So the harmer says: "Many food stores and food retailers have announced implementation of third-party verification measures to ensure the animals from which food products are derived were treated humanely. In the near future, customers will demand third-party verification and if it doesn’t exist, the store providing the food is not going to be credible with the public.Agriculture can win this battle for the hearts and minds of consumers. Farmers and ranchers must remember whom they are trying to influence. Customers and consumers need to hear from livestock producers.It is not productive for the agriculture community to attack activist groups. Instead, agriculture must retake its rightful position as the people in charge of ensuring the humane treatment of animals.Agriculture must inform people we share their concerns and we work hard every day to make sure our animals are treated fairly and humanely. Follow that by sharing with them how we meet our obligations to the humane treatment of the animals on our farms."Now what exactly is "humane" - Everyone wants to know! It seems that consumers are having a hard time with figuring out the "standards" that others are suggesting:
Animal Welfare Institute
Animal Welfare Approved
USDA Livestock Behavior Research
Animal Wellbeing Program
Animal Care and Use Committee
Animal Welfare Quality
Compassion in World Farming
Animal Wellbeing Program
Animal Care and Use Committee
Animal Welfare Quality
Compassion in World Farming
This list of "experts" and diverse "welfare ratings" could go on and on... But there are a few basic "rules" to what they all say is "humane". And they are: that all animal intended as "food", ought to have food and water themselves... (duh) And animals ought to be given appropriate medical treatment just to insure they don't (accidentally) die... And that when it is time for them to be killed it should be done "humanely". From there on there is a plethora of variables that can get very confusing.
So, if you're someone looking to figure out what is "humane" and you can't quite sort all the details out yourself - Perhaps you should play The Humane Game:
It sort of works like chutes and ladders... You know - You find a "free range" egg... But ooops! You just learned the hen came from a hatchery where millions of male chicks are killed --- Down the slide you go!
Hey! Found some "grass fed beef"? But wait a second... You discover the dehorning and castration process is done without anesthetics --- Gosh, down the slide you go again!
Now... How about some bacon sourced from pigs that are wallowing contentedly in the mud and sunshine... Uh, Oh... You pull the card that has this question: Is it really right to remove a "happy" animal from the earth either?
Let's face it... It's a game that can't be won! There is no "humane" way to eat animals!
Finally, if you really want to get technical about it --- Here goes:
"Humane" means to be concerned with alleviating suffering. These animals are not diseased, crippled or in aged pain. They are delivered young and healthy and "fit for life", so there is absolutely no "misery" to relieve these animals of- Only terror and pain to cause.
The saddest thing of all though in this Humane Game is that
it's always the animals that lose!
Tired of playing games with innocent lives? Learn more: Humane Myth
9 comments:
BRILLIANT BLOG, BEA!
THE MOCK GAME YOU CREATED IT SO ARTISTIC AND REALISTIC, IT LOOKS POSITIVELY STRAIGHT OFF THE STORE SHELVES? OR AM I WRONG IN THINKING THAT YOU MADE IT UP?
LOVE THAT PHOTO OF TEMPLE NEXT TO THE WORDS: "HAPPY MEAT HAS NEVER BEEN THIS MUCH FUN" -- AND THOSE CONSCIENCE CARDS ARE A KICK.
AGES 6 AND UP -- WHY NOT INFANTS? AREN'T WE INDOCTRINATED STARTING WHEN WE'RE BORN, WHEN SOME OF US ARE FED MOM'S MILK -- FROM A COW'S UDDER?
YOU ARE RIGHT ABOUT THE OUTCOME OF THE HUMANE GAME -- IT'S EVEN MORE FIXED IN HUMANS' FAVOR THAN A CASINO SLOT MACHINE: THE ANIMALS ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS LOSE, UNLESS ONE LIKE MOLLY B. MANAGES TO ESCAPE THE MEAT MAN'S CLUTCHES.
Hi CQ - And thanks for the appreciation of the art work and idea... Yeah, it came out of my sarcastic head alright.
I suppose infants should be included - Just wanted to make it look more realistic with "6 and up".
It's true that the ones like Molly B have hit the lucky-life-lottery. This always disturbs me though... I don't think being able to live your life out completely and unhindered AS INTENDED ought to be a matter of "luck" but a right. Course I know I'm choir singing now. It's the rest of the world that needs to learn this truth. Ah but how?
Guess it's just more of the same, pressing ever on in what ways we *can* make a difference. As always, the support we get and give to each other is invaluable. Thank you for this and your comment. ;)
Ok. Don't some people make the step to veganism by first accepting the idea of humane treatment?
You make lots of mistakes.
Organic cows aren't shuffled off to industrial slaughterhouses. They're usually sent to the local slaughterhouse to be made into ground beef to be sold as organic beef which brings about 10 times more money.
They don't take away their babies. Read the standards. The babies stay with for a period of time. Then the babies are fed milk from their mother cow thereafter.
Actually castration is often done just after birth with rubber bands. Cuts off the circulation and numbs the area until undeveloped testicles atrophy and fall off. Much less memorable than what we do... cutting off foreskin and piercing our bodies for looks. Disbudding also is often done with anesthetic, though not always.
A lot of modern organic farmers don't bother castrating or disbudding. It's best if you have polled cattle to start with, then you don't have to disbud them.
Biodynamic farmers are forbidden from these modifications. Their animals are intact.
Don't forget that it's cruel to leave horns on. Cattle gouge each other and humans. They get horns stuck in fences and hang themselves or starve. They get horn maggots which can lead to infections. These are all painful and cause suffering.
Overall, removing the horns or breeding for polled animals is better than not doing it in most situations. Pain is short lived, but saves suffering later on.
Hello Anonymous #1 - I think some people do initially expand their circle of compassion with the understanding that nonhumans do feel pain. And once they start caring about the "welfare" of animals - Many see that that isn't enough... And that becoming vegan and avoiding as much harm as possible is what's in order. And then they act on that choice. Thanks for your visit and interest. ;)
Hello Anonymous #2 - I care little about what physical place an animal is killed. I care not that it's a huge institutionalized assembly line or a quaint mom & pop slaughter operation. The deed is the same in both. And your "10 times more money" comment also holds zero influence on me. bye.
Hello Anonymous #3 - IF the calves stay with their mothers it is only to receive the first collostrum. After that they MUST be removed for two reasons: To start the mother cow on her new cycle of making milk for man AND because bonding with her calf becomes even stronger after 24 hours. Please google "calf milk replacer". bye.
Hello Anonymous #4 & #5- Castration, disbudding - with/without anesthetics. Thanks for the info.
Hello Anonymous #6 - What would save a lot of suffering would be not to breed these cows, chickens and pigs at all! To leave them off our plates. To not wear their skins. To not pay to see them perform or do tricks. To not test chemicals and drugs on them. In short: To NOT use them! Now THAT would save a whole world of miserable, torturous, inhumane suffering. bye.
Post a Comment