Talking Turkey and the Sanctimony of American Slaughter

Christine Saenz

It’s that time of year again. A time when 45 million turkeys are slaughtered, stuffed, and feasted upon for Thanksgiving dinners across the U.S. According to PETA and other sources, this 45 million makes up 1/6 of the number of turkeys killed each year in America. While many animal rights groups will be imploring President Obama to pardon all turkeys this season, you shouldn’t have to worry about a protest stampeding across your lawn if you partake in this gluttonous “tradition.” Apparently the protestors and news media outlets will be thoroughly preoccupied with the Hindu Gadhimai festival in Nepal, where, every 5 years, 200,000+ animals are ritualistically sacrificed to bring peace and prosperity to devotees.

Last week, an organizing committee member defending the ritual stated, “We will not stop this centuries-old tradition now. This is our religion, belief and tradition and we will continue with it no matter what.” Sound familiar? The 45 million turkeys slaughtered in the U.S. this year will die in the name of our own time-honored beliefs and traditions. On one end of the world, hundreds of thousands of buffaloes, pigs, sheep, birds, and goats (to name just a few) will have their throats slit by priests and their carcasses distributed to devotees after the festival. In our own country, hundreds of millions of turkeys will live their lives in tightly-packed, windowless “houses,” hung upside down in shackles (alive), mercilessly slaughtered, and decorated on dining room tables.

Does the Winter Mean Fur Coats?

Simona Fucili

 

As the holiday season is approaching, one cannot help notice all of the fur ads you see in magazines and commercials.  The ads portray fur coats as a symbol of elegance and status but fail to show how the original owners of these coats met their gruesome deaths.  According to the Spanish animal-rights organization Igualdad Animal, four hundred thousand minks are killed and turned into fur coats every year.  The organization advocates for the abolition of animal slavery and has been researching the killing of mink to produce fur coats.  Some of Igualdad Animal’s research was recently highlighted by a press agency that focuses on Mediterranean countries referred to as ANSAmed.

November is usually the month where mink farms prepare to harvest the mink fur.  This year, Igualdad Animal Organization decided to videotape this process through the use of hidden cameras.  This ghastly video was distributed through the online version of the Publico newspaper to illustrate “the other side of the fur business and the suffering behind the elegance of a mink coat.”  The video shows a very cruel reality of the harvesting of mink fur.  It vividly illustrates where conditions the mink live in, as well as, the cruel procedure used to separate the fur from the animal.  In the video, you can see that the minks are usually killed by carbon monoxide blown from the exhausts of large tractors.  In addition to the images shown in the video, the organization took more than 650 pictures from various farms in Spain during different hours.  All the material was collected and distributed as part of an investigation conducted by Igualdad Animal organization.  The results of the investigation were published on the Piel Es Asesinato website.  This was the first investigation shown in Spain demonstrating the cruelties performed on minks during the creation of fur coats.  The organization states in the video “people can see minks that have gone completely crazy, held in small cages since they were born, mechanically moving from one side to the other while their mothers are used as breeding machines and then taken away from their young. We show everything the entrepreneurs in the business don’t want people to see, the suffering, the torture and death, to make buyers of mink fur reflect”.  Igualdad Animal is hoping the visual images of the tormenting and killing of the mink will make people think twice about their next fur coat purchase.  In addition to this video, Igualdad Animal Organization has performed protests during various fur fashion shows.  The last spectacular protest was on February 14, 2009 during the Iberpeil exhibition of fur clothing and accessories in Madrid.  The organization continues to pursue its awareness-raising campaign for the use of synthetic fur coats.

Animal Law Grant Opportunity for Students

From the email:

Animal Welfare Trust is currently seeking applicants for our 2010 Student Grant Program.  The grant provides up to $5000 per recipient for graduate students to work on an independent research project under faculty supervision or for an unpaid position within an established organization.  Internships can be for a summer, semester, or year-long duration.  Details about the grant program, the application process, and information on past recipients can be found on our website at www.animalwelfaretrust.org under “student internships.” The deadline for this grant opportunity is March 1, 2010.

Our particular areas of interest are farm animal welfare, humane education and pro-vegetarian campaigns (though by no means are we limited to these areas).  Please pass this announcement on to any students you think may be interested and feel free to cross post as well.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Thank you!

Ali Berman
Animal Welfare Trust
141 Halstead Avenue, Suite 301
Mamaroneck, NY 10543

(914)-381-6177 ext 102
ali@animalwelfaretrust.org
www.animalwelfaretrust.org

No Bunnies Threw Up in the Filming of This Ad…or Maybe Some Did?

Christine Saenz

I recently watched this “Sweet Million’s” commercial, one ostensibly cute enough to elicit a genuine “awww” from Dick Cheney. Bloggers from across the country have almost unanimously agreed that “widdle bunniewunnies riding in widdle teacupsis” is the cutest thing they have ever seen. In contrast, my non-comformist younger sister watched the 30 second clip and noted that “they all look so sad.” Sad, scared, or sedated? Once we push past the sickeningly sweet image of a rabbit spinning in a teacup, we are forced to confront the grim reality that bunnies do not, in fact, voluntarily race down slides, drive bumper cars, take photos, or ride in hot air balloons. The only rabbits I have ever seen at a carnival were cooped up in cages to be sold as household playthings—and, unsurprisingly, they were not wearing doll’s clothing. So this begs the larger question – what exactly are these rabbits doing in this commercial, and more importantly, who monitors their use in advertisements to ensure they are handled properly and treated humanely?

That job belongs to the American Humane Association (AHA), though it is painfully clear that they have no qualms about bunny bumper cars. While on set, the AHA works with the Screen Actors Guild to “make certain that no animals are harmed during the filming.” But their supervision starts and ends there—the AHA does not monitor the training of animals prior to filming, and is not responsible for their fate after the shoot. Perhaps they assume that the bunnies merely win a few prizes and head home after an exciting day at the fair.

Factory “Farmaceuticals”

Jessica Morowitz

Premarin® is a hormone replacement therapy drug manufactured by Wyeth-Ayerst Pharmaceuticals.  The drug is widely prescribed to an estimated nine million women to help them cope with the symptoms of menopause, such as hot flashes and night sweats.  Premarin® gets its name by virtue of what it is made from—PREgnant MARes’ urINe (PMU).  That means that in order to manufacture this drug, Wyeth needs a constant supply of pregnant mares.

It is not surprising that the conditions these mares experience are not unlike those experienced by animals raised for food in factory farms.  According to the Humane Society of the United States, the mares enter the barns in September, and remain tethered in their stalls until March or April.  The stalls are very narrow, and do not allow the mares to turn around or move more than a step or two in any direction.  While inside they are constantly hooked up to a collection system that even further restricts their movements, and can make it uncomfortable to even lie down.  Moreover, the mares are often denied access to an adequate supply of water in an effort to concentrate the hormones in their urine and increase profits.  Typically, the mares will be ‘in production’ for about eight or nine years consecutively, getting pregnant and giving birth year after year.

What is just as bad if not worse than the way these mares are treated, is the inevitable by-product of all these pregnant mares—the foals.  Sadly, they are usually weaned from their mothers too early, at around three or four months of age instead of six months.  This is due to the nature of the production system.  The mares are usually bred-back right after giving birth (within a few weeks), and need to move back into the barns in September to begin urine collection.  Like the fate of many of the mares when they are no longer able to produce, these foals are often sent to auction.  From auction these horses often find their way to into feedlots, and eventually slaughterhouses.    While there are a few rescue organizations out there dedicated to the adoption of PMU mares and foals, there are not nearly enough of them to keep up with the estimated 40,000 PMU foals born each year.

Are We Protecting Our Pets?

Sarah Murphy

Vaccination is a hotly debated topic, appearing in the news on a regular basis.  Is there a link between childhood vaccines and autism?  Is there going to be a mandatory vaccination of healthcare workers for H1N1?  Why is it though, that the issue of companion pet vaccination also does not come up during these vaccination conversations?

Animals, like babies and young children that receive vaccinations, do not have a voice or say in the vaccine debate.  Pets’ human caretakers, veterinarians and lawmakers make the vaccination decisions.  People want to make sure their pets are adequately protected, that they are following the laws in place in their state, and that they are getting their pets the care they need.

Eating Like a Rogue

Vanessa Merton

A bit of wisdom from Sarah Palin’s new book:

“If any vegans came over for dinner, I could whip them up a salad, then explain my philosophy on being a carnivore,” she wrote. “If God had not intended for us to eat animals, how come He made them out of meat?”  Follow this link for photo of SP with caribou:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/palins-book-sparks-republican-war-on-vegetarians.html

Romeo’s Law

Gillian Lyons

In response to public outcry of a videotaped beating of a Labrador Retriever, Romeo- on April 16, 2008 Kentucky passed S.B. 58 (dubbed Romeo’s law) which amended § 525.135 to state that the “torture of a dog or cat is a Class A misdemeanor for the first offense and a Class D felony for each subsequent offense if the dog or cat suffers physical injury as a result of the torture, and a Class D felony if the dog or cat suffers serious physical injury or death as a result of the torture.”

According to the ALDF website- attorneys have prosecuted the first successful case under this law- resulting in a felony conviction of a man who stabbed two cats to death.  The article regarding the case can be found here.

Most states have laws on their books labeling animal cruelty a felony (here is a list of which states label animal cruelty a felony, but note that the laws only protect certain animals and exclude large classes of activities, such as hunting.) Until this law passed, Kentucky, a state that has a reputation for being notoriously lax in regard to animal abuse, was one of the holdout states that penalized animal cruelty with only misdemeanor charges.  In that respect, this law is a step in the right direction.

One has to consider, however, why the law provides no protection to animals besides cats and dogs- and why the law provides only misdemeanor charges for the first offense if no serious physical injury has occurred. Apparently the Kentucky legislature thought those were questions for another day, and we can only hope they are addressed in the future.

Top 75 Blogs for Vegans and Vegetarians

One blogger’s take: find it here (and look for us!).

“Voiceless” Making Itself Heard

David Cassuto

Fine op-ed on animal welfare laws here by Katrina Sharman of Voiceless, an Australian animal advocacy organization.  Parallels to the U.S. situation are clear and present…

“One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, No Fish”

Jennifer Church

This Monday, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), the international body that sets annual tuna fishing limits, announced a reduction in the fishing quota of the Bluefin Tuna.  However, most scientists agree that the reduction does not go far enough to save bluefin tuna from near extinction. The EU, US and Japan have decided to limit the 2010 catch quotas to 13,500 tons.  Catches were lowered from 28,500 tons to 22,000 this year. Scientists say that is still 7,000 tons over what they would advise.

A single bluefin tuna can sell for $100,000 and is traditionally used for sashimi.  Overall, it’s a billion dollar global business that is driven by an appetite for tuna, especially in Japan.  The bluefin population is less than a fifth of what it was in the 1970s, making it one of the most threatened fish in the sea.  Illegal overharvesting is the main cause of the bluefin’s sharp population decline.  Many scientists urged the ICCAT to accept nothing less than a fishing quota of zero, however the commission has never reduced the allowable catch by as much as scientists recommended (See the blog post written last year regarding this very issue.)  Now many fear the species is inevitably headed toward extinction.

“BatManu”

Stephen Iannacone

On Halloween night, Manu Ginobili, a shooting guard for the San Antonio Spurs, swatted down a bat that got loose in the AT&T Center.  The bat had been loose for most of the game and after several failed attempts by the Spur’s mascot to catch the bat in a net, Ginobili got close enough to hit and kill it.  After the game, Ginobili said: “I didn’t think it was a big deal. Then the whole arena started chanting my name” and also referred to the bat as a “just a mouse with wings.”  The Spurs’ head coach noted, “He’s never ceased to amaze me the years he’s been here. … He just did it again.”  Some reports even suggest that this may be one of Ginobili’s “greatest athletic achievements” next to winning a gold medal in the Olympics and an NBA Championship.  Highlights on ESPN replayed the clip over and over in order to brag about his great reflexes.  Reports also say that the real burden is on Ginobili, because he now has to go through a series of rabies shots.  Does this seem wrong to anyone?  An entire stadium cheering over the death of a defenseless creature and giving praise to this person as if he has accomplished something great.

Long Island House of Horrors: Animal Abuse in a Suburban Backyard

Katy Steere

 

On November 5, 2009 43-year-old Sharon McDonough of Selden, New York was arrested on charges of running a “pet concentration camp” in her Long Island home. Upon investigation, the remains of at least 20 dogs were found buried in her backyard in shallow graves. Neighbor Andrea Martinez said, “The smell was unbearable. They were taking bags out by the dozen. It was crazy.”

McDonough’s children claim she forced them to help torture the animals. Sharon’s eldest son, Doug, 21, told reporters, “She would have the oldest kids hold down the dog while we duct-taped his mouth and she would hit him.” Five dogs and a cat were removed from the home, all found packed into cages with feces and urine in their matted coats. They were being cared for at the Suffolk County SPCA and are now up for adoption. Her six daughters, aged 18 months to 13 years old, were also removed from her custody.

Ohio’s Issue 2: Good for Animals?

Laura Schierhoff

On November 2nd, Ohio voters passed Issue 2, a constitutional amendment, which creates a ‘Livestock Care Standards Board’ to set standards for livestock and poultry care, food safety, disease prevention, farm management, and animal well-being.  The Board will comprise of 13 Ohioans appointed by the governor and the legislature with minimal oversight.  The Board will have the authority to establish the standards governing the care and well-being of livestock and poultry in Ohio.  As stated in my previous post on Issue 2, this ballot initiative was in response to the Humane Society of the United States’ (HSUS) having picked Ohio for the next State to target for agriculture legislation banning confinement treatment of farm animals.

The battle may have been won for Ohio, but the war is still on as far as HSUS is concerned.  With little money invested into defeating Issue 2 (Ohio farmers and agribusiness lobbies spent over $4 million), HSUS is gearing up for future legislation in Ohio and other states.  While Ohio lawmakers refused to work with HSUS on humane farming legislation, Michigan recently agreed on legislation on improved livestock-standards, requiring that egg-laying hens, breeding pigs and veal calves must be able to stand up, lied down, turn around and extend their limbs.  The lawmakers, agribusiness interests, and HSUS came together to jointly agree on livestock-care legislation.  Wayne Pacelle, the president and CEO of HSUS said that “the solution forged in Michigan shows that open-minded and fair discussions among stakeholders can lead to good outcomes for farmers and for animal welfare.”  Jim Byrum, president of the Michigan Agri-Business Association, said his group and others decided to work with the animal-rights groups rather than against them.  He said the decision was based on “a healthy dose of pragmatism.  In terms of public policy, it made sense to sit down with them.”  Michigan is the seventh state to act on livestock standards, including Arizona, California, Florida, Maine, Colorado, and Oregon.

Ohio farmers claim that the health and well-being of animals is at the forefront of this amendment and argue that unhealthy animals do not produce the healthy products.  This of course is false, and there is much evidence supporting the fact that very very unhealthy animals are indeed the types of animals that we find in our food.  The animals raised for human consumption are genetically designed for productivity, fed unnatural diets, and pumped full growth hormones and antibiotics, which can hardly be argued as a “healthy” way of raising them.  One of the biggest problems I have with letting farming interests decide on animal cruelty is that they certainly do not have the physical and mental well-being of animals at heart – ultimately they are a business and want to maximize profits.

While reading blogs and articles about Issue 2, I came across a farmer who phrased my opinion of this whole situation perfectly:  “We are stewards and caretakers of these animals and we have a moral obligation to treat them humanely.”  With the passage of Issue 2, I sincerely hope that conditions for farm animals improve in Ohio, as promised, but I really doubt that will be the outcome.

Oreo’s Survival Ends With Euthanization

Tiffany Gallo

On June 18, 2009 New Yorkers were outraged and saddened to hear that a one-year old pit bull mix was beaten and thrown off the roof of a six floor building in Brooklyn.  Oreo suffered two broken legs and a fractured ribcage, but miraculously survived the fall. After months of rehabilitation, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was able to repair Oreo’s injuries.

Despite Oreo’s physical recovery, the ASPCA made the decision to euthanize the pit bull on November 13, 2009. Following months of both physical and obedience rehabilitation, the ASPCA determined that Oreo’s erratic aggression made her a danger to both humans and other animals.

Does Your Pet Need an iPhone?

Bridget Crawford

“Pet Acoustics” makes an iPhone app so that “you and your pet can experience the power of Pet Acoustics’ music for your dog, cat or horse from your iPhone, iPod Touch or other music player.” Here’s the official description from the company’s website:

Just as music for humans can change the mood and feel of an environment, this is true for animals as well. Pet Acoustics music has been specifically designed for the hearing sensitivities of your pet, both in frequency, volume and rhythm to calm and soothe your pet anytime, anywhere.

Amazingly, dogs, cats and horses hear two to three times more than humans. In our homes, barns and pet-care environments, animals can develop stress, anxiety, and aggression in reaction to sounds. Pet Acoustics music has been specifically developed to support your pet’s sensitive hearing thereby ensuring relaxation. An easy tool for pet owners, this music will greatly benefit your pet by filling their environment with a sense of safety, connectedness and love.

Play your choice of music with repeatable results for rest time, separation anxiety, thunderstorm nervousness, car travel, veterinary visits, barn time, trail rides, walking with your dog, grooming, puppy and kitten training or for quiet time.

Pet Acoustics music is designed for you and your pet together! Play My Dog and Me, My Cat and Me, My Horse and Me, whenever you and your pet want to enjoy quality time and relax!

I am quite willing to accept that animals are sensitive to music, but I’m still laughing at this. I’m sure the creators are, too…all the way to the bank!

Innocent Woman Mauled by Chimp: Who is to Blame?

Lindsay Macleod

In February 2009, Charla Nash, a 55-year-old woman was visiting her friend Sandra Herold in Stamford, Connecticut, when Herold’s pet chimp, Travis, suddenly attacked her. The crazed chimp tore off Nash’s nose, lips and eyelids before being shot dead by cops. Nash was left with no face or hands and is now suing Herold for $50 million. Nash appeared on the Oprah Winfrey show this week and bravely revealed what remains of her face.

This was clearly a terrible accident, and I feel horribly for Ms. Nash.  But I also feel bad for Travis, who should never have been a pet to begin with. Chimpanzees are known to possess incredible strength, with the average adult male having four to five times the upper-body strength of an adult human. They are also very difficult pets. They typically act aggressively toward their owners when they reach adulthood, and once raised by humans, they cannot be re-introduced into the wild because other chimpanzees will reject them.

The Pig, The CAFO, & The Flu

David Cassuto

Excellent piece here regarding the pig CAFO/swine flu link and another one here about the inefficacy of the vaccine approach to prophylaxis.  And yet another interesting piece here about the intelligence and social nature of pigs.

In light of these developments, let’s consider the American approach to pigs: mass confinement in facilities so devoid of stimulation for the animals that their tails are amputated to prevent them from biting each other.  In addition to torturing the animals, these facilities incubate disease, which our government then attempts to treat not by addressing the cause (factory farms) but rather with a mass vaccination program that will almost certainly fail, and a PR campaign to rename swine flu, H1N1.

What will we learn from this logic-defying juxtaposition?  If history is any predictor: nothing.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200911/brownlee-h1n1

Can U.S. v Stevens Bite Back?

Irina Knopp

I am currently working on a paper that looks at the case, arguments for and possible consequences of U.S. v Stevens. Recently, I’ve found several articles online suggesting that the statute in the case thought to promote animal rights in America could possibly hurt animal rights groups.

Rory Eastburg, author of the article “High Court to Consider Categorical Ban on Cruelty Images,” warns that animal rights groups should be very careful what they wish for because such groups often use film and images to expose the animal abuses that go on and the vague exemption for serious content in 18 U.S.C. § 48 may get them in trouble.

He states, “Many if not all films made by such groups falls squarely within the terms of the statute because they are recording unlawful treatment of animals.” Eastburg fails to explain how animal rights group videos/images would fall under the interstate commerce element of 18 U.S.C. § 48.

NEPA, Preliminary Injunctions, and Animals

David Cassuto

A few days ago, I and a few colleagues from Pace and several other American law schools met at Shanghai Jiao Tong  University School of Law with a number of Chinese academics and members of the Chinese Ministry of Environment.  We were there because the Chinese government wanted our input as it attempts to reshape the country’s environmental law regime to make it more effective and enforceable.  Towards that end, the members of the Ministry were particularly interested in the United States’ National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

NEPA requires that federal agencies contemplating an action that could significantly impact the environment do an assessment to determine the scope and nature of those potential impacts.  This involves a preliminary Environmental Assessment (EA) and then, unless the EA makes clear that no significant environmental impact is possible, a full review in the form of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

NEPA is purely procedural in scope; once an agency carries out a proper review, it can go forward with the proposed action regardless of the potential impact.  However, the assessment process often reveals potential mitigation measures and/or legal hurdles that can change or even halt a given project.

My presentation to the Chinese dealt with the 2008 Supreme Court case, Winters v. NRDC (129 S.Ct 365 (2008)).  In Winters, the NRDC filed suit to stop the Navy from using Mid-Frequency Active Sonar (MFA) during exercises off the California coast until it completed an EIS that adequately documented potential harms to marine mammals.  The Navy lost in the lower courts, where the district court issued (and the circuit court upheld) a preliminary injunction staying the exercise pending resolution of the lawsuit.  The Navy asked for and received an emergency exemption from the President’s Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) relieving it from compliance with NEPA.  The Navy then went back to the lower courts asking that the injunction be lifted.  The lower courts refused – holding that the CEQ’s action violated the separation of powers.  The Navy appealed to the Supreme Court, which reversed on a number of grounds.

Buggery and Factory Farming

Rodell Green was just sentenced to three years imprisonment for having sex with a horse. Over at the Atlantic Blog, correspondent Wendy Kaminer asks the following “quick question“:

Can someone explain to me why it is a criminal offense to have sex with animals but entirely legal to kill and eat them?  Surely laws against bestiality don’t reflect concern about the rights of animals, (who would probably opt for sex over death.) I don’t mean to denigrate meat eating (I’m a carnivore;) I do mean to point out the absurdities of imprisoning people for “buggery.”

In a sense, Ms. Kaminer is right. It is simply inconsistent for the law to send someone to jail for three years for having sex with a horse while simultaneously allowing billions of animals to unnecessarily suffer as a result of factory farming.

Nevertheless, I believe that there is a way to explain this inconsistency. As I pointed out in a previous post, it’s unclear whether the purpose of bestiality statutes is to protect animals from cruelty. As a matter of fact, I think that bestiality statutes have little to do with preventing animal suffering. Instead, it’s more likely that the purpose of bestiality statutes is to enforce a moral principle, namely: that it’s against natural law and morality for human beings to have sex with an animal.  This reading of bestiality statutes is supported by the history of laws criminalizing such conduct.

The first statute criminalizing bestiality in common law jurisdictions was England’s Buggery Act of 1533. The statute made engaging in anal sexual intercourse or having sex with an animal a crime punishable by hanging. These acts were criminalized because they were unnatural and against God’s will. After all, as Blackstone (in)famously asserted in his famous Commentaries, someone who engaged in these acts committed the “abominable and detestable crime against nature”. As a result, it seems fairly obvious that what inspired bestiality laws was the state’s desire to enforce a particular moral view.

IUCN Academy Colloquium — No Animal Law Here…

David Cassuto

I’m currently in China having all kinds of interesting experiences.  For example, it was only in Shanghai a few days ago that I saw my first wheelchair-accessible urinal.  I’ve also seen more pictures of Chairman Mao in the last 2 days than I had seen in the previous . . .  well, ever.   I’m here for a series of meetings.  Presently, I’m in Wuhan attending the Colloquium of the IUCN Academy of Environmental Law – an annual meeting of an organization dedicated to the teaching of environmental law around the world.

I did not speak about animals at this Colloquium.   Neither has anyone else.  In fact, today’s lunch speaker presented some data about the research interests of the membership and animal law merited mention only as one the disciplines least often listed as a primary research interest.  Indeed, I’m one of only 6 academy members who did list it.

A Day of Reckoning

David Cassuto

Halloween is my birthday.  That fact alone likely would not merit the holiday’s mention here.  I note it because only this year – some forty-odd years into my marking of the day– did I stop to consider what makes this holiday unusual.  First, my son, Jesse, whose tastes seem to be rather typical for his age group, debated for weeks whether to dress up as Genghis Khan or as John Dillinger.  Other candidates on the slate include the Grim Reaper and an assassin.  This approach seems atypical of our cultural observances.

A second unique characteristic of Halloween lies with the fact that it does not revolve around the consumption of animals.  Easter and Christmas require hams, Thanksgiving involves turkeys, Passover needs a sheep shank and chicken soup, and July 4^th is about barbecue.  The list goes on.  American festivals are meal-based and animals pay a mortal price for our food-related revelry.  Except, that is, during Halloween.

Happy Birthday, Animal Blawg!!

It’s difficult to believe, but Animal Blawg just turned 1!! These last 12 months have been wonderful. Animal Blawg received only 5 or 6 hits per day during the first month or so. Slowly, but surely, the number of hits started increasing.  I’m pleased to report that during the last month or so the Animal Blawg has received over 1,000 hits per day on several occasions.  Our goal is to reach an even broader audience, but I believe this is a good start.

Thanks to all of you for reading the blawg and for your frequent and insightful comments. Thanks are also due to our numerous guest bloggers.

On a more personal note, I want to thank my dear friend and colleague, David, for encouraging me to think about these issues, for allowing me to co-host this wonderful blog with him, and for keeping the blawg going come rain or shine.

Just like it has done since October 2008, Animal Blawg will continue transcending speciesism through 2010 and beyond.

Luis Chiesa

The Dirty Side of “Clean” Energy

Micheal Friese

Saving the wild salmon in the Columbia River Basin is an issue that does not get much press outside of the Pacific Northwest.  However, the possible extinction of the Columbia River Salmon has far reaching effects.  One of the more interesting issues (and representative of the greater environmental and animal advocate’s conflict) is that a main reason for the massive die off of salmon is the dams which supply “clean” energy to much of the northwest.  According to William Dietrich, a noted Pacific Northwest naturalist and writer, the natural salmon population has been reduced by 98 percent.  Much of this die off can be directly attributed to the normal operation of dams.

Fish Pedicures Revisited: The Debate hits New York State

Irina Knopp

The seemingly symbiotic relationship where customers lose their dead skin cells and fish get a free meal is back in the news.  This time, in my home state of New York.

The procedure has spread like wildfire across the country since its establishment in the United States by John Ho at the Yvonne Hair and Nail Salon in the D.C. area.  However, as popularity grew, concerns for the health of salon patrons increased.  Many states have imposed bans on the procedure stating that it can cause fungal and bacterial infections because there is no way to sterilize the fish. If New York follows suit, it would become the 15^th state to ban the procedure.

Interior Proposes Polar Bear Habitat

David Cassuto

A while back, the Bush Administration reluctantly declared the polar bear threatened (under the Endangered Species Act) due to global warming and shrinking habitat.  It determined, however, that it would not use the ESA as the basis to require steps to curtail climate change.  Indeed, the Bushies had no intention of curtailing climate change at all.  The Obama folks agreed that the ESA was the wrong means through which to make climate policy.  Thus, the bear remained threatened and the government remained unwilling to take steps to protect it

Livestock Emissions Account for 51% of Greenhouse Gases

Katie Hance

In 2006, the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) reported that livestock accounted for 18% of greenhouse gases, making livestock emissions “one of the most significant contributors to today’s most serious environmental problems.”  However recently, Worldwatch Institute, a Washington D.C. environmental think-tank, reported that livestock emissions actually account for 51% of greenhouse gases.

The Crime-Fighting Leech

David Cassuto

Viktor Korotayev / Reuters File

In case anyone was thinking that animal law is always depressing, here’s a story about a leech that cracked a cold case in Tasmania.  8 years ago, a 71 year-old woman had her home invaded and was beaten and robbed.  An engorged leech was found at the scene.  Samples of the DNA from the blood in the leech were added to the police database.  When Peter Alec Cannon was picked up for another offense and his DNA cross-checked — voila!  He pleaded guilty to robbery last Monday.

A feel-good story about a leech.  Truly, a banner week.

The Belgian Blues

Marjorie Levine

Pictured above and here is the Belgian Blue Bull It came about naturally in the 1800s, but modern technology has been able to determine that a gene mutation preventing a control of muscle growth results in a “double-muscled” cow.  Additionally, their lean meat has been ranked amongst the best Angus being produced in terms of quality. This mutation is a farmer’s fantasy because the Blue yields higher beef quality at a comparable price without a drop in quality. Some of the statistics that farmers find desirable can be found here.

Although it looks like a superhero-like cow, the Blue lives a miserable life from the minute it is brought into this earth. The only way for a Belgian Blue to bear her calves is by Cesarean, her birth canal simply cannot freely deliver a calf on its own, and lack of intervention causes the potential for mortal danger to both cow and offspring.  In addition, the extra size of a Belgian Blue fetus causes an underdevelopment of its vital organs, and respiratory and cardiac issues as calves result. As adults, these cows are not any stronger than an average cow; much of their extra muscle is non-functional. Instead, they suffer from crippling joint and bone problems also brought on by a lack of sufficient space in utero. Blues have trouble walking, and in terms of mating, the bulls must have semen harvested and the females have artificial insemination. Some supporters of banning the farming of the Blues believe that it is unethical to breed animals that put the animal and the offspring in danger at every birth. The calves have a number of birth defects including tongue swelling so that they cannot feed from the mother, hardening of the arteries causing problems to stand upright and cardio-respiratory problems which may lead to premature death. These problems lead to calves and the mother cows to have constant operations, causing discomfort and pain.  Ban supporters believe that it is not ethical to breed an animal that we keep in continual pain and suffering.