Washington Post Magazine article
Alley Cat Allies Response to WaPo
Dr. Fox's and Readers' comments on TNR
I have not been a dedicated blogger, I know. As with all diaries and journals I have tried to keep throughout my life, I start out strong and then just sort of peter out. My apologies to anyone who actually missed me. (Allow me a few delusions of importance, please.)
I feel inspired to post after reading the Washington Post Magazine's article on Trap Neuter Return programs operating in DC. I was extremely disturbed by some of the comments reported.
I do believe that pet cats should be kept indoors to the greatest extent possible, or at least to escape-proof back yards (I wouldn't want my dog to wander around unsupervised, why would I want that for my cat?). It does seem to me that felis catus probably should be categorized as an invasive species in the Americas and certainly in Australia and New Zealand, and that they can prey on indigenous animals that may or may not be threatened. They may, of course, also prey on other invasive species, like rats. And their destructiveness is nothing compared to the destruction caused by the species that helped them migrate to new continents: humans.
We are the most destructive invasive species of all. However, if I suggested wide-spread "euthanasia" to manage human populations, I would be considered a monster, and rightly so. Progressive humans can look back at history and recognize that efforts at eugenics, at keeping "undesirable" people from reproducing, were and are horrific. I would like to think that nobody read Lois Lowery's The Giver and thought it was a blueprint for an ideal society.
I lead with all this not to say that there is no distinction between human and non-human animals, though I find the importance/meaning of those distinctions so minimal that some find it offensive. I lead with all this to say that large sections of humanity must let go of their arrogant assumption that it is right and proper that humans curate the planet.
It is dangerous thinking that both environmentalists and non-environmentalists adopt. The position of Ingrid Newkirk is a perfect example of this. The president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals believes it is unethical to return feral cats to outdoor lifestyle. PETA often seems to be of the view that animals are better off dead than in less-than-perfect circumstances of any kind. It's ironic, I think, that the world spends considerable resources on psychiatric treatment to prevent people from adopting the same philosophy in their own lives.
A representative of the American Bird Conservancy thinks its morally justified to kill cats because this saves birds. Of course, organizations also justify killing invasive bird species to preserve indigenous birds. But whoever is being killed and who is being saved, we humans have reserved the right to make that decision. And our reasons often fail tests of practicality and morality. It makes no sense to euthanize healthy homeless dogs while people continue to purposefully breed English bull dogs, animals of notoriously poor health. We also devote significant amounts of money and labor resources to trying to breed pandas in captivity, despite ample evidence that this is a losing battle. But hey, they have those cute black circles around their eyes, so by all means, lets focus on them.
The world is in many ways a big mess right now, and it's all thanks to human behavior. In a misguided effort to preserve the native species that we have endangered, many organizations institute eradication policies of species considered invasive, which frequently means killing any that can be found. This is as if animals have no emotional lives, no sentience worth considering. Moreover, it is an attempt to solve problems with the same defective thinking that caused the problems in the first place. We change the landscape and the ecosystems we inhabit to accommodate our needs. If we find that in accommodating our physical needs we have left a wake of destruction, we satisfy our psychological need to make reparation by creating making a new path of destruction. Yet destruction is the result no matter what. It is only that we have convince ourselves that the latest form of annihilation is a moral good. This is also what European colonialists thought about their policies of forced sterilization and transplantation of indigenous human populations.
We know now that they were wrong to think that because they had the power, they had the right, or even the obligation, to tell others humans how or whether or they could live. We now redirect that energy to animals, animals that are in the wrong environments because of our interventions.
Trap-neuter-return is humane and sensible. It may be slower than mass extermination (and the evidence doesn't necessarily prove it is), but you would think by this point we would have learned that the quickest solution is not the best or the most sustainable. When we stop thinking about the planet and its non-human denizens as though it was our living room and decor, to be arranged in the most pleasing and efficient manner, maybe we will finally start to find real solutions to our problems.
Welcome!
If you're a first time visitor (or just generally confused), here's an explanation: Originally this blog was titled "The Tree of Knowledge" and was full of my exhortations and explanations about various social issues. Now they aren't so much explanations as Tourette's like interjections, because I started to find the research exhausting.
Amazon Earth Day
Showing posts with label animal rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label animal rights. Show all posts
Sunday, February 23, 2014
Monday, January 15, 2007
Hey Mikey!
In my numerous recent failures to avoid eggs, dairy, and crappily-sourced chocolate, I have become increasinlgy frustrated. Not only with myself, but with everyone I know. Because I have realized that going vegetarian is so ridiculously easy compared to trying to go organic, sustainable, or sweat-shop free. Most foods are pretty obvious about being meat-based. And even when they aren't, they're all required to have ingredients listed on the side. Same with clothes. Labels say what they're made of: leather, fur, silk, wool. And most malls and grocery stores carry some form of vegetarian merchandise; not always so for organic, fair trade, etc. And electronic books are becoming more readily available (the glue used for binding books isn't animal friendly). Vegetarianism is practically a cake walk.
So, here's my challenge: go one week, no meat. It's good for the animals, good for the planet, good for humanity, and good for you. C'mon, just try it. You may even like it.
Fair warning: hostess uses animal fat in their products.
Also, here's a small thing we can all do to help the planet. When you leave a room, shut off the lights. It's that simple. ;-)
So, here's my challenge: go one week, no meat. It's good for the animals, good for the planet, good for humanity, and good for you. C'mon, just try it. You may even like it.
Fair warning: hostess uses animal fat in their products.
Also, here's a small thing we can all do to help the planet. When you leave a room, shut off the lights. It's that simple. ;-)
Friday, September 29, 2006
We're here. We're SPCA. Get used to it.
"I'm sorry, but you people make me absolutely sick. A group of people from your organization goes all the way to Beirut, sees how a city has been demolished, witnesses, first-hand, the human catastrophe that took place and then proceeds to fly 300 dogs and cats to the United States?!?!
You should be prosecuted for for crimes against humanity."
The above was posted by someone on the Best Friends animal rescue organization's website (www.bestfriends.org). In all likelihood, they did it just to piss people off. However, this wouldn't be the first time that a person has belittled the efforts of animal welfare groups, citing all the people who need help.
First, at the risk of sounding catty, I wonder what these people are doing with themselves? It often seems to me that there are plenty of people who would rather see apathy and selfishness rather than any sort of sympathy directed towards animals. One woman who spent thousands of dollars on healthcare for her pet was sent angry mail about the human beings who have no healthcare. Yet how much money has that person given to charity? How much did they spend on their electronics or luxury cars? It seems that rarely do people say, "How dare they put so much money and effort into the Academy Awards ceremony when there are people starving in Africa?" At least, they aren't saying it in my hearing.
Second, animals have no voice. Yes, many human beings are disenfranchised and oppressed, but the option exists for rebellion and sedition. Animals don't have the capacity to organize a media campaign for support, to band together and rise up against their tormentors, to drastically manipulate their environment to better suit their own needs. Which means that when human endeavor endangers animals, it is up to human endeavor to save them. Would I argue that human aid organizations should instead direct their efforts to animals? No. However, I still contend that the efforts of animal welfare organizations are valid and perhaps equally important.
Finally, I feel these people need to be made aware that all victories for animal rights are victories for people as well. It's important to campaign against factory farming because humans are injured by its excesses. Actions to find alternatives to animal testing mean better, more innovative ways of developing treatments for humans. Maintaining the integrity of rare ecosystems means a healthier planet for people and a greater likelihood of making discoveries that are ultimately of benefit to humanity. There may be any number of yet to be studied plants in the rainforest with miraculous medicinal qualities, which means that the entire ecosystem must be saved, as all organisms are interconnected. And really, if the world guarantees that all animals have a right to freedom from suffering, how can anyone get away with denying humans the same?
You should be prosecuted for for crimes against humanity."
The above was posted by someone on the Best Friends animal rescue organization's website (www.bestfriends.org). In all likelihood, they did it just to piss people off. However, this wouldn't be the first time that a person has belittled the efforts of animal welfare groups, citing all the people who need help.
First, at the risk of sounding catty, I wonder what these people are doing with themselves? It often seems to me that there are plenty of people who would rather see apathy and selfishness rather than any sort of sympathy directed towards animals. One woman who spent thousands of dollars on healthcare for her pet was sent angry mail about the human beings who have no healthcare. Yet how much money has that person given to charity? How much did they spend on their electronics or luxury cars? It seems that rarely do people say, "How dare they put so much money and effort into the Academy Awards ceremony when there are people starving in Africa?" At least, they aren't saying it in my hearing.
Second, animals have no voice. Yes, many human beings are disenfranchised and oppressed, but the option exists for rebellion and sedition. Animals don't have the capacity to organize a media campaign for support, to band together and rise up against their tormentors, to drastically manipulate their environment to better suit their own needs. Which means that when human endeavor endangers animals, it is up to human endeavor to save them. Would I argue that human aid organizations should instead direct their efforts to animals? No. However, I still contend that the efforts of animal welfare organizations are valid and perhaps equally important.
Finally, I feel these people need to be made aware that all victories for animal rights are victories for people as well. It's important to campaign against factory farming because humans are injured by its excesses. Actions to find alternatives to animal testing mean better, more innovative ways of developing treatments for humans. Maintaining the integrity of rare ecosystems means a healthier planet for people and a greater likelihood of making discoveries that are ultimately of benefit to humanity. There may be any number of yet to be studied plants in the rainforest with miraculous medicinal qualities, which means that the entire ecosystem must be saved, as all organisms are interconnected. And really, if the world guarantees that all animals have a right to freedom from suffering, how can anyone get away with denying humans the same?
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
For the Love of Wolves
I find wolves to be compelling animals. They are beautiful, intelligent, and devoted to family. So it's enough to make me want to cry when I find out that Idaho would like to eliminate their wolf population. Please sign this petition to urge the Fish and Wildlife Service to say no to Idaho's outrageous slaughter request.
Thursday, July 06, 2006
Go Vegetarian, Part I
Well, I put it off for several months, and I think I deserve some recognition of my restraint. But here is my exhortation to go vegetarian. First, a note on etymology: vegetarian comes from “vegetare” which is Latin and means “to enliven.” It comes up sometimes, so just FYI. Also, if you remain completely unmoved by what I’m about to tell you, don’t ever ask a vegetarian if she eats animal crackers. It’s the dumbest, most annoying joke imaginable.
Vegetarianism is the right thing to do. The first, but most certainly not the last, reason to eschew meat, and perhaps even eggs and dairy if you have the strength and dedication, is that to consume animal products causes animal suffering. At a very basic level, death is something that all animals try desperately to avoid. Animals die for you to eat meat, and even if one could imagine that there are completely painless, fearless ways to slaughter an animal, and it seems unlikely, you are robbing them of the enjoyment of life. And animals do enjoy it. If you have a pet, you know this.
But if needlessly killing a sentient being doesn’t bother you, then what about the acute suffering that animals go through as they are raised for your plate? Unless you are buying certified organic and cruelty-free, then you are contributing to the life-long torture of farm animals. According to FARM (www.farmusa.org), some 300 million turkeys and 9 billion chickens are slaughtered for human consumption. In factory farms, poultry is housed in sheds with roughly 10,000 birds to a shed. The animals are fattened up as quickly as possible, and many collapse under their own weight, and are then unable to get food and water or protect themselves from the mass of other birds. The sheds aren’t kept clean, and there develops a build-up of sulfides, methane, and ammonia. The birds are only taken out of these sheds to be crammed into wooden cages for transport to slaughter. I’ve seen rescued turkeys who had to be supported by a sling (for more stories of animal rescues, visit www.animalsanctuary.org ).
Then there are the cows. Beef cattle are kept in feed lots, where there is no shelter, no grass, no space; there are tens of thousands of cows kept in a single lot. Cattle are dehorned, castrated, and branded without anesthetic.
And of course, the pigs. Breeding sows are kept pregnant almost all of the time, the only respite is the 2-4 weeks (as opposed to the natural 12 weeks) of nursing 10-12 pigs. The gestation crates are so narrow that the sows cannot move. The farrowing pens are not much better. After 3-4 years the sows are sent to slaughter. After premature weaning, the piglets are put in tiny crates and fed synthetic formula, where they, like the cattle, are castrated and tagged without benefit of anesthesia. They are then moved to overcrowded feeding lots for six months before slaughter.
During transport, animals are deprived of food and water for hours. If they’re too weak to walk to the killing floor, they’re dragged. Sometimes animals are skinned, dismembered, or even boiled alive while still conscious.
And I haven’t even gotten to the egg-layers and dairy cows.
Vegetarianism is the right thing to do. The first, but most certainly not the last, reason to eschew meat, and perhaps even eggs and dairy if you have the strength and dedication, is that to consume animal products causes animal suffering. At a very basic level, death is something that all animals try desperately to avoid. Animals die for you to eat meat, and even if one could imagine that there are completely painless, fearless ways to slaughter an animal, and it seems unlikely, you are robbing them of the enjoyment of life. And animals do enjoy it. If you have a pet, you know this.
But if needlessly killing a sentient being doesn’t bother you, then what about the acute suffering that animals go through as they are raised for your plate? Unless you are buying certified organic and cruelty-free, then you are contributing to the life-long torture of farm animals. According to FARM (www.farmusa.org), some 300 million turkeys and 9 billion chickens are slaughtered for human consumption. In factory farms, poultry is housed in sheds with roughly 10,000 birds to a shed. The animals are fattened up as quickly as possible, and many collapse under their own weight, and are then unable to get food and water or protect themselves from the mass of other birds. The sheds aren’t kept clean, and there develops a build-up of sulfides, methane, and ammonia. The birds are only taken out of these sheds to be crammed into wooden cages for transport to slaughter. I’ve seen rescued turkeys who had to be supported by a sling (for more stories of animal rescues, visit www.animalsanctuary.org ).
Then there are the cows. Beef cattle are kept in feed lots, where there is no shelter, no grass, no space; there are tens of thousands of cows kept in a single lot. Cattle are dehorned, castrated, and branded without anesthetic.
And of course, the pigs. Breeding sows are kept pregnant almost all of the time, the only respite is the 2-4 weeks (as opposed to the natural 12 weeks) of nursing 10-12 pigs. The gestation crates are so narrow that the sows cannot move. The farrowing pens are not much better. After 3-4 years the sows are sent to slaughter. After premature weaning, the piglets are put in tiny crates and fed synthetic formula, where they, like the cattle, are castrated and tagged without benefit of anesthesia. They are then moved to overcrowded feeding lots for six months before slaughter.
During transport, animals are deprived of food and water for hours. If they’re too weak to walk to the killing floor, they’re dragged. Sometimes animals are skinned, dismembered, or even boiled alive while still conscious.
And I haven’t even gotten to the egg-layers and dairy cows.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
