed to have a theory to it. People think vegans are going to examine everything. One of the most important things I think we do is just having vegan meals for people. They leave and think, ‘Gee, Carol’s a vegan. That was a really great risotto; it was so creamy. So…that was a vegan risotto.’ So I’ve given them a chance to incubate, and the next time they come back to me they’re not as threatened, because I’ve enlisted their right brain to work with me rather than just arguing with the left brain that might not want to change.”

Carol also likes Facebook, which she joined earlier this year. “When I get friended by someone I don’t know, I generally accept the friending, but I’ll ask them to tell me about their activism,” she said. “Oh my gosh, the wonderful responses I’ve gotten! People write, ‘Thank you for asking,’ and often they’ll talk about the influence of my books. Some will say, ‘I’m a quiet activist. I’m uncomfortable speaking in public. But I make vegan meals.’ Some say, ‘I’m a full-time teacher, but I also write letters, or rescue strays and help them get new homes, or I’m doing this or organizing that.’ I’m just so grateful for them. No one has to tell them to go watch a video. They’re way beyond that.”

My sincere thanks to Carol Adams for her time and her contributions to the movement. You can learn more about Carol’s work at her Web site.

Back in February, I blogged about Josh Hooten, who rode his bike 600 miles from Portland, Oregon, to Farm Sanctuary in Orland, California, raising funds for the organization and awareness about animal cruelty. Inspired by Josh’s feat, animal activist and athlete John Merryfield recently embarked on a three-day journey around the circumference of Lake Tahoe — 72 miles ― on his stand-up paddle board. He even invited anyone who was interested to join him. John is a great reminder that using our strengths and interests is an easy and fun way to campaign for animals. He plans to make his “Stand Up for Farm Animals” event an annual tradition, and we chatted the other day about his advocacy efforts.

What inspired you to go vegan?

I’ve been a vegetarian for 25 years and was in denial about the abusive practices within the dairy industry for 20 of those years, until becoming a vegan five years ago. Part of my denial was infused with a spiritual practice that included the use of milk in the diet as a form of spiritual connection to the cow. I now see my former practice as antiquated, and ultimately I could no longer deny the harm caused to cows as well as the overwhelming information about the effects to the dairy industry has on the environment. Oh, and not to mention the adverse affects animal fat has on our health.

Was there something you read or saw that was a tipping point regarding milk?

Some talks by Erik Marcus and Gene Baur here in Tahoe had a big influence on me. They made me realize there was no reason to use dairy products.

What was the toughest part about your 72-mile journey?

John Merryfield, third from the left, just before he set off to stand-up paddle Lake Tahoe. Photo by Michael Fish

The logistical components. Who, if anybody will be coming with me? How far will we get each day? What if other people coming along become unable to continue? Where will other people coming with me sleep at night? Will the weather challenge us?  

Where did people sleep?

Eight paddlers started with me, but in the end only my step-daughter, Kim Kerrigan, and I completed the entire 72-mile paddle and needed to sleep overnight. I have a Eurovan, which my wife drove and followed us around the lake. We stopped at camping grounds to sleep.

How did you prepare for the event?

I prepared for the paddle by paddling and stand-up paddle surfing, which is done in the ocean. Not too grueling and a lot of fun. My preparation paddles were six- to 18-mile paddles two to four days a week for a month or so, which isn’t that different from my normal fun paddles. I also got in a couple of surfs on a nice south swell this summer down in Southern California, which I logged as “training.”

When will the next Stand Up for Farm Animals event take place? Will it be another excursion on Lake Tahoe?

The second-annual Stand up for Farm Animals will be in Lake Tahoe the first weekend after Labor Day. I have thought about this idea growing to include other locations, and in the year to come I can see how or if that idea could take shape. Stand-up paddling is a hugely growing sport that is getting a lot of attention and I thought, What better way to bring attention to what really needs our focus ― the cruelty to factory farm animals — than a cool sport people are noticing? I’ve been an athlete my entire life with many different accomplishments with some recognition. I don’t need attention anymore. I can use that former need for attention and translate it into bringing attention to these inconceivably cruel farm animal practices and bringing about change. I stand on my paddle board, paddling Lake Tahoe, while people on the beach look at me and point, [saying] “Look, I’ve never seen that before. I want to do that. Is it hard? Do you have to know how to surf?” Light bulb! Paddle the entire lake and connect the paddle to end cruelty to farm animals! People will take notice.

So how hard is stand-up paddle boarding?       

It can be very challenging for someone with no experience on the water, but the boards are large, which makes it easier to balance. Anyone who has done yoga usually takes right to it.

How can others help or get involved?    

Others can get involved by paddling the second-annual Stand up for Farm Animals with me, or starting a Stand Up for Farm Animals paddle in another location or doing something unique to their own interests that ultimately raises awareness. At next year’s paddle, I hope to have more paddle boards available for people who want to paddle the entire thing, 15 miles of it or as little as 10 minutes. The more the better.

If you’d like to support John’s work by donating to Farm Sanctuary, please click here. Every little bit helps the animals.

In yet another blow to animal agribusiness, the UK animal rights nonprofit Animal Aid recently released video footage taken inside three randomly chosen British slaughterhouses. Between January and June 2009, the group captured scenes using hidden cameras they had installed at JV Richards (Rietfontein) Ltd in Cornwall, AC Hopkins (Taunton) Ltd in Somerset and Pickstock Ashby Ltd in Derbyshire. The abuses depicted are shocking to most viewers, but apparently just another working day for slaughterhouse employees. From some 40 hours of video, Animal Aid compiled a 10-minute clip, which you can see here. Among the scenes are pigs and sheep being kicked, shoved and dragged into the stun room, which was packed with frightened animals. Tormented animals slip, fall and cry out. In one instance, a ewe is stunned and killed while her young is still suckling her. Animal Aid believes that millions of animals across the UK are suffering untold torture inside slaughterhouses, and they are calling on the government to require ongoing training and assessment for all slaughterhouse workers and for cameras to be permanently placed inside slaughterhouses. Kate Fowler, head of campaigns at Animal Aid, says the video disposes of the myth that slaughter in the UK is, or can ever be, humane.

Kate kindly took time to answer some questions about this investigation.

From what I understand, this investigation was inspired by the “humane meat” myth, which seems to be as common in the UK as it is here in the US. Who there is driving the fiction that animals can be raised for meat without suffering?

The insistence that slaughter in the UK is humane comes from a variety of sources. Unsurprisingly, the industry insists that all is well and, as the government’s agencies are supposed to monitor slaughterhouses, they also state that their checks ensure high animal welfare standards in abattoirs. They couldn’t very well tell the truth and admit that animals suffer horrifically and routinely at slaughter because that would be a tacit admission that they are not doing their job properly. Other deniers include celebrity chefs and TV companies who have, in recent months, tried to boost their profile and ratings by showing slaughter on mainstream television. Of course, the slaughter they show is typically a single animal brought into a mocked-up abattoir where time is taken to ensure standards are adhered to and best practice is observed. This is a million miles away from the chaos and terror of real slaughterhouses and gives false assurances to the meat-eating public.

Reading Animal Aid’s lengthy report on this investigation made me sick. What do you see as the most shocking animal welfare violations at the three slaughterhouses?

There are many animal welfare violations that appear to breach the law, but we didn’t set out to reveal illegal practices. What we wanted was to show a typical day in typical slaughterhouses, and the most shocking scenes weren’t necessarily those that breached welfare regulations. The images that haunt me still are of the animals ― particularly the sheep ― in the stun room at two of the slaughterhouses. Their fear was extreme and abundantly apparent: one sheep was so desperate to escape the fate she had already seen her flock mates succumb to, that she leapt through the hatch and into the slaughter area where she landed in the blood pit below her bleeding and shackled mates. Other sheep and pigs ran and ran, looking for any chance to escape. One sheep leapt up the walls while a pig attempted to climb the door. The fear the animals feel is something that cannot be “smoothed away” with increased monitoring ― it is a horrific inevitability in commercial slaughterhouses. Other shocking violations included stunning a ewe while her lamb suckled her, bringing a ewe to slaughter in a wheelbarrow because she was too sick to stand, and almost all pigs at one abattoir being stunned improperly the first time so they suffered electric shocks severe enough to floor them but not powerful enough to render them unconscious. Absolutely shocking.

Why did Animal Aid choose to install a hidden camera in each location rather than send someone in undercover to record slaughterhouse practices?

There are a number of logistical reasons for obtaining the footage the way we did but, most importantly, any person in the stun or slaughter area may change the behavior of other workers around him. We wanted no distractions, no behavior modifications, no excuses for why the workers acted in the way they did. We wanted to see what happens on a typical day ― not what happens when a new “worker” is in the room. The footage we obtained shows genuine slaughterhouse practice, and that can’t be denied.

What has been the response from the meat industry?

Extraordinary. Animal Aid has conducted many investigations over the years, but never have we had so many industry insiders queuing up to offer information about the facilities that they work in! We expected an industry backlash with denials and mud-flinging, and we did get a little of that. But by and large, the industry has thrown its hands up and admitted we did find serious issues. How could they deny it? Now, everyone is blaming someone else: farmers are angry at the way “their” animals are being killed, slaughterers are blaming the Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) over its lack of enforcement and the MHS inspectors blame their management for not supporting them. We have certainly shaken things up and we’ll have to see how it all settles. But in the meantime, we are pursuing every avenue that could lead to improvements in the fundamentally flawed slaughter system.

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was upset that Animal Aid didn’t report the slaughterhouse abuses to them right away. Why did you release the video evidence to the public before alerting the RSPCA?

Over the years, we have interrupted our investigations (and by so doing increased the risk to our investigators who were still filming inside facilities) to report the most shocking cruelties to the RSPCA. Not only have they never prosecuted on the basis of our evidence, they have publicly given the “all clear” to the farms involved. We even filmed inside an RSPCA-approved chicken farm ― a so-called “Freedom Food” farm, where tens of thousands of birds were crammed into a squalid unit in the same way that “standard” birds are reared. The level of leg and hip deformities in that shed was extreme, and I think it is probably the most shocking chicken farm I have ever seen. Even then, with its own reputation at stake, the RSPCA did not prosecute. I have little faith that the RSPCA would have stepped in to help the animals in the slaughterhouses. But aside from that, I believe what we filmed is typical of slaughterhouses right across the country. It is not the case of a “bad apple” that can be prosecuted and then everything will be well. The problems, the abuses, the suffering, are endemic and inevitable and the RSPCA feeds into that by sanctioning farms and promoting meat consumption.

How does Animal Aid want slaughterhouses or legislators to respond to this investigation?

What we have shown is that the system currently in place does not protect the welfare animals at the time of slaughter ― and there is no way that it could. (And of course, by the very nature of slaughterhouses, it does not protect the rights of animals ― quite the opposite.) The MHS is clearly failing in its role to protect the welfare of animals in abattoirs and that is why CCTV needs to be installed in all slaughterhouses. Even then, it is unlikely that the authorities would agree to release the footage to an independent board who has the welfare of animals as its primary motive. But I believe it would be a good step towards ensuring best practice. And there must be ongoing training and independent assessment for all stun operators and slaughterers. Currently, training and assessment is usually done in-house and there is no re-training or re-assessment ever. I would also like to see people who have violent or sexual convictions barred from working in slaughterhouses.

What can the public do to help?

Their role in eliminating animal suffering is much clearer and is guaranteed to be effective: stop eating them.

For more information about this investigation, and to support the work of Animal Aid, please visit animalaid.org.uk.

It’s been a bad month for the egg industry. Only weeks after Mercy For Animals released damning video footage taken at the Hy-Line Hatchery in Iowa, Compassion Over Killing has announced details of their investigation into an egg farm owned by Minnesota-based Michael Foods. While employed at the facility in August, a COK investigator used a hidden camera to document conditions for hens in this factory farm, which confines more than one million birds inside barren wire battery cages.

COK’s video reveals hens immobilized in the wires of their cages, unable to access food or water; decomposing corpses left in cages with live birds; a Michael Foods employee decapitating a hen; and birds suffering from overcrowding, severe feather loss and untreated injuries. Thanks in no small part to the Internet, the public is able to see more and more of this indefensible cruelty, which is clearly routine and unchecked within agribusiness.

Michael Foods is one of the country’s largest egg producers, supplying eggs to several national restaurant chains, including Dunkin’ Donuts. COK has asked Dunkin’ Donuts many times about the treatment of hens in its supply chain and encouraged the company to make meaningful changes for hens ― and consumers ― by offering vegan doughnuts. According to COK, there are an estimated 6,400 Dunkin’ Donut stores in the U.S. alone, offering more than 52 varieties of doughnuts ― all of which contain egg and dairy products from animals forced to endure miserable conditions inside massive and mechanized factory farms like the one COK investigated. After getting no action from Dunkin’ Donuts, COK launched DunkinCruelty.com, which has prompted thousands of concerned consumers to contact the doughnut maker about this important issue.

Several animal welfare experts viewed the new video. Dr. Ian Duncan, Chair of Animal Welfare in the Department of Animal and Poultry Science at the University of Guelph, said the hens were clearly enduring enormous suffering. “The most striking feature of the video is the large number of dead birds that are taken out of the cages,” he said. “[B]irds are removed that have been dead for a considerable time. The carcasses are covered in feces, and are rotting. In some cases, the carcasses are actually disintegrating which suggests that the birds have been dead in the cages for well over a week. In many cases the carcasses are very difficult to remove from the cages. This suggests that the hens may have been trapped while still alive and had a slow lingering death because they could not reach the food or water.”

“No responsible company should support this animal cruelty,” says COK’s executive director Erica Meier. “Dunkin’ Donuts can ― and should ― make the right decision by removing eggs from its doughnuts and offering more humane vegan menu items.”

What You Can Do:

Compassion Over Killing is asking people to contact Dunkin’ Donuts and urge the company to stop using eggs and dairy. You can call them at 1-800-859-5339 and send them an email using COK’s form.

Click here for additional ways to help COK.

One of the agribusiness cruelties that has always made me shudder is the practice of killing newborn male chicks, whom egg producers deem as having no monetary value. Each year in the US, 200 million male chicks are killed shortly after hatching, and many of these birds are ground up in large machines called macerators while still alive. Taking these innocent babies, fresh from their eggs and searching for their mothers, and subjecting them to such a callous execution is one of the dirty little secrets of agribiz. The hens, meanwhile, are born into a bleak life of intensive confinement and suffering; they will most likely spend up to 24 months crammed into a battery cage and laying eggs for human consumption until, their bodies depleted, the hens will be yanked out of their wire prisons and slaughtered for dog food or some other low-grade chicken product.

Inspired to help these sensitive beings, activists from Mercy For Animals have been quietly engaged in an undercover operation inside the world’s largest breeder of egg-laying hens. At a press conference in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, today, Mercy For Animals executive director Nathan Runkle released video footage shot covertly inside the Spencer, Iowa, location of Hy-Line International. Taken with a hidden camera by a Mercy For Animals investigator who worked at the hatchery from May 20 to June 6, 2009, the disturbing video depicts newborn chicks being dumped onto a swiftly moving conveyor belt and hanging by their beaks in a de-beaking machine. But it’s the haunting scene of chicks being dropped into a high-pressure macerator that will probably upset viewers most. And rightly so: Each day at this Hy-Line facility, nearly 150,000 male chicks are grabbed by their fragile wings, separated from the females and tossed into chutes that eventually lead them to a machine that will tear their tiny bodies to pieces. Every inch of the way the baby chicks are fully conscious.

Keeping a detailed written record, the Mercy For Animals investigator reported numerous instances of inhumane treatment and animals denied food and water. “I saw a bloody chick on the floor slowly twitching and breathing,” he writes. “I asked a worker if the chick would live, and he told me to throw it away. Like every day, dozens of chicks from broken eggs were left to die in trashcans.”

Nathan says Mercy For Animals selected the Hy-Line hatchery for its investigation because it is the world’s largest and the conditions documented there ― including throwing, mutilating and grinding up live animals ― illustrate the harsh and brutal nature of the entire egg industry, which treats animals as mere egg-producing machines, placing profit over animal welfare.  “If egg producers threw, mutilated and ground up puppies or kittens in the manner they do baby chicks, they could be prosecuted for animal cruelty,” he said.

Several animal welfare experts have viewed the video footage and remarked on the cruelty exhibited by Hy-Line workers.

“The video depicts compromised chicks struggling on the floor,” observed Dr. Sara Shields, an animal welfare scientist at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln. “Some are undoubtedly still alive after falling through the separation machine…. These animals are in need of immediate attention and should have been euthanized without delay or given care to assist their recovery. It is disconcerting that these animals are simply left on the floor with dead chicks and egg debris.”

Meanwhile, Dr. Karen Davis, founder of United Poultry Concerns, stated that “Based on the most up-to-date scientific knowledge of the neurological and behavioral complexity of birds, including chickens at the time of hatching, … my opinion of the hatchery footage I observed is that the chicks shown in the footage are experiencing extreme mental and physical trauma at the hands of the workers and in the devices of the machinery designed to mutilate them.”

Nathan also used the press conference to announce that Mercy For Animals will be sending letters to the 50 largest grocery chains in the US asking them to voluntarily require that all eggs sold in their stores bear a label that reads “Warning: Male chicks are ground-up alive by the egg industry.” These egg retailers include Wal-Mart, Kroger, Safeway, Costco, Albertson’s, Whole Foods Market, Trader Joe’s and Meijer.

“To the shock of most compassionate consumers,” Nathan said, “each year egg producers kill hundreds of millions of male egg-laying breed chicks at hatcheries because they will not lay eggs and do not grow large or fast enough to be raised profitably for meat. This is another violent and cruel side of the industry that consumers have a right to know about so that they can make informed and compassionate purchasing decisions.”

What You Can Do:

• If you’re still eating eggs ― even “cage free” or “free range” eggs ― please go vegan. You’ll be amazed how easy it is to enjoy a delicious, nutritious plant-based diet. I bake all the time, for example, and never need to use eggs, thanks to the many alternatives now available. And who needs more cholesterol? For some great advice on going vegan, visit ChooseVeg.com.
• Share this information. Most people ― even many ethical vegetarians ― are unaware of the cruelties behind egg production. The abusive practices at Hy-Line are common throughout the industry and, in the case of grinding up live male chicks, considered standard. Let family and friends know what’s happening by sharing this story with them.
• Support the work of Mercy For Animals. This is an outstanding organization that relies on the generosity of compassionate people to help fund investigations like the one announced today.

The ink was barely dry on Michael Vick’s deal with the Philadelphia Eagles and animal advocates were calling for his removal from the team. But emotions within the animal rights community range from all-out disgust to a charitable sentiment that sounds a lot like forgiveness. Those in the latter camp argue that animals in factory farms suffer much worse than the animals in Vick’s dogfighting operation in rural Virginia, where police removed 66 injured dogs and exhumed the bodies of eight more. Vick served 18 months of a 23-month sentence in federal prison for his crimes.

“What Vick did is, obviously, senseless and reprehensible,” writes actor and animal advocate Alec Baldwin on the Huffington Post. “But I believe Vick, as a wealthy and talented athletic superstar who performs his job out in the open before crowds of amped-up and highly opinionated fans, suffers an unfair disadvantage as compared to, say, the heads of a meatpacking plant or the directors of a medical research lab where animals are suffering the cruelest imaginable abuses behind walls and doors that remove them from our sight and, therefore, judgments.” Baldwin goes on to write that “Vick deserves another chance. One chance. Just like all of us who eat meat, drink milk, attend rodeos, circuses, zoos and horse races and yet find it easier to hand Vick the bill for all of the other, more systemic abuses in our society may find ourselves needing another chance one day. Just like Michael Vick.”

Peter Singer agrees. The author of Animal Liberation told The Philadelphia Inquirer that what Vick did was reprehensible. “But many people do or participate in things regarding animals that are awful. To some extent, I think people may have rushed to judgment because he did something awful to dogs.” Pigs, says Singer, are just as sensitive and intelligent as dogs, but we don’t give much thought to how bacon is created. “What I’m saying is that the people who are very quick to jump on Michael Vick maybe could spend some time thinking about how they participate in the cruelty to animals just by walking into the supermarket, spend some time thinking about what happened to that animal before it was turned into meat.”

Perhaps the largest olive branch has come from the Humane Society of the United States. “Michael Vick admits that what he did to dogs was cruel and barbaric, but now that he has served his time, he wants to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem,” says Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of HSUS. “He has pledged to make a long-term commitment to participate in our community-based outreach programs to steer inner-city youth away from dogfighting. At events with Michael in Atlanta and Chicago, we’ve seen him deliver a powerful message against animal cruelty.”

“The football player is free and has the right ― just like any ex-convict in this country ― to go back to work,” writes Michael DuDell of Ecorazzi, which reports on celebrity-related animal news. “Whether you believe him or not, Vick has shown public remorse for his crimes and has even agreed to work with the HSUS campaigning against dogfighting. What better educator than a reformed sinner?” DuDell says there’s no question that what Vick did was wrong. “But what would also be horrible is showing the world that those who stand up for the welfare of animals do not stand up for the welfare of their fellow man.”

Photo by Jonathan Ernst/Getty Images

But other activists aren’t sold on the new Vick. According to PETA’s Shawna Flavell, “Until Michael Vick undergoes the rigorous psychiatric tests now available to determine his ability to experience remorse, there’s no way to establish whether he will reoffend.” Her colleague Dan Shannon was even more emphatic, writing on the PETA blog site: “PETA and millions of decent football fans around the world are disappointed that the Philadelphia Eagles have chosen to sign a man who hanged dogs from trees, electrocuted them with jumper cables, held them underwater until they drowned in his swimming pool, and even threw his own family dogs into the fighting pit to be torn to shreds while he laughed. What sort of message does this send to young fans who care about animals and don’t want to see them be harmed?”

Football enthusiasts are equally divided. Though some Eagles fans have no problem with Vick, others are campaigning to have him ousted from the team. One even launched a Web site, SackVick.net, to target the Eagles’ corporate sponsors, which include Budweiser beer, Canon copiers, Gatorade, MasterCard, NovaCare Rehabilitation, Staples and U.S. Airways. Owners of Hot Dog Collars, an online company that sells NFL-themed merchandise for dogs, announced that they’ve stopped selling Eagles-themed pet products. The site now features anti-Vick images and a page to accept donations for the Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (PSPCA). Meanwhile, a former Eagles fan recently advertised their season tickets on Craigslist for $2,000, along with the note: “If the Eagles are going to sell out, then so am I.”

BusinessWeek writer Mark Hyman believes that in the long run, Vick’s dogfighting crimes won’t matter to sports fans if the Eagles’ new player helps the team. What Hyman fails to note is that by landing in Philadelphia, Vick finds himself in one of the most animal-friendly areas in the country. The Humane League of Philadelphia, the Philadelphia Animal Welfare Society and the PSPCA are just a few of the groups active in the city, and they’re not likely to let Vick forget that there are plenty of people watching.

People like singer Pink. Posting on Twitter, the animal advocate and Philadelphia native wrote: “wow. michael vick in MY hometown, Philly. of all the places. I hope the fans tear him to pieces like his beloved dogs.”

I went to summer camp once, and I don’t have fond memories of it. Maybe it was the terrible food or the short-tempered camp counselors. Maybe it was the completely meaningless activities. Or maybe it was that Jimmy Teufel gave me an atomic wedgie in front of the female campers. Ah, childhood.

Thanks to people like Nora Kramer, however, summer camp has changed a lot. Nora has channeled her teaching skills and passion for activism into creating the new Youth Empowered Action Camp (YEA), which will give kids the knowledge and guidance they need to take on a world of social injustice. Animal cruelty, gay rights and global warming are just a few of the important issues YEA will cover, with each camper choosing his or her area of interest. This summer’s event will be held at the Quaker Center in Ben Lomond, California, just outside of Santa Cruz, August 17th to the 21st.

Youth Empowered Action Camp director and animal activist Nora Kramer

Nora, who’s worked as a camp director and senior staff at three different summer camps over the years to learn the best practices of established camps, is also a longtime animal activist and has been working with young people for most of this decade, including teaching high school English. She says she was inspired to start YEA Camp after doing some work for In Defense of Animals while teaching humane education on the side. “I had such a positive experience working with youth, both at after-school programs, as a guest speaker at schools and with the kids who volunteered or called in to IDA about animal issues,” she says. “I sensed the compassion and urgency that young people have ― there wasn’t the same jadedness or cynicism that I had seen in many adults. A few students asked me about things to do in the summer, and I started looking into it.”

What she discovered was a shortage of programs for kids interested in social activism. “Most organizations have no capacity to handle volunteers or interns who are under a certain age, and there were kids who were sitting around doing nothing for animals or other issues they might care about because there wasn’t anything out there for them, and they didn’t have the initiative or experience to start doing stuff on their own — which is an issue for adult activists too!” Since Nora loved summer camp as a kid, it became clear that this was something she wanted to pursue. She soon got her teaching credential, which enabled her to work but still have summers free. Now, after experience at three summer camps, she’s put together an outstanding team to make Youth Empowered Action summer camp a reality for kids 11 to 15.

Campers will have their choice of issues they want to address, and the emphasis, Nora says, will be on teaching skills kids can use to tackle these social injustices in the real world. “Our plan for the future is a full-length summer camp with probably two-week sessions, so there will be much more program time.” Nevertheless, kids will get some good background in whatever topic they choose this year. “Each camper will have a mentor who will work with them to make sure they have accurate information and are connected with local or national groups working on their issue of importance,” explains Nora. “I will be the mentor to the animal rights kids.” One of the techniques used in the training will be to have campers create their own talking points, break out into small groups and practice answering questions about their topic; not only does this give them exposure to the rhetoric of their chosen issue, but they’ll be teaching one another. (This is a technique adults can apply to their activism too: Take a public-speaking class, for example, and you’ve got a built-in audience for your outreach efforts while polishing your skills.)

The camp will also feature a daily series called Compassion Into Action in which they’ll focus on one social issue that can be impacted by our daily choices. “We’re thinking one of these will be on animal issues and that we’ll show The Meatrix, though this has not been finalized.” In addition to Nora, lauren Ornelas*, another longtime animal activist, will discuss the issue of animal cruelty. Oh, and did I mention all the food will be vegan? “Because the camp is vegan, we will explain in detail why the food is what it is,” Nora says. “We will certainly discuss factory farming as well as the other reasons that influence this choice.”

Animal agribusiness has long known the value of involving kids in the industry early on, which is why they support desensitizing programs like 4-H, FFA and ag classes that help turn today’s young people into tomorrow’s factory farmers. So it’s encouraging to see activists like Nora engaging kids through a compassionate, life-affirming program. YEA Camp will only be accommodating 18 campers this year, allowing counselors to give everyone more attention. There’s still time to apply.

Update: Due to a scheduling conflict, lauren will not be able to speak at the camp this year.

Last May, farmers, slaughterhouse managers, policymakers, veterinarians, restaurant owners and other links in the animal-based food chain met in Arlington, Virginia, for the Animal Agriculture Alliance’s annual Stakeholders Summit. Not surprisingly, in the wake of Prop 2 and other successful campaigns on behalf of animals, the theme of this year’s summit was “Politics, Activism and Religion: Influencing the Debate on Animal Welfare in America.”

The Cattle Network published an interesting summary of the event this week, and it offers a glimpse of how agribiz hopes to take on what it fears most: animal activists. The plan includes stepping up security at factory farms and processing plants so activists have more difficulty with undercover investigations — clearly, it’s easier to get away with cruelty when the public doesn’t know about it. They’re also mighty concerned about activists controlling the message, as well as ballot measures and other animal welfare initiatives.

“Aggressive animal rights campaigns are being mounted globally, and it is important that we address them strategically and in a unified manner,” said Kay Johnson Smith, executive vice president of the Animal Agriculture Alliance, before the summit.

Other speakers included Wes Jamison, associate professor of communications at Palm Beach Atlantic University and a Southern Baptist Minister. Jamison is a longtime critic of animal activism, and he has erroneously claimed that activists want to give animals the same rights as humans. He recently told a convention of pig-flesh producers: “Never forget that you do the right thing in the right way for the right reasons. Be proud of it.”

At the May meeting, Jamison unveiled a study on how animal rights groups are using religion to advance the vegan or vegetarian message, and he suggested that meat-eaters with companion animals are particularly vulnerable, since they must confront the moral implications of treating some kinds of animal like family members while treating other kinds of animals like dinner. Jamison said animal advocates use that guilt as an advantage, noting that “God is compassionate; factory farming is not.”

Also notable is big ag’s concern that campaigners are using technology to advance the interests of animals, effectively controlling the message. “Activists have learned to use the Internet better than industry has,” reads the article. They’re even upset at mainstream media, noting that The New York Times and other outlets are still using the term “Swine flu,” rather than the industry-preferred (and less blameworthy) “H1N1 virus.”

In her PowerPoint presentation, Kay Johnson Smith advises those working in animal agribusiness to:

• Thoroughly screen job applicants and implement a security plan. (In other words, why treat animals better when you can suppress what’s happening behind closed doors?)
• Implement the industry’s animal welfare guidelines. (Yes, those guidelines that are basically meaningless. For more information, see Farm Sanctuary’s in-depth report on agribusiness welfare programs.)
• Strengthen state laws to protect farming and ranching. (Another attempt to prevent animal advocates from educating the public and working to improve the lives of animals.)

It’s always important to know what the opposition is doing; after all, we want to continue to keep the pressure on.

A new undercover investigation by PETA has revealed (yet again) circus handlers abusing animals. Video footage, which was released today, shows employees of Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus beating elephants before they enter the ring. The video depicts elephants being whipped and making noises in protest. Workers sink bullhooks into the elephants’ sensitive skin and pull hard as the animals trumpet in pain. One of the elephants in PETA’s video, 25-year-old Tonka, is shown swaying back and forth, bobbing her head and kicking her foot ― all stereotypic behaviors indicative of severe psychological stress.

The video was taken by a PETA employee who got a job with Ringling Bros., working as a stagehand from January to June and traveling with the circus across seven states.

Predictably, rather than owning up to the abuse — or even agreeing to look into the matter — officials from Ringling Bros. are relying on a tactic commonly used by animal exploiters when faced with proof of their cruelty: attacking the messenger. “PETA is an animal rights extremist group,” said a spokesman for Ringling Bros. “We have 139 years of experience of working with Asian elephants.”

What You Can Do:

Contact the USDA. Ask them to seize the elephants in Ringling’s hands immediately, investigate PETA’s evidence and enforce the Animal Welfare Act, the federal law that governs the humane care, handling, treatment and transportation of animals used in circuses.

Mr. Tom Vilsack
Secretary of Agriculture
U.S. Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC  20250

Email: AgSec@usda.gov

If a circus is coming to your community, speak up!

• Contact the local humane society and ask what measures will be taken to ensure animals will be treated in accord with the Animal Welfare Act when the circus is in town. (In some cases, your humane society might not even be aware that the circus is coming.)
• Write to your local paper and explain why the use of live animals in traveling shows is not acceptable. Click here for details.
• Contact circus sponsors and ask them to support humane events rather than the circus.
• If local merchants offer free or discount passes to the circus, ask them not to.
• Protest the circus. Many local and national animal rights organizations, including PETA, will help you organize a peaceful demonstration. I protested the Carson & Barnes circus when it came to my community last month, and many families turned away once they learned about the cruelty under the big top.