tagged w/ Farm Animals
WHACKO-TV loves to go on the road and visit the farmlands of America. This time we spent some time in Amsterdam, New York at the Adirondack Feed Center to see some of those famous Adirondack Chairs. The precursor to today's Adirondack chair was designed by Thomas Lee in 1903. He was on vacation in Westport, New York, in the heart of the Adirondack Mountains, and needed outdoor chairs for his summer home. He tested the first designs on his family. And of course, the rest is history. But think about this; what if you could actually become a chair. What a view?WHACKO-TV loves to go on the road and visit the farmlands of America. This time we... more
Cow Proves Animals Love, Think, And Act
April 13, 2012 Megan Cross
A dairy cow made the tough choice to hide one of her calves after giving birth to twins. As her fifth birth, the cow remembered her previous agony and knew that both of her babies would be taken away, unless she tried to save one. The intelligence and care displayed by this mothering cow is both heartbreaking and breathtaking. Read this touching tale, told by a veterinarian, about an amazing display of motherly love that proves animals love and feel. — Global Animal
Photo Credit: APEX
By Holly Cheever, DVM, reprinted from Action for Animals
I would like to tell you a story that is as true as it is heartbreaking. When I first graduated from Cornell’s School of Veterinary Medicine, I went into a busy dairy practice in Cortland County. I became a very popular practitioner due to my gentle handling of the dairy cows. One of my clients called me one day with a puzzling mystery: his Brown Swiss cow, having delivered her fifth calf naturally on pasture the night before, brought the new baby to the barn and was put into the milking line, while her calf was once again removed from her. Her udder, though, was completely empty, and remained so for several days.
As a new mother, she would normally be producing close to one hundred pounds (12.5 gallons) of milk daily; yet, despite the fact that she was glowing with health, her udder remained empty. She went out to pasture every morning after the first milking, returned for milking in the evening, and again was let out to pasture for the night — this was back in the days when cattle were permitted a modicum of pleasure and natural behaviors in their lives — but never was her udder swollen with the large quantities of milk that are the hallmark of a recently-calved cow.
I was called to check this mystery cow two times during the first week after her delivery and could find no solution to this puzzle. Finally, on the eleventh day post calving, the farmer called me with the solution: he had followed the cow out to her pasture after her morning milking, and discovered the cause: she had delivered twins, and in a bovine’s “Sophie’s Choice,” she had brought one to the farmer and kept one hidden in the woods at the edge of her pasture, so that every day and every night, she stayed with her baby — the first she had been able to nurture FINALLY—and her calf nursed her dry with gusto. Though I pleaded for the farmer to keep her and her bull calf together, she lost this baby, too—off to the hell of the veal crate.
Think for a moment of the complex reasoning this mama exhibited: first, she had memory — memory of her four previous losses, in which bringing her new calf to the barn resulted in her never seeing him/her again (heartbreaking for any mammalian mother). Second, she could formulate and then execute a plan: if bringing a calf to the farmer meant that she would inevitably lose him/her, then she would keep her calf hidden, as deer do, by keeping her baby in the woods lying still till she returned. Third — and I do not know what to make of this myself — instead of hiding both, which would have aroused the farmer’s suspicion (pregnant cow leaves the barn in the evening, unpregnant cow comes back the next morning without offspring), she gave him one and kept one herself. I cannot tell you how she knew to do this—it would seem more likely that a desperate mother would hide both.
All I know is this: there is a lot more going on behind those beautiful eyes than we humans have ever given them credit for, and as a mother who was able to nurse all four of my babies and did not have to suffer the agonies of losing my beloved offspring, I feel her pain.
Holly Cheever, DVM
Vice President, New York State Humane Association Member
Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association’s Leadership Council
.Global Animal... . Cow Proves Animals Love, Think, And Act April 13, 2012... more
On Thursday, the Georgia House of Representatives debated HB 954, which if enacted would reduce the window of time for women to be able to have an abortion from 26 weeks to 20 weeks. During the debate on the floor, Republican Rep. Terry England took his turn and in a southern drawl, compared women to cows and pigs.
“Life gives us many experiences. It give us the experience- or I’ve had the experience of delivering calves dead and alive, delivering pigs dead and alive, and I want to tell you, Rep. McCall, Rep. Roberts, all of us, Rep. Anderson, that have done that, Rep. Black, that have done that, it breaks our hearts to see those animals not make it. Ya know a few years ago, I had a young man come to me in our store, and it was when we were debating- talking about dog and hog hunting I believe- and at that point there was some language inserted in there that dealt with chicken fighting. And young man called me to the side and said ‘I want to tell you something.’ And y’all, this is salt of the earth people I’m talking about. Someone I would never have expected in 100 years to tell me what he told me that day. ‘Mr Terry, I want to tell you something. Tell those folks down there that when they stop killing babies, I’ll give them every chicken I’ve got.’”On Thursday, the Georgia House of Representatives debated HB 954, which if enacted... more
Fukushima's animals abandoned and left to die
By Kyung Lah, CNN
updated 5:48 AM EST, Thu January 26, 2012
Click link to play video
Animals left to die in Fukushima zone
Nearly a year after the quake and tsunami, animal carcasses litter the region
Animal activists call the dead animals an outrage
Environmental agency says government has tried to rescue as many as possible
It points out the risk posed to people entering the contaminated area
Inside Fukushima Exclusion Zone, Japan (CNN) --
When you stand in the center of Japan's exclusion zone, there is absolute silence. The exclusion zone is the 20-kilometer (12-mile) radius around the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant, an area of high radiation contamination.
On March 12, the day after the quake and tsunami hit, 78,000 people were evacuated out of this area, believing they would return within a few days. As such, thousands of people left with their dogs tied up in the backyard, cats in their houses and livestock penned in barns.
Nearly a year later, animal carcasses litter the region.
Cows and pigs starved to death, their bones still in pens. Dogs dropped dead with disease. A cat skull sits on a neighborhood road.
This is perhaps an inevitable outcome to a nuclear emergency, but animal rights activists call it an outrage.
"It's shameful," says Yasunori Hoso with United Kennel Club Japan. "We kept asking the government to rescue these animals from the beginning of the disaster. There must have been a way to rescue the people and the animals at the same time following the nuclear disaster at Fukushima."
Japan's environmental agency tells CNN the government's position has been to rescue as many livestock and animals possible. But it points out that because of the risk posed to people entering the contaminated area, the government has chosen to take a prudent attitude toward animal rescue.
Last December, the government allowed animal rights groups like UKC Japan to enter the exclusion zone and rescue any surviving animals. Hoso entered with his members, carrying cages and food.
On one of those days, Hoso's group approached a house. A six-week-old female puppy lay dead in the living room in a pool of blood. It appeared to have died from disease. From the back of the house, the UKC volunteers heard weak barking. The puppy's two brothers were still alive, hiding in another part of the house. They were traumatized and afraid of the rescuers, having never been around people before. The volunteers soon rounded up their mother.
Those dogs now reside at the UKC Japan shelter near Tokyo. 250 dogs and 100 cats, all from the exclusion zone, live in cramped cages at the shelter. UKC Japan, which survives on donations, says it has tracked down 80% of the owners.
But that hasn't meant the animals can reunite with owners. Shelters and temporary apartment housing have not allowed the owners to live with their pets, Hoso said.
Unfortunately, he added, the owners can't live with their animals because they are homeless themselves.
.CNN... . Fukushima's animals abandoned and left to die . By Kyung... more
Los Angeles Times...
California animal-slaughter law struck down; activists pin hopes on federal bill
The Supreme Court rejects the 2008 California law against slaughtering animals if they cannot walk on their own. Animal activists push for a federal law instead.
CLICK ON PICTURE:
A 2008 video that showed workers at a California slaughterhouse dragging sick cows prompted stricter federal regulations that involve cattle but not pigs. Above, hogs in Auxvasse, Mo. (Jeff Roberson, Associated Press / April 30, 2009)
By David G. Savage and Matt Stevens, Los Angeles Times
January 24, 2012
Reporting from Washington and Los Angeles—
Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down a California law against slaughtering pigs and other animals unable to walk, activists are pressing forward with efforts to get a tough federal measure passed.
The 2008 state law had made it illegal for slaughterhouses in California to "receive a non-ambulatory animal." Any animal that could not stand on its own was to be returned to the farm or "humanely euthanized."
But the court's 9-0 decision Monday held that since Congress had already adopted its Federal Meat Inspection Act, California was not free to enforce differing rules or standards. Justice Elena Kagan wrote that "the California law runs smack into" the federal regulations.
The state measure was adopted shortly after an undercover video in 2008 showed workers at a California slaughterhouse dragging sick and disabled cows. It led the federal government to institute the largest beef recall in U.S. history and prompted stricter federal regulations involving cattle. But the federal laws did not include pigs.
Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States, which sponsored the state bill, said the group's hope rested on a federal bill, HR 3704. The measure was introduced in Congress in mid-December and is being considered by the House Agriculture Committee.
"This ruling places the matter squarely in the Congress and USDA to take meaningful action to protect animals unable to walk, and prevent the food safety threats that arise from these animals," Pacelle said. "But it's a very tall hill to climb because of the power of the meat industry in D.C."
The National Meat Assn., which represents pork producers, cheered the court decision.
"We need to have one law for the nation," spokesman Jeremy Russell said. "In California, companies would have had to find some way to exclude animals who were going to become fatigued. It was sort of an impossible situation."
Lesa Carlton of the California Pork Producers Assn. said if the law had stuck, it would have placed California pork producers at a severe disadvantage. She said that the state ranks about 29th in pork production and that any additional burden would have compromised its ability to compete in the market.
The Supreme Court's attention Monday was primarily on pigs, but the ruling also allows the slaughter of sheep, goats and veal calves that cannot walk.
The California attorney general's office said it had no comment on the ruling.
.Los Angeles Times... . California animal-slaughter law struck down; activists... more
International Organization for the Abolition of Animal Slavery
31 December 2011
Make it your New Year's resolution to Help Animals!
Each year Animal Equality carries out many vegan outreach activities and investigations in defence of animals. With this work we aim to touch peoples’ hearts, in the hope that they will discover a lost empathy towards non-human animals. We aim to show them that it is easy to create a world without animal exploitation.
Much impassioned work was carried out during 2011, and it would not have been possible without the dedication of new volunteers and supporters just like you.
Read ahead to see how we carried out activism for animal rights in the UK and elsewhere in Europe throughout the year.
2011: a year growing up!
We believe that human education is the first step to equality, and a truly kind world. During 2011, we carried out dozens of events and info-stalls in the UK.
Here are some examples of our work:
• In the UK alone, during our Demonstrations promoting veganism and free vegan food giveaways, we handed out 12,000 vegan leaflets.
• We launched a brand new website called ChooseVeganism.org, Thanks to the website’s new video, 'A message of respect', we received more than 11,000 visitors in a few days.
• Hundreds of vegan outreach events were carried out in Spain, Poland, UK and Venezuela, more four undercover investigations.
Our dedication did not stop in these countries; in India we started to work to convince the Indian Government to prevent elephant deaths on railway tracks.
Another important event during 2011, was the creation of a new branch of Animal Equality in Italy, based in Rome!
International Animal Rights Day 2011:
A fantastic celebration of the International Animal Rights Day 2011, marked this year as being such a success in terms of recruiting new activists and achieving excellent worldwide media coverage on our activities. A brief summary of our events to mark this important day are as follows:
• LONDON (UK): Crime scenes featuring the outlines of the victims of the speciesism calling on passers-by to adopt a vegan lifestyle.
Photo gallery: http://flic.kr/s/aHsjxhi5Na
• MADRID (Spain): 400 activists gathered to show 400 corpses of dead animals, and demand justice for the billions of animals who continue to die each year as victims of speciesism.
Photo gallery: http://flic.kr/s/aHsjxgLviM
• ROME (Italy): For six hours, the Pincio's square was covered with 100 crosses, each one accompanied by a photo of an animal who had been exploited and/or killed for human consumption.
Photo gallery: http://flic.kr/s/aHsjxhWfTD
Behind the closed doors of the animal exploitation centers, Animal Equality's Investigation Team with hidden cameras exposed the reality and misery of animals' lives. With our investigation work, we aim to change society into one that respects animals by promoting a vegan lifestyle.
Some examples of our investigation work are as follows:
• We recording of the brutal killing of minks on one of the biggest fur farms in Spain.
• We carried out a unique and intensive undercover investigation into the most important zoos in Spain.
- Visit the website: Spanishzoos.org
• We infiltrated Tordesillas, one of the biggest bullfighting traditions in Spain.
• We documented the gruesome ritual slaughter of 6.000 lambs for the ‘Feast of Sacrifice’ in Melilla, Spain.
.Animal Equality... International Organization for the Abolition of Animal Slavery... more
If It Becomes Possible, Should Human Beings End Predation?
Posted by Brian Carnell on Jan 3rd, 2011
One of the more interesting dilemmas that animal rights critiques poses is exactly what role human beings should play as part of the animal kingdom, specifically when it comes to things like predation. After all, if we suppose that birds have rights, not only does the turkey on a farm have a right not to become my Thanksgiving meal, then so does the bird chirping outside my window have a right not to become the victim of the neighborhood serial killer of the feline persuasion.
Occasionally a variety of this argument is used as an attempted reductio ad absurdum against the case for animal rights — that if one were to take seriously the claims made by animal rights theorists that humans should be out there attempting to prevent lions from preying on zebras and antelope. Taking that to a further extreme, perhaps instead of attempting to preserve endangered carnivore species, human beings should instead allow them to go extinct since this would reduce the total suffering in the world on this view.
Some people, especially in the transhumanist community, take this idea very seriously, however. In September, The New York Times published an op-ed by Rutgers University philosophy professor Jeff McMahan on this very topic. Once you get past the tedious introduction referencing Isaiah and whether or not we would be “playing God” by making wholesale changes in carnivorous species, McMahan gets to the heart of the matter,
There is an element of truth in this view, which is that our moral reason to prevent harm for which we would not be responsible is weaker than our reason not to cause harm. Our primary duty with respect to animals is therefore to stop tormenting and killing them as a means of satisfying our desire to taste certain flavors or to decorate our bodies in certain ways. But if suffering is bad for animals when we cause it, it is also bad for them when other animals cause it. That suffering is bad for those who experience it is not a human prejudice; nor is an effort to prevent wild animals from suffering a moralistic attempt to police the behavior of other animals. Even if we are not morally required to prevent suffering among animals in the wild for which we are not responsible, we do have a moral reason to prevent it, just as we have a general moral reason to prevent suffering among human beings that is independent both of the cause of the suffering and of our relation to the victims. The main constraint on the permissibility of acting on our reason to prevent suffering is that our action should not cause bad effects that would be worse than those we could prevent.
That is the central issue raised by whether we ought to try to eliminate carnivorism. Because the elimination of carnivorism would require the extinction of carnivorous species, or at least their radical genetic alteration, which might be equivalent or tantamount to extinction, it might well be that the losses in value would outweigh any putative gains. Not only are most or all animal species of some instrumental value, but it is also arguable that all species have intrinsic value. As Ronald Dworkin has observed, “we tend to treat distinct animal species (though not individual animals) as sacred. We think it very important, and worth a considerable economic expense, to protect endangered species from destruction.” When Dworkin says that animal species are sacred, he means that their existence is good in a way that need not be good for anyone; nor is it good in the sense that it would be better if there were more species, so that we would have reason to create new ones if we could. “Few people,” he notes, “believe the world would be worse if there had always been fewer species of birds, and few would think it important to engineer new bird species if that were possible. What we believe important is not that there be any particular number of species but that a species that now exists not be extinguished by us.”
. . .
Yet the extinction of an animal species is not necessarily bad for its individual members. (To indulge in science fiction, suppose that a chemical might be introduced into their food supply that would induce sterility but also extend their longevity.) And the extinction of a carnivorous species could be instrumentally good for all those animals that would otherwise have been its prey. That simple fact is precisely what prompts the question whether it would be good if carnivorous species were to become extinct.
. . .
Here, then, is where matters stand thus far. It would be good to prevent the vast suffering and countless violent deaths caused by predation. There is therefore one reason to think that it would be instrumentally good if predatory animal species were to become extinct and be replaced by new herbivorous species, provided that this could occur without ecological upheaval involving more harm than would be prevented by the end of predation. The claim that existing animal species are sacred or irreplaceable is subverted by the moral irrelevance of the criteria for individuating animal species. I am therefore inclined to embrace the heretical conclusion that we have reason to desire the extinction of all carnivorous species, and I await the usual fate of heretics when this article is opened to comment.
Transhumanists who go down this road typically posit altering the DNA of carnivores and omnivores so that they no longer need/desire the flesh of other animals (which McMahan does mention), or producing meat in a non-cruel way (for example, growing it in a vat and then distributing it somehow).
An alternative that McMahan seems to ignore might be modifying prey species so that they no longer suffer when they are killed by predators which would allow predation to continue without reducing the number of species or radically changing the ecosystem in other ways.
It is also curious that McMahan and others tend to stop there. After all, predation is not the only cause of suffering in the animal kingdom. For example, in 2009 a 39-year-old chimpanzee kept in captivity at a zoo in Oregon died from what is believed to have been either a heart attack or stroke. Presumably, either way the chimpanzee’s death involved quite a bit of suffering.
Would human beings also be obliged to then re-engineer animals to prevent the sort of suffering that occurs even from “natural” deaths? If we are somehow obliged to prevent suffering due to predation, it becomes difficult to argue that we can still tolerate other forms of suffering that animals experience.
.. If It Becomes Possible, Should Human Beings End Predation? Posted by Brian... more
Lets take a moment to think about this wonderful creatures. Learn to love them and respect them.
Pictures used with permission from
http://www.farmsanctuary.orgLets take a moment to think about this wonderful creatures. Learn to love them and... more
June 23rd, 2011
11:00 AM ET
Does 4-H desensitize kids to killing?
4-H stands for "Head, heart, hands, health" and apparently a fifth - for "haters."
To many, 4-H Clubs are all about nurturing sweet little calves, adorable children winning ribbons, urban garden patches and proud future farmers grooming prized pigs for show. To others, it's a calculated system for turning the youth of America into cold, unfeeling animal killers.
When Eatocracy ran a 5@5 feature with chef Kelly Liken on the topic of Five Reasons to Buy from Your Local 4-H earlier this week, we quickly identified within the comments two distinct perceptions of the organization - which was originally set up by the United States Department of Agriculture to train the rural youth of America in hands-on skills like agriculture and raising animals. One was that 4-H promotes responsible animal husbandry and the cultivation of food resources in a responsible, ethical way and the other was that it serves to desensitize children to the suffering of animals.
Here's what our commenters had to say:
In cold blood
I don't and would never support the 4-H. This group helps desensitize youngsters into having no emotional attachment to animals raised for food. For those who say no one should have attachment to animals raised for food, I say "of course". This is how the meat industry stays in business. If children are raised to love all animals and not try to see them as products, they would not be interested in seeing them killed. "Listening to the auctioneer and seeing how excited the children get when their animal is purchased is an incredibly fulfilling experience."
Really? Incredibly fulfilling experience. You mean knowing the animal that trusted you from birth is off to be mistreated before being slaughtered! That's fulfilling? Maybe that's because the 4-H has successfully desensitized these children who may have once be appalled by this. It's simply horrific. Shame on you 4-H for what you do to animals and to children. - Heather King
Education, not desensitization
What 4-H does do is promote responsible animal husbandry and the cultivation of food resources in a responsible, ethical way. I accept your position that any killing of animals for food is, in your position, not ethical or moral, however most of us are omnivores and I for one would rather that those producing the meat I choose to eat do so in a humane and ethical way. I respect your position, but I would also hope that you would rather see people brought up to understand, and therefore demand, that there an ethical way to treat an animal even if that animal's eventual purpose is the nourishment of a human being.
Desensitization is the wrong word–education is the right word. These kids (I was one) are not at all desensitized to the process–rather, they are educated about proper raising and care of these animals. Not only was I a member, but growing up we also purchased meat and produce from 4H and FFA members–talk about locally sourced! We could be confident in the quality, origin, and raising of these products in a way we can rarely be in a supermarket. - Value rather than desensitization
A lasting impact
Have you ever been at a 4-H auction? Most of the younger kids end up crying after their animal gets bought and not donated back. As they grow older, they wrap their head around the idea, but when they're first starting out they have a hard time accepting it. It doesn't mean they're "desensitized" to it, it's the fact they they've matured and understand that animal's purpose more as time goes on. - Brianna
The circle of life
Someone asked earlier in the thread how many 4-H kids had actually seen an animal slaughtered. In my club back home (rural Sierra Nevadas), the answer was ALL OF US. We toured the packing houses where our animals would later be slaughtered (note packing HOUSES, as these buildings housed perhaps thirty head at an outside estimate, nowhere near large enough to call a "processing plant"), examined carcasses, viewed the taking of animals lives and the bloodletting afterwards, and were given briefings on the saws and tools used. This while spending hours a day bathing, training, feeding and cleaning up after our own still very alive animals. - 4-H fo'sho'
The value of life
It is really so unevolved. Why are people proud that the kids are crying as they lead their animals onto the trailer to be killed for food? You are teaching them that relationships are disposable. That animals are disposable. NOT A GOOD LESSON, and these poor animals raised as pets are off to the slaughterhouse where they will be tortured before they die. - Kathy
It keeps them off the streets
Small scale food-animal raisers aren't cold blooded killers, they're making money doing what they enjoy doing. If anyone is desensitized to animal life, go to Youngstown [ed: where the commenter grew up] and talk to all the thugs on the street that grew up around murders happening weekly. THEN you'll find someone who doesn't value human or animal life.
If I have kids, you bet they'll be in 4-H. I'd rather see them doing that than doing what most of the people I grew up with did. Kids deserve more of a chance than what drugs, crime and partying can offer them. - Brianna
It should be noted that animal husbandry and sales are only a portion of what 4-H Clubs do. Other former members spoke of "arts and crafts like pottery, painting; outdoor activities like camping, canoeing, kayaking, rock climbing, and...skills like woodworking and leather-working" as well as horse showing and "cooking, photography, jewelery making" and others.June 23rd, 2011 11:00 AM ET Does 4-H desensitize kids to killing? 4-H stands... more
Japan to launch massive search for quake bodies
By SHINO YUASA, AP
4 hours ago
TOKYO — Japan will send nearly 25,000 soldiers backed by boats and aircraft into its disaster zone Monday on an intensive land-and-sea mission to recover the bodies of those killed by last month's earthquake and tsunami, the military said.
Agriculture officials also plan to send a team of veterinarians into the evacuation zone around a stricken nuclear plant to check on hundreds of thousands of abandoned cows, pigs and chickens, many of which are believed to have died of starvation and neglect. The government is considering euthanizing some of the dying animals, officials said.
About 14,300 people have been confirmed dead so far in the catastrophic March 11 tsunami and earthquake. Another 12,000 remain missing and are presumed killed. Some of their bodies were likely swept out to sea, while others were buried under the mass of rubble.
Cleanup crews have discovered some remains as they gingerly removed rotting debris to clear the area for rebuilding.
But the two-day military search operation will be far more extensive, Defense Ministry spokesman Ippo Maeyama said Sunday.
"We will do our utmost to recover bodies for bereaved families," he said.
A total of 24,800 soldiers will scour the rubble, backed by 90 helicopters and planes, he said. Another 50 boats, along with 100 navy divers, will search the waters up to 20 kilometers off the coast, he said. Police, coast guard and U.S. troops will also take part.
"It's been very difficult and challenging to find bodies because the areas hit by tsunami are so widespread," he said. "Many bodies also have been swept away by the tsunami."
The operation will be the third intensive military search for bodies since the disaster last month. With the waters receding, Maeyama hopes the teams will have more success.
The search was complicated by the decomposition of some of the corpses, he said. Some had already turned into skeletons.
"You have to be very careful in touching the bodies because they quickly disintegrate. We cannot tell the bodies' gender anymore, let alone their age," he said.
The searches will continue, however, "as long as families want us to look for their loved ones," Maeyama said.
Meanwhile, the government in the Fukushima prefecture will send a team of six veterinarians into the 12-mile (20-kilometer) evacuation zone around the radiation-leaking Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant to survey the livestock there.
Farmers in the area were estimated to have left 3,000 cows, 130,000 pigs and 680,000 chickens behind when they hurriedly fled the area last month when the nuclear crisis started.
With no time for burials, veterinarians who find dead livestock will spray lime over them to prevent them from spreading disease, agricultural officials said.
The government is also considering euthanizing dying animals, but only after getting permission from their owners, said Yutaka Kashimura, an agricultural official in Fukushima.
"Killing animals is the very last resort," he said.
Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewriJapan to launch massive search for quake bodies By SHINO YUASA, AP 4 hours ago... more
What you never knew about dairy
by Animals Australia plus
The treatment of bobby calves has been a long-held secret of the dairy industry. For the sake of milk products, the Australian dairy industry discards some 700,000 unwanted week-old calves as 'waste products' every year. You can help these vulnerable animals at animalsaustralia.org
Bobby calves are among the animals in most need of human kindness.What you never knew about dairy by Animals Australia plus The treatment of bobby... more
NPR Morning Edition...
Livestock Farms Could Be Off Limits To Photos
Click on Link to Listen to the Story by Kathleen Masterson
April 13, 2011
Animal rights activists have secretly filmed the inner workings of livestock farms, which has led to some bad press for the industry. Bills introduced in Florida and Iowa would make photographing animal operations without the owner's permission a felony. Supporters say that would help prevent activists from fraudulently being hired. Opponents argue the bills would prevent current employees from reporting abuse.
STEVE INSKEEP, host:
In Iowa and in Florida, big livestock operations are supporting bills that would forbid animal rights activists from going undercover to take photos and document conditions at big farms. Activists are asking what the industry has to hide. From Iowa Harvest Public Media's Kathleen Masterson reports.
KATHLEEN MASTERSON: If livestock industry groups get their way what happened at this farm would be considered a crime. Here in central Iowa amid an expanse of cornfields, Rose Acre Farms has six huge hen houses, each the length of a football field.
Last February, an undercover activist from the Human Society got a job here. He wanted to get inside and film the workings of the facility that houses about a million chickens. He stayed here only two weeks.
Then three months later, the Human Society held a news conference and splashed a video on the Web. It shows scenes filmed at Rose Acre Farms and another company's farm. The footage shows chickens living in cramped cages and some dead birds whose carcasses were left so long they'd been mummified.
Unidentified Woman: The crews just shoving them in the cages, sometimes they'll get their legs slammed in the door or their wings.
MASTERSON: The pending Iowa law would make filming this video without the owner's permission and the mere possession of it a criminal offense, punishable by up to five years in jail.
At Rose Acres, farm manager Andrew Kaldenberg says while the video did show some footage of their farm, the abuses didn't occur there. The media were invited out to their barn within hours of the video being released.
Mr. ANDREW KALDENBERG (Manager, Rose Acres): We welcome reporters, you know, what have we got to hide? If we're not treating our animals right, they ain't going to produce. They're not going to produce, we're out of business.
MASTERSON: So I asked him to show me around the hen houses.
Mr. KALDENBERG: In this house we are ten rows wide, five tier high. That means that we have five cages stacked on top of each other.
MASTERSON: Kaldenberg says the activists' motives are to promote an agenda which is vehemently against how the industry produces food, with thousands of birds living in row after row of small cages.
Rose Acre Farms and other large chicken, hog and cattle organizations say the pending Iowa legislation is being mischaracterized. They say it isn't about stopping whistleblowers from reporting abuse, but argue it's about keeping people who misrepresent their true purpose from getting hired.
Kevin Vinchattle is the executive director of the Iowa Egg Council.
Mr. KEVIN VINCHATTLE (Executive Director, Iowa Egg Council): People are trying to characterize the livestock folks as trying to hide things. We're not. We don't want any animal to be abused. And if it's truly a case where a person thinks that abuse is occurring, that needs to be reported immediately, not six weeks done the road or months later in a video released for PR efforts to raise money for an organization.
MASTERSON: But a whole section of the Iowa bill explicitly bans photography.
There's a similar bill under debate in Florida. Kansas and Montana already have laws that ban taking secret photos of an animal facility if the intent is to damage the owner. And other states across the country are also considering similar legislation.
Humane Society's Paul Shapiro says the bills are an attempt to shield America's food production system from public scrutiny. He says their exposes have been done legally and resulted in convictions for animal cruelty, as well as meat recalls over food safety problems. Without undercover videos, activists say their claims wouldn't be taken seriously.
In Iowa, State Senator Matt McCoy, a Democrat from Des Moines, said a bill like this would set a dangerous precedent. He argues the multibillion dollar livestock industry wants to operate with less oversight.
State Senator MATT MCCOY (Democrat, Iowa): They view animal welfare groups and individuals that take undercover video and release it to the public as a threat to their livelihood.
MASTERSON: Neither side in this fight appears willing to budge yet on a key sticking point, whether secretly photographing farm animals should be considering a criminal act.
For NPR News, I'm Kathleen Masterson in Ames, Iowa.
(Soundbite of music)NPR Morning Edition... Livestock Farms Could Be Off Limits To Photos Click on... more
The New York Times
March 15, 2011, 8:30 pm
Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others
By MARK BITTMAN
Mark BittmanMark Bittman on food and all things related.
It’s time to take a look at the line between “pet” and “animal.” When the ASPCA sends an agent to the home of a Brooklyn family to arrest one of its members for allegedly killing a hamster, something is wrong.
That “something” is this: we protect “companion animals” like hamsters while largely ignoring what amounts to the torture of chickens and cows and pigs. In short, if I keep a pig as a pet, I can’t kick it. If I keep a pig I intend to sell for food, I can pretty much torture it. State laws known as “Common Farming Exemptions” allow industry — rather than lawmakers — to make any practice legal as long as it’s common. “In other words,” as Jonathan Safran Foer, the author of “Eating Animals,” wrote me via e-mail, “the industry has the power to define cruelty. It’s every bit as crazy as giving burglars the power to define trespassing.”
Meanwhile, there are pet police. So when 19-year-old Monique Smith slammed her sibling’s hamster on the floor and killed it, as she may have done in a fit of rage last week, an ASPCA agent — there are 18 of them, busily responding to animal cruelty calls in the five boroughs and occasionally beyond — arrested her. (The charges were later dropped, though Ms. Smith spent a night in jail at Rikers Island.)
In light of the way most animals are treated in this country, I’m pretty sure that ASPCA agents don’t need to spend their time in Brooklyn defending rodents.
In fact, there’s no rationality to be found here. Just a few blocks from Ms. Smith’s home, along the M subway line, the city routinely is poisoning rodents as quickly and futilely as it possibly can, though rats can be pets also. But that’s hardly the point. This is: we “process” (that means kill) nearly 10 billion animals annually in this country, approximately one-sixth of the world’s total.
Many if not most of these animals are raised (or not, since probably a couple of hundred million are killed at birth) industrially, in conditions that the philosopher Peter Singer and others have compared to concentration camps. Might we more usefully police those who keep egg-laying hens in cages so small the birds can’t open their wings, for example, than anger-management-challenged young people accused of hamstercide?
Yet Ms. Smith was charged as a felon, because in New York (and there are similar laws in other states) if you kick a dog or cat or hamster or, I suppose, a guppy, enough to “cause extreme physical pain” or do so “in an especially depraved or sadistic manner” you may be guilty of aggravated cruelty to animals, as long as you do this “with no justifiable purpose.”
But thanks to Common Farming Exemptions, as long as I “raise” animals for food and it’s done by my fellow “farmers” (in this case, manufacturers might be a better word), I can put around 200 million male chicks a year through grinders (graphic video here), castrate — mostly without anesthetic — 65 million calves and piglets a year, breed sick animals (don’t forget: more than half a billion eggs were recalled last summer, from just two Iowa farms) who in turn breed antibiotic-resistant bacteria, allow those sick animals to die without individual veterinary care, imprison animals in cages so small they cannot turn around, skin live animals, or kill animals en masse to stem disease outbreaks.
All of this is legal, because we will eat them.
We have “justifiable purposes”: pleasure (or, at this point, habit, because eating is hardly a pleasure if you do it in your car, or in 10 minutes), convenience — there are few things more filling per dollar than a cheeseburger — and of course corporate profits. We should be treating animals better and raising fewer of them; this would naturally reduce our consumption. All in all, a better situation for us, the animals, the world.
Arguing for the freedom to eat as much meat as you want is equivalent to arguing for treating farm animals as if they could not feel pain. Yet no one would defend Ms. Smith’s cruel action because it was a pet and therefore not born to be put through living hell.
Is it really that bad? After all, a new video from Smithfield, the world’s largest pork producer, makes industrial pig-raising seem like a little bit of heaven. But undercover videos from the Humane Society of the United States tell quite a different story, and a repulsive one. It also explains why we saw laws proposed by friends of agribusiness in both Iowa and Florida in recent weeks that would ban making such videos: the truth hurts, especially if you support the status quo.
Our fantasy is that until the industrial era domesticated animals were treated decently. Maybe that’s true, and maybe it isn’t; but certainly they weren’t turned out by the tens of thousands as if they were widgets.
We’re finally seeing some laws that take the first steps toward generally ameliorating cruelty to farm animals, and it’s safe to say that most of today’s small farmers and even some larger ones raise animals humanely. These few, at least, are treated with as much respect as the law believes we should treat a hamster.
For the majority of non-pets, though, it’s tough luck.The New York Times March 15, 2011, 8:30 pm Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others... more
When Animals Fight Back – Fear of the Animal Planet: The Hidden History of Animal Resistance
Animal Rights and AntiOprression
[Challenging oppression and injustice, against nonhuman animals, humans, and earth — one vegan, environmentalist, feminist, social-justice-loving, all-around-progressive post at a time.]
When Jason Hribal’s book, “Fear of the Animal Planet: The Hidden History of Animal Resistance“, arrived in the mail, I was excited, and intrigued. I wasn’t unfamiliar with the topic, thanks to articles such as pattrice jones’ “Stomping With Elephants” in “Igniting a Revolution“, and I was interested to read more.
Jason Hribal stumbled on this topic when he began studying history under Peter Linebaugh. In Jason’s own words (emphasis mine):
I wanted to understand history from below. That fall, I took a research seminar on the Gilded Age, and the topic I chose to write about was the Toledo Zoo. It could have ended up being a standard history: the zoo and its directors, their curatorial ideas and the evolution in exhibit design, and a list of animals. Yet, my work with Linebaugh led me to see the research material in a new light. Information that I would have previously missed or passed over now became evident. More specifically, I noticed that the captive animals were resisting and that the resistance was having an effect. The zoo and the circus no longer remained the hero.
He takes us through many stories, going back to some of the earliest zoos and circuses, and the picture is damning. The trauma to the individuals and the communities, wrenched from their families, often at the same instant they are orphaned, forced into unnatural caged lives filled with servitude for the profit of others, and usually ending with their own untimely death, does not paint a pretty picture of the human demand for entertainment.
Yet there is also hope. Through the bloody history of the elephants in circuses, you begin to see the impact that the elephants’ resistance is having on both the mindset of the public as well as the government. The death of Tyke in Honolulu, Hawai’i in 1994 sparked many people into action, including the founding of the Hohenwald Elephant Sanctuary, and many circus protests around the globe. (p. 59-60) Tyke’s death was one in a very long list of elephants gunned to death, poisoned, electrocuted, or hung for resisting their captors, and hers was far from the last. However, the pressure is on.
Tyke, the elephant, may have died that autumn day in 1994, but her actions proved far from futile. She was part of a larger struggle against oppression and exploitation: Jumbo, Mary, Janet , Debbie, Frieda. Indeed, her resistance that day altered the course of history. Humans were inspired into action. The city of Honolulu never again hosted a circus. Hawthorn has never again touched an elephant. Tyke’s adopted sisters and brothers are now living out their lives in peace. The legacy of Tyke remains engraved in the memories of animal lovers around the world.
Elephants in zoos have gone through a similar bloody history of resistance, with similar end results. Zoos resist admitting that they can’t properly care for elephants, going so far as the American Zoo Association denying that Hohenwald even exists. But death is no longer the automatic answer for elephants who have become “problems”, as it used to be before there were sanctuaries, before the public was engaged. The mindset of some zookeepers seems to be changing, and elephants are now quietly being shipped to the sanctuaries, at least some of the time.
As the rider who Flora attacked in 1999 explained: “I just think elephants are not meant to be captive. as they mature, they get to a point where they aren’t going to take it any more. It’s not her fault, she’s just becoming more and more unhappy.” (p. 91)
PART TWO...When Animals Fight Back – Fear of the Animal Planet: The Hidden History of... more
Jennifer Lee Pryor
President, Indigo Inc.
President, Tarnished Angel, Inc.
Director, Pryor’s Planet
From: nancyelizabeth green
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 1:07 PM
Subject: Fwd: WCTV (Tallahassee) CBS affiliate refusal to air news spot
A quick update to the situation in Ga. The station backed down from showing the spot, as the lawyer for the ministry called their legal dept. I called CBS in New York to issue a complaint. I am trying to find an attorney to help protect this woman and her animals from a greed-entrenched Christian entity and a town totally intimidated. These animals will starve if she cannot receive some type of feed assistance. I am hoping if people call CBS, maybe the spot will be aired and the truth will be revealed. Thank you
From: nancyelizabeth green
Sent: Wed, Nov 24, 2010 10:53 am
Subject: RE:WCTV (tallahassee) CBS affiliate refusal to air news spot
Ms. Cooper: The reporter (Ms. Caroline Gonzmart) did the interview. She was both professional and kind. High Point Ministries was informed, but did not send anyone. The spot was to be aired twice yesterday. Ms. Bannister received a call, approx. 4pm, telling her apologetically that the station could not air the spot as scheduled. Apparently, Mr. Kevin Cauley, attorney for the High Point Ministries, called WCTV's legal dept., and the rest is history. There was nothing negative or disparaging in the spot; just informing the community of the removal of animals, without any writ of possession filed or served, by High Point Ministries. I left messages with both the news director and station manager @ WCTV. This is of great concern to the animal community. This truly is a story of David vs. Goliath. The Tallahassee community has a right to know , and WCTV has a duty to reveal the truth, regardless of the influence of parties involved.
nancyelizabeth green atlanta ga.
"I urge you to ask yourself just how honorable it is to preside over the abuse and suffering of animals."
Dream High Farms (5013c) in Wigham, Ga. has been evicted without notice, by the High Point Ministries (Tallahassee, Fla.). This "christian"-based group, run by Donna Floyd, is wealthy; some say it has more $$$ than God! Three jets, a Russian orphanage; you get the idea. They had the sheriff remove 8 horses and one donkey last Friday night. No papers were ever filed or served, and Becky Bannister (founder of Dream High Farms) has adoption papers (2008) for the equines. They also took most of the feed and hay, which leaves Becky with barely enough to feed the remaining animals. This is a very small, rural town (631 people), and this ministry has the power of wealth and religion. I called local TV stations, trying to get a reporter to the property, when the sheriff was allowing the removal of these animals.
P.S. Becky just called me and told me a WCTV (CBS affiliate in Tallahassee), has responded, and is due @ Dream High Farms @ 9am, tomorrow (Tuesday) morning! I hope they have the guts to show the community, what the High Point Ministries is really all about. This situation is particularly despicable, as animals and children are being deprived under the guise of religion.
Thank you for passing this along to your contacts.
Respectfully, nancy elizabeth Green atlanta ga.
Subject: Fwd: -11/12/10 HIGHPOINTE MINISTRIES EVICTING 5013c rehab for special needs children through animals
ATTENTION: The situation with the High Point Ministries (see below) has worsened. This evening, the sheriff of Wigham approached Mrs. Bannister's property and said they were removing her horses. No legal papers (eviction or otherwise), were presented. Several horses were confiscated. I was on the phone with Becky during the "theft" of her animals. The sheriff threatened her with obstruction of justice, as she objected. I tried to call TV stations, to get a reporter on the scene. I could not get anyone's attention. This is a travesty!
High Point Ministries needs to be confronted on their seemingly "unchristianlike" behavior. This is a small Georgia community (631population.) But, like its large city counterparts, $$$ appears to make right. The Sheriff needs to be investigated( Grady county) as to why he would assist in the removal of property without any type of court mandate. Please contact Becky Bannister.
Sent: Fri, Nov 19, 2010 10:30 am
Subject: -11/12/10 HIGHPOINTE MINISTRIES EVICTING 5013c rehab for special needs children thru animals
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Dream High Farms, Whigham, Georgia
A Nonprofit Animal Rescue falls victim to greed of Christian Ministry.
Dream High Farms (an IRS approved 501(c)(3)) was founded in 2007 by Becky Bannister and her husband Richard. Richard Bannister is a Vietnam Air Force Veteran, who works for the U.S. Post Office. Becky has a background in adolescent psychology, mental retardation and substance abuse. They are located in Whigham, Georgia, in the southwestern portion of the State.
They currently provide needed shelter for 98 horses, 13 greyhounds, 50 peacocks, and 187 other assorted animals, including 2 llamas. Over the last five years they have provided Equestrian Assisted Therapy for hundreds of at risk youth in southwest Georgia and northern Florida.
In 2008 High Pointe Ministries stepped in to assist the agency, offering to purchase the land so that the Animal Rescue agency could continue in perpetuity. Tragically, benefactor Mike Floyd, passed away in January of 2010, leaving no will and control of the Christian Conglomerate to his wife Donna Floyd and his daughter Melode.
Donna Floyd is host of a Christian TV Show called “Wisdom for Winning” on WKOW, carried on Titan TV. High Pointe Ministries owns many interests in TV and radio, among other business entities.
I month ago High Pointe Ministries suspended all youth programming on the property, citing liability issues. With no warning, Dream High Farms was informed that they will be thrown off the property and High Pointe Ministries would take over the operation (see www.magnoliahorsefarm.com)
High Pointe Ministries (supposedly a Christian Organization) is behaving in a decidedly Un-Christian manner.
For more information contact:
.SHARED BY... Jennifer Lee Pryor President, Indigo Inc. President, Tarnished... more
The Friendly Face of Torture, Death, and Animal Exploitation
Posted by Gary L. Francione
If you question whether animal welfare reform is in the interests of industry, look no further than the October 21, 2010 article in the New York Times about controlled-atmosphere stunning of poultry, which, as I discussed in an essay here in 2008, is promoted by PETA and PETA award-winning slaughterhouse designer, Temple Grandin.
From the New York Times article:
“When you grab a chicken, turn it upside down and put it on the line, it’s stress, stress, stress,” said Scott Sechler, the owner of Bell & Evans. “Our system is designed so that we put them to sleep without stress and we kill them without stress.”
Anglia Autoflow, the company that is building the knock-out systems for the two processors, calls the process “controlled atmosphere stunning,” but Mr. Pitman [owner of Mary's Chickens] said his company was considering the phrase “sedation stunning” for use on its packages. Also on the short-list: “humanely slaughtered,” “humanely processed” or “humanely handled.”
The trick, he said, is to communicate the goal of the new system, which is to ensure that the birds “not have any extra pain or discomfort in the last few minutes of their lives.”
Mr. Sechler said the system was designed to put birds to sleep gently, in the same way that a person undergoes anesthesia before surgery.
To evoke that image, he wants to put the words “slow induction anesthesia” on his packages and advertising, which already tell customers that the birds are raised in roomy conditions with natural light and given feed free of antibiotics or animal byproducts. Customers who want to know more will be able to go to the company’s Web site.
Mr. Sechler said the system he chose, after years of research, was better than similar gas-stunning systems used in Europe. Those systems, he says, often deprive birds of oxygen too quickly, which may cause them to suffer. They are also designed to kill the birds rather than simply knock them out, something that Mr. Sechler is not comfortable with.
“I don’t want the public to say we gas our chickens,” he said.
And, of course, better treatment means better meat:
Mr. Sechler and others promoting the new system said that they expected the meat to be of higher quality because the birds faced less stress and also there would be less bruising and broken wings when they died.
PETA, which promotes the gassing of chickens, also maintains that gassing is in the economic interests of producers. In its Analysis of Controlled-Atmosphere Killing vs. Electric Immobilization from an Economic Standpoint, PETA argues for the gassing of poultry, claiming that the electric stunning method of slaughter “lowers product quality and yield” because birds suffer broken bones and the process results in contamination dangerous to human health. The electric stunning method also “increases labor costs” in various ways. PETA argues that gassing “increases product quality and yield” because broken bones, bruising, and hemorrhaging are supposedly eliminated, contamination is reduced, “shelf-life of meat” is increased, and “‘more tender breast meat’” is produced. PETA also claims that gassing “lowers labor costs” by reducing the need for certain inspections, reducing accidents, and lowering employee turnover. Gassing provides “other economic benefits” to the poultry industry by allowing producers to save money on energy costs, and by reducing by-product waste and the need to use water.
This sort of campaign is doing nothing but making the public feel better about animal exploitation. Indeed, the large animal welfare groups have become active partners in animal exploitation by helping industry to put a little smiling happy face on death, torture, and exploitation while, at the same time, helping industry to make animal exploitation more economically efficient and profitable. If you are questioning whether “happy” meat is, and is intended to, make the public feel better about animal exploitation, you are not paying attention.
This “happy” exploitation nonsense represents a very big step backward. People are never going to go vegan if they believe that they can exploit morally. And that is exactly the message that the “happy” exploitation movement is trying to convey: we can continue to exploit animals and treat ourselves to animal products as long as animals are treated “humanely.” As Peter Singer has stated:
[T]o avoid inflicting suffering on animals—not to mention the environmental costs of intensive animal production—we need to cut down drastically on the animal products we consume. But does that mean a vegan world? That’s one solution, but not necessarily the only one. If it is the infliction of suffering that we are concerned about, rather than killing, then I can also imagine a world in which people mostly eat plant foods, but occasionally treat themselves to the luxury of free range eggs, or possibly even meat from animals who live good lives under conditions natural for their species, and are then humanely killed on the farm. (The Vegan, Autumn 2006.)
The “happy” exploitation movement represents the promise of “compassionate” exploitation so that we may indulge in the “luxury” of animal exploitation.
That’s a “luxury” that animals cannot afford.
There is no such thing as “humane” exploitation and even if there were, it would still involve the unjustifiable killing of sentient nonhumans. Singer and his “happy” exploitation movement are not bothered by killing because they do not believe that animals have an interest in continuing to live, as I have discussed in other essays, including these: 1, 2, as well as in my new book, The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition or Regulation?, in which I debate the “happy” exploitation movement with Professor Robert Garner.
If you are opposed to animal exploitation; if you regard animals as members of the moral community; if you reject the notions that nonhumans are just things that exist as resources for humans, you have one choice: go vegan. It is easy, better for your health and the planet, and, most important, it is the right and just thing to do. It’s what we owe other animals. If you are not vegan, then you are participating directly in animal exploitation. You don’t get off the moral hook by eating gassed chicken.
If you are vegan, then educate others about veganism in creative, non-violent ways.
The World is Vegan! If you want it.
Gary L. FrancioneThe Friendly Face of Torture, Death, and Animal Exploitation Posted by Gary L.... more
Bob Barker MFA Press Conference
Bob Barker talks about growing up in South Dakota and the treatment of farm animals at an MFA press conference held in Los Angeles on 8/31/10.Bob Barker MFA Press Conference Bob Barker talks about growing up in South Dakota... more
Pregnant Cow Shot 11 Times at California State Fair | Both She and Her Baby Died | Animal Rights Advocates Continue Peaceful Protests | Videos/Photos | UpdatesAnimal rights advocates protest pregnant cow shooting at state fair
Kris Vera-Phillips Last updated 26 mins ago
SLIDESHOW: Cow shot at the State Fair
RAW VIDEO: Cow running away at State Fair
SACRAMENTO, CA - Animal rights advocates staged a peaceful protest at the Cal Expo fairgrounds Wednesday morning after California State Fair police officers shot and killed a pregnant cow.
Cal Expo officials said the shooting was necessary after the cow ran away from UC Davis veterinarian staff members Tuesday.
"We're all pretty shocked and horrified," said California Senior State Director Jennifer Fearing of the Humane Society of the United States, "that such bad animal management would take place on state property under the guidance of the UC Davis Veterinary School."
The group is also calling for an end to livestock exhibits that feature pregnant animals.
"(The exhibits) really are an anachronism in the realm of a fair that's really focused on deep friend twinkies and slushies," Fearing said.
Meanwhile, the director of the William R. Pritchard Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital at UC Davis called for a complete review of animal use and handling procedures for animals at the fair.
"This event yesterday was very much a one-off (i.e one of a kind), very much unanticipated but at the same time, that's what contingency planning is all about," said Dr. David Wilson. "Think of the worst case scenario and develop contingencies."
State Fair management welcomed the call for a review and said they would be closely involved.Animal rights advocates protest pregnant cow shooting at state fair Kris... more
Excerpts of Robert Cheeke's talk, in regard to going vegan.
Gov. Bill Ritter is signing a measure that will provide animals and pets protection from domestic abusers.
The measure being signed Monday would allow judges to order suspected domestic abusers in Colorado to stay away from family
pets and livestock.
Democratic Sen. Linda Newell says domestic abusers can harm or
threaten to harm pets as well livestock to intimidate their victims. Advocates say some are afraid to leave abusive homes out of fear for the animals they may have to leave behind.
Candlelight Vigil Planned for Buddy the Dog
GRAND JUNCTION, Colo (KKCO) -- A candlelight vigil has been planned for Buddy the dog, just days before his alleged killer is expected to enter a guilty plea.
The vigil will take place on Tuesday, April 27th in front of the Buddy memorial at the Roice-Hurst Humane Society. Organizers say a short memorial ceremony will start at around 7:30pm.
Earlier this year, the German Shepard - Blue Heeler mix was stolen from his owners, then dragged to death on the Colorado National Monument.
Steven Romero -- the man arrested for Buddy's death -- had intially pleaded not guilty to charges of aggravated animal cruelty. However, the U.S. Attorney's office says he will change that plea when he appears in a federal court in Denver on April 29.
http://www.nbc11news.com/home/headlines/90639269.htmlGov. Bill Ritter is signing a measure that will provide animals and pets protection... more