WARNING: This Peta article contains confronting images.
Read it here
Author: Sandra Kyle
‘Not Your Feathers, Not Your Food’
In this article End Animal Slaughter contributor Lynley Tulloch agrees that chicken feathers do not belong in KFC packets. Neither does the chicken. (All photos accompanying this article were taken in 2018 when activists from Direct Animal Action entered a Tegel (New Zealand) Broiler Chicken factory).
An anonymous UK mother from Blackpool who served her son KFC with feathers in it has complained to the KFC branch concerned. She also posted pictures on Facebook with the offending feathers (feature photo).
This customer was so appalled that she wrote ‘I won’t ever eat KFC again’.
I don’t get it. Chicken is a bird. Last time I looked they came complete with feathers.
A healthy ‘Cobb’ chicken, the same breed commonly used as chickens reared for meat on factory farms.
If you think your chicken should have the feathers removed before you consume them then perhaps consider what you are eating. Which, to be fair, she has – but it took the presence of the bird’s feathers to engender such outright disgust.
I’m offended as well. I’m offended for the chicken. What, seriously, do you think the chicken felt when his life was brutally ended in a medieval assembly line torture chamber?
In the UK chickens bred for their meat are killed though electrical systems or gas systems. Electrical systems involve hanging the chickens upside down on metal shackles and stunning them using electrified water. They then have their throats slit with an automated knife.
Due to individual variation in resistance to the stunning process, some birds are inevitably only electro-immobilized (paralyzed but fully conscious). They are then bled out and plunged into a tub of scalding water to remove their feathers. I guess the poor chicken in the KFC box of the UK woman just didn’t get all his feathers removed.
Chickens in New Zealand are also killed by this system of electrical stunning and throat slitting. It is notoriously inhumane, considering that many birds are not unconscious during the process and get their necks cut while paralyzed. They also may break their legs while being shackled.
If you are happy to gamble on which bird you are eating (the stunned or electro – immobilized) then hands – up I am offended. I’d write a letter, for all the good it would do me, to complain to the factories that raise (and I use that term very loosely) these birds to be killed and send them to slaughter.
And that is the problem isn’t it? Consumers get heard, they get listened to and apologies and refunds.
Thrown onto the barn floor at a few days old, the little chicks at first have some room to run around. However, as they are bred to grow rapidly to reach slaughter week at just 6 weeks old they become so cramped that they can barely move.
Animal activists, on the other hand, have to actually twist themselves inside out to get footage of animal suffering, document it, analyse it to see if it breaches welfare standards – before they even complain. And they have to use their own money. And then more often than not, it does not get taken seriously. They definitely don’t get a refund.
Walk into any ‘broiler’ factory farm and you will find a percentage of dead birds. The overburdening of the birds’ underdeveloped cardiopulmonary systems often causes congestive heart failure before they reach slaughter weight.
Take for example, Direct Animal Action who investigated a chicken factory farm owned by Tegal in 2018. This farm was a KFC supplier. The investigators found countless lame chickens unable to reach water, slowly dying. Ammonia in the shed from chicken waste was so strong the activists had to wear masks. The crowded sheds housed dead and live birds together.
The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) did not take action against this farm. There is really not a lot I can say about that, because it is so devastating that the people responsible for ensuring the animal welfare code is adhered to choose to look the other way. But I guess that is what you get when they have a vested interest in the ongoing continuation of animal agriculture.
The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) did not take action against this farm. There is really not a lot I can say about that, because it is so devastating that the people responsible for ensuring the animal welfare code is adhered to choose to look the other way. But I guess that is what you get when they have a vested interest in the ongoing continuation of animal agriculture.
Basically, the suffering of chickens is a necessary evil if you want your KFC. You simply cannot raise that many animals, that quickly without factory farming them.
So yes, I am offended. Every chicken in that shed is quite literally a dead chicken walking (if they are not lame). They all have a target on their feathered backs, and live a life of misery while they wait. Well, when I say a life, I mean six weeks. These birds are bred to reach slaughter weight fast – too fast for their legs which collapse under them.
A chicken unable to right him or herself will die from dehydration, because they are physically unable to even reach the water nozzles in their sheds.
A chicken is a sentient being – meaning they have feelings including fear, joy, and pain. We may associate such emotions with humans, but our emotional repertoire is not unique to us. We have more in common with animals than we don’t. In fact, the emotional make-up of animals is very similar to that of humans.
I can’t begin to think what they are going through during their time incarcerated in a factory and the slaughter process. It’s a horror film.
So back to the UK scenario of the fried feathers. Reading further in the article it says: ‘It doesn’t meet the Colonel’s usual high standards, and it’s certainly not the reunion we want people to have with their favourite fried chicken after some time apart!’
Say, what? A reunion with fried chicken after some time apart because of lockdown? Seriously?
KFC is using this Covid-19 situation to continue their marketing line that the Colonel (who is now dead along with the chickens in the boxes) has high standards. High standards for who? Not for the chicken who hobbles around, lame from the excess weight his legs cannot support the plump juicy breasts of your favourite meal.
I remain incredulous that people can consider meat of chicken as something they have grown emotionally attached to. In reality, they are attached to the fried batter, the oils and herbs and spices. Give them a plain chicken breast and they would not be so excited.
There is nothing wrong with the enjoyment of herbs, spices, oils and so forth. This can be wrapped around a fake meat if you like. Just please leave the chickens, and their feathers out of it.
As well as lameness and heart failure, other common causes of death pre-slaughter are heat prostration, cancer—in an animal less than seven weeks old—and infectious diseases. Ammonia blindness and ammonia conjunctivitis are eye conditions the birds can suffer from.
Not your feathers, not your body, not your food.
So to the ‘angry Mum’ in this article – get angry about the suffering of the chicken and the destruction of our planet caused by fast food outlets like KFC. Don’t be angry at the feathers. They are poignant and sad reminder that someone once lived.
They belonged to somebody. Just not you.
Dr Lynley Tulloch is an animal advocate, and a Lecturer in Education
UK Doctors: We Need A Food System Change Now
- UK-based Plant Based Health Professionals (PBHP) say the connection between major disease outbreaks and factory farming is being ‘swept under the carpet’ amid the coronavirus pandemic.
- While former coronavirus epicentre Wuhan has introduced a law against the breeding, hunting and consumption of wild animals this week, this is not just a problem for China.
- The vast majority of new infectious diseases that have appeared in humans over the past century have been caused by tampering with farmed animals and their habitats, including Swine Flu (pigs), Avian Flu (birds) and Spanish Flu (poultry).
- In the UK demand for cheap meat has fuelled a huge expansion of factory farming – providing the perfect conditions for the generation of novel infections with epidemic and pandemic potential, as well as an antibiotic resistance among humans.
- A vaccine won’t solve the problem, because of the risk of mutations.
- A growing body of evidence shows a balanced vegan diet can provide all nutrients the body needs and improve human health by minimising the potential for cardiovascular disease, obesity and type 2 diabetes.
- The coronavirus crisis has seen a record number of sign-ups in PBHP’s ‘No Meat May’, but while such campaigns are important, effective, change will only come about if it is implemented from the top.
- We need a food system change now.
Read the metro.co.uk article here
A Tale Of Two Sheep
In this true story End Animal Slaughter contributor Maya Cohen-Ronen recounts the heart of a mother…. and the altruism that can exist between sentient beings.
A couple of days ago as I was scrolling through my Facebook feed somewhat absentmindedly, one story managed to capture my attention. It was a beautiful story with a substantial ‘feel-good’ element to it. A story of two sheep.
Somewhere in the United States of America there is a sheep farm. There is nothing particularly interesting about this farm. It is owned by a couple I know nothing about, and their children participate in the American 4-H programme, in which farming children are encouraged to raise ‘their own’ animals, invest in them emotionally, then once ready – sell them off to slaughter. I’ll get to that bit a little later.
In this said farm, there live two sheep. Of course, there were more sheep, but only these two are of interest to this story. To refrain from referring to them as ‘Sheep One’ and ‘Sheep Two’ I shall hereby name them Agnetha and Anni-Frid.
Like all sheep in farms around the world, Agnetha and Anni-Frid were bred to serve a purpose. This purpose is monetary. Their female reproductive systems are exploited for man’s financial benefit. Like their sisters, Agnetha and Anni-Frid are routinely forcefully impregnated, so that a new generation of lambs can then be ‘harvested’ to feed people who enjoy feasting on decomposing young flesh.
Agnetha and Anni-Frid were pregnant together. In silence they carried their babies to full term. I don’t know about you the reader, but as a mother who experienced this miraculous phenomenon first hand, I know the magical feeling of having a baby inside your uterus. Sensing it grow, the first tingling bubbles, the movements and the kicks, the hormonal storm, the growing heaviness of the breasts as their feeding role nears. As fellow mammals, I have no reason to doubt that Agnetha and Anni-Frid experienced such emotions as well, to some degree.
It was Agnetha who felt the pain of child birth first. It was early, her lamb was not yet due. In sadness she gave birth to her son. He was dead. In the morning, the farmer took away the lifeless little body.
I have another secret to share with you. I have experienced a silent birth. My son Gilead was born and died at twenty-week gestation. I know the emotional blow this tragic event causes. The deep sense of loss, the sorrow, the longing. One might think only human mothers can be riddled with the severe pain of a baby’s loss, but that is a very selfish and cynical human-centric view. All mammalian mothers are similar. Sheep are no different.
I have another secret to share with you. I have experienced a silent birth. My son Gilead was born and died at twenty-week gestation. I know the emotional blow this tragic event causes. The deep sense of loss, the sorrow, the longing. One might think only human mothers can be riddled with the severe pain of a baby’s loss, but that is a very selfish and cynical human-centric view. All mammalian mothers are similar. Sheep are no different.
Agnetha was devastated. Her grief was palpable. She didn’t stop crying. For days she kept calling for her baby, but he never came back.
A couple of weeks later, it was Anni-Frid’s turn to give birth. In pain she delivered two healthy lambs. Twins. Indeed, a happy occasion for the farmer; the birth went smoothly, without any losses to bear. Mazel Tov.
It was a few days later that an astounding discovery was made. On the sun-kissed field there stood Agnetha and Anni-Frid. But low and behold – BOTH were gently licking and tending to a precious little lamb! It was not down to a miracle, but rather a very poignant display of deep care and selfless love. Moved by the immense grief of her distraught friend, Anni-Frid has gifted one of her new-born lambs to Agnetha!
Agnetha (l) with the newborn lamb given to her by Anni-Frid (r) after her own was still-born. They are Suffolk sheep, one of the most popular of English breeds.
From the update I have read, the little lamb and Agnetha have deeply bonded. She mothers him gently, and he in turn follows here everywhere. She is his mother, and he is her baby. Forever.
Hold on a minute. Forever?
Well, no. In an ideal world the ending should have been “and they lived happily ever after…” but this is the real world, and this is a sheep farm, and there are no happy endings to these sheep.
One day soon-ish, as the lambs grow and fatten enough, they will be taken away from Anni-Frid and Agnetha. Imagine the horror and the desperation Agnetha will experience all over again. How many nights will she call him? I don’t know. A broken heart of a sheep must feel the same as that of a human. It was her miracle child. The epitome of the most beautiful friendship. But there is no mercy in the industry of flesh harvesting. How many more lambs will Agnetha be forced to deliver before her time is up and she and Anni-Frid are loaded on the truck that takes them to their horrific death? I couldn’t tell you. But the ending is a given. They will not escape it.
Now, I could have finished the story here, and allow you the reader to make the connections yourself, to draw the conclusion about the cruelty of flesh eating. To realise the insanity in sentencing such incredible beings to death simply because that’s what we’re used to. But there is another point I still wish to make.
As mentioned, the particular farm where Agnetha and Anni-Frid’s tale took place, promotes the 4-H programme. This programme, like the AAF and probably others, encourages children to raise animal friends all the way to slaughter. Children are assigned a young animal, be it a calf, a lamb, a kid etc., and they raise it with the devotion only a child can show when they want to prove themselves to adults. As can be expected, with time a bond is formed between the two children, the human and the non-human. The animal child learns to trust their human friend, and the human child cannot help but deeply connect with ‘their’ animal. But the time comes when the animal is ready to be sold for slaughter and it is the child’s duty to prove maturity as they are forced to say goodbye to their animal friend and leave them behind. Social media is full of soul-destroying images of distraught children crying, while their disconnected parents are full of praise for their children who managed to handle the devastating situation so well.
When I first came across this travesty, I couldn’t believe it at first, but I’ve been on social media for long enough to have come across this insanity time and time again. What does it really teach children, this practice of allowing them to connect with animals, knowing that this bond is doomed, and their trusting friend is scheduled to die sooner or later? What does it tell them about values such as compassion? Empathy? Loyalty? Trust?
What it does is desensitise these children to violence in the most abhorrent way possible. It makes them betray their friends whom they love in such an unforgivable manner, while the adults around them cheer on. These children’s natural sense of compassion is being actively lobotomised out of them, replaced with cold apathy and detachment from the cruelty they are directly responsible for. It is hard to comprehend how it’s not legally considered as parental child abuse.
And so, while Agnetha and Anni-Frid have shown us the kindest, deepest form of selfless love between two beings, what farming clearly shows us is that it’s time for it to end.
Maya Cohen-Ronen is an animal rights activist, and author of two dystopian suspense novels.
Related links
‘The Shed’
‘Liberation’
‘Your Pain Is Mine’ Q&A: Indian Politician and Animal Activist, Maneka Sanjay Gandhi
When End Animal Slaughter’s Sandra Kyle visited India in 2018 as the recipient of the Philip Wollen Animal Welfare Award, she was presented with her certificate by Maneka Gandhi, then Minister for Women and Child Development in the Narendra Modi government. Her brief meeting with the formidable Mrs Gandhi left a lasting impression on her:-
“At the back of her office was an enormous whiteboard filled up with animal campaigns she was currently working on, a ‘to-do’ list that covered every aspect of animal rights and welfare in India. Of this long list, only a few had been marked as completed, reflecting the difficulty of the work she grapples with every day. I was so impressed that this one individual, through force of character and hard work, and despite her enormous governmental responsibilities, had achieved so much for animals in India, earning her an international reputation. Maneka no doubt has a brilliant mind, but what she does also requires vision, imagination, patience and determination. For much of our meeting she was businesslike, even a bit brusque, but every now and then the sweetest smile broke through. In her presence I could feel the breadth of her intelligence, but also her compassion. As Eileen Weintraub, founder of Help Animals India, describes her: ‘Maneka has a golden heart”.
1. Have you always loved animals?
I don’t know whether what I felt or feel was love . It is respect and compassion and a sense of oneness and a desire for fairness that drives me. I feel each animal/insect/bird stuck in this man-made world, bewildered, grappling to survive, is part of my soul. I simply cannot see the difference between me, a leaf, a crow, a goat, or an elephant. I cannot understand how the human species can create so much pain around them and expect to be happy.
2. When did you start actively campaigning for animal rights and welfare in India?
I made the first animal shelter in India with the money that my husband, who died when I was 23, left me. I ran the shelter first and then because I was in politics, used that platform always to change things for animals.
3 You have enormous responsibilities, and have achieved much in your political career. And yet you also manage to be so productive for animals, through the Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre, and in your writing and other activist platforms. You are the longest serving Member of Parliament in India, having won 8 times. How do you manage to do so much?
I don’t stop for a minute. And I do everything that I can. I study very hard every day to improve my knowledge of animal issues so that I can speak/do with correct information.
I feel the heart is a door. When it opens, it opens for every being. My heart and energy is open for all kinds of pain, and I endeavour to lessen it for as many beings as I can. That is what gives me the ability to work hard.
4 What is the hardest thing about your work advocating for animals? What are the main obstacles you face?
Ignorance, the ignorance of politicians and bureaucrats especially. When I started, it was considered the domain of “little old ladies”. Now fortunately the movement is coming into its own, with groups starting everywhere.
5 What are some of the campaigns you are currently working on?
I work on 50-100 things at the same time . At this exact moment we are getting pet shops and dog/cat breeders banned.
6 At the beginning of the Covid-19 Lockdown you issued a press release saying that people should continue to feed stray dogs and cows, and even gave your personal number out all over India to help people get special passes to feed animals without the police hassling them. Can you put into words what drives you to work so hard to fight animal cruelty and injustice?
The fear of pain. Your pain is mine, so I need to get rid of it.
7 Are things beginning to change for animals in India? If so, why?
Some things change. But for every good thing, some politicians will make sure three more policies are made that are bad. But last year I made the government give money for the scientific exploration of making clean meat (meat by cell multiplication). We are the first government to do so . That is going on now, and if we can do this, it will change the world as we know it.
8 What would you like to see happen in the future?
Clean meat, clean milk – milk/meat made without animals. The banning of any meat exports until we get there. A sharp rise in veganism. Compulsory training in animal welfare in schools… I have a booklet in which I have listed 170 things I want to do or I want to see happen before I die.
Of course they will not be all done but even if I can get half, I shall die happy and not have to come back!
Duck Shooting Season A Licence To Kill Endangered Native Species
On the Eve of the New Zealand duck shooting season opening, End Animal Slaughter contributor Paul Judge calls for an end to the carnage.
As I write, the murderous mayhem of duck-shooting season has been given the go-ahead by the government during New Zealand’s level-2 Covid-19 lockdown.
I walk down to my favourite spot on the Waikato River most evenings. I hear the ducks as I approach, quacking away and going about their duck business. And there they are, on the river’s edge sitting calmly in their flock, or sometimes, led by a brave duck, waddling up the bank to look for food. Something will suddenly spook them and they all take off into the air as one, swooping past me with flapping wings, circling way out over the river before settling again on the sandy beach. These are the lucky ones, I think to myself. As long as they stay here they will escape the horrors of the hunters’ guns.
How I loathe duck shooting. It is so obviously cruel I cannot understand how it is still legal. Australian studies show that around one in four ducks are not killed outright, but instead fall to the ground mortally wounded, dying an agonising, lingering death. While a good percentage of geese and swans are monogamous, ducks can also pair bond for extended periods. If a single duck manages to survive the carnage duckshooting causes, then they will ‘mourn’ the partner they bonded with.
The mayhem and murder is not only normalised by the media but is celebrated. Blokey, camouflaged duck-shooters are shown stocking their maimais (concealment huts) with beer and talking about how it’s the best thing since Christmas. Small children are dressed up in identical camouflage to their proud dad’s and declare on camera that they have shot their first duck. Often the children will speak with trepidation in their voice, not understanding fully why they have killed a beautiful living bird.
Duckshooting family. Teaching our children violence from an early age. (Photo credit: TVNZ)
When it comes to duck shooting, the law is truly an idiot. The large numbers of maimed, wounded ducks flies in the face of humane slaughter laws in the Animal Welfare Act. Duck-shooting should be banned on these grounds alone. I know it will be a long battle, given the powerful enculturation of the practice, and I will never give up the fight to see it happen. But there is another Act of Parliament that can and should be properly updated – the Wildlife Act 1953.
When it comes to duck shooting, the law is truly an idiot. The large numbers of maimed, wounded ducks flies in the face of humane slaughter laws in the Animal Welfare Act. Duck-shooting should be banned on these grounds alone.
All New Zealanders should know that some species of native duck, which are in decline or classified as endangered, are allowed to be shot under the Law.
Notwithstanding the regional variations regarding bag limits, the hypocrisy of killing our native species is absurd. We spend millions of tax-payer’s dollars – expensive aerial poison drops, hours upon hours of both government paid work and unpaid volunteer work – protecting our precious native birds. To allow our native species to be slaughtered makes absolutely no sense.
The only ducks that are legally protected in New Zealand are the Brown and Grey Teals, (Patekeke and Tete Moroiti respectively), NZ Scaup (Papango), and Blue Duck (Whio). Native species so recklessly assigned to the carnage are the Grey Duck (Parera), the Shoveler (Kuruwhengi) and the Paradise Shelduck (Putangitangi).
The Grey Duck is in rapid decline and has been declared “critically endangered”. It is thought to be extensively hybridised with the mallard, and this hybrid is allowed to be hunted. Good luck with telling the difference! The true Grey Duck is in danger from being shot by hunters as both sexes look similar to the female mallard. The Grey Duck has a pattern of stripes from the bill and over the head. The general similarity of appearance to the mallard is one very good reason to ban all duck-shooting.
The female Grey Duck (Photo credit: NZ Birds Online)
The introduced Mallard is, of course, the most common duck. We see them almost everywhere, the female with her uniform, dull brown feathers, the male with his handsome, dark green, iridescent head and neck feathers. These ducks are considered pests. They apparently disturb the replanting programmes along the waterways and they overcrowd the wetlands for native species. What? Hang on a minute. We are shooting the native species! And as for overcrowding, wetland habitats have been devastated in this country, largely due to intensive agriculture. 90% of our original wetlands have been destroyed. And it’s the duck’s fault?
Male and female Mallard ducks (Photo credit: NZ Birds Online)
Conservation of remaining wetlands is a contentious issue in the duck-shooting debate. The hunters become ‘greenies’ in regard to wetlands, but only in order so there will be plenty of game next year to carry out their blood-sport.
The native Shoveler duck also deserves immediate protection. It is estimated about 30,000 of these birds are killed every hunting season. That’s around 20% of their total population. That is not sustainable and certainly not acceptable. Once again, the females look quite similar to the plainly embellished female mallard. The male Shoveler, however, must be New Zealand’s most handsome waterfowl, with his blue-grey head with white vertical stripe between eye and bill, his striking reddish-brown breast and blue wings. It is inconceivable that such a bird, endemic to New Zealand, can be legally shot.
The Shoveler duck (Kuruwhengi) (Photo credit: NZ Birds Online)
The Paradise Shelduck is sometimes mistaken for a goose, possibly due to the male’s goose-like honk or the female’s white head. The male Shelduck is a uniform black or dark grey with green iridescent head feathers, while the female is a chestnut brown with a distinctive pure white head and neck. After the mallard the Paradise Shelduck are the most abundant waterfowl in New Zealand. Ironically, they have increased their numbers since colonisation due primarily to their ability to adapt to feeding on grassland. Thus farmers see them as a pest and shoot these beautiful creatures relentlessly.
Of an estimated population of 700,000 about 200,000 are shot annually. And this is a native bird! Under this logic, Will we see the hunting of kiwi if the conservation programmes are hugely successful and their numbers increase?
Male and female Paradise Shellducks (Putangiangi) (Photo credit: NZ Birds Online)
The Paradise Shelduck was listed in 2008 as “not threatened”. That, of course, seems an absurdity given the overall decline of all waterfowl species since that date. Habitat loss, predation, overhunting and extreme weather events due to climate change are taking their toll on even the abundant mallard, so much so that the 2015 season was shortened to one month, with bag limits for all duck species reduced.
And why is the beautiful, iconic Pukeko, another native to Aotearoa, allowed to be killed en masse? Large numbers of these stunning birds are killed ‘for fun’ by duck-shooters. Conservation groups have estimated 50,000 are killed each season. But Fish & Game say this is wrong, and that only 20,000 are killed. Hold on a minute. That’s a bit like saying the use of napalm in the Vietnam War was not so bad because the civilian death count was over-estimated.
Pukeko and chick
The Pukeko is almost as iconic a bird as the kiwi. Check out any tourist trinket shop and there they will be, adorning ceramic tiles, headscarves, countless prints and paintings. Killing the Pukeko is as dumb as the Australians killing the kangaroo, an animal that adorns the tail of the Qantas aeroplanes, the national symbol. Shhh! Keep quiet, we don’t tell the tourists anything about this.
All duck shooting is unacceptable, but native birds still being shot in this country is a total outrage and simply beggars belief. The Wildlife Act of 1953 is in urgent need of extensive revision.
The most well-known of our protected ducks, thanks to the media coverage of conservation efforts, is the Blue Duck (Whio). But here’s an idea; let’s protect all the native ducks shall we? Or better yet, all the ducks, native or otherwise.
But here’s an idea; let’s protect all the native ducks shall we? Or better yet, all the ducks, native or otherwise.
Blue duck (Whio) (Photo Credit: NZ Birds Online)
COVID-19
With the Covid-19 pandemic the world is in crisis, but are we learning anything? Are we looking at the root causes of this catastrophe? Are we examining our relationship to our evolutionary partners who we exploit and maim and kill in the most horrendous ways?
Can we not even develop a new empathy for those we define as our prey, when we ourselves are experiencing the horrors of becoming prey to a biological enemy out to destroy us?
And before the Covid-19 crisis there was the biodiversity crisis. Well guess what? That is still happening, and overhunting, along with habitat loss, pollution and climate change, is a root cause.
There is so much morally and ethically wrong with duck shooting – the scale of the suffering of the birds, the enculturation of children into violence, the poisoning of the environment with lead (yes, still used, not to be phased out until 2021), the list goes on. But to put endangered native species in harm’s way every duck shooting season is incomprehensible, and cannot be allowed to continue.
Paul Judge (seen here with his beloved companion goat, Robert) is a filmmaker and animal rights activist. He taught film production in the tertiary education sector for 17 years.
Emerging and Mutating Viruses Killing Millions Will Be The Norm Unless We Stop Consuming Animals
In this article and video we learn not only about the threat of future viruses that will emerge from wild meat markets and factory farms, but also the risk of existing zoonoses mutating and potentially devastating human populations. The only sure safeguard is to adopt a vegan diet.
Read the article and watch the video here
It’s Time To Wash The Blood Off Our Hands
We will never find peace within ourselves until we stop treating other animals so appallingly, writes End Animal Slaughter contributor, Paul Stevenson. (Featured art by Lynda Bell (artbylyndabell.com).
Although the nature/nurture debate has raged for decades, recent studies have shown convincing evidence that humans are innately moral: we are born with the capacity to care about others. In fact as far back as 1871 Darwin countered theorists who argued that humans are naturally selfish, identifying components of a ‘moral sense’ throughout the tree of life. As a product of evolution, we would expect that moral behaviour is within other animals as well, not just humans, and so it appears to be the case. Primatologists like Frans de Waal, Jill Pruetz, and Christophe Boehm have shown that our closest kin in the animal kingdom, from chimps to bonobos, possess within themselves the building blocks of morality and moral goodness, treating treat each other with empathy, compassion, and self-sacrifice. And it by no means only found in primates, as Marc Bekoff and Jessica Pierce show in their book ‘Wild Justice.’
As humans, this moral sense culminates in us, and our caring and morality extends beyond people to include other animals, plants and the wider environment. When we go against our fundamental nature by ignoring our humanity and unnecessarily harming others, we consequently feel bad inside, and cannot experience peace of mind. As we can never know real happiness or contentment when we are not at peace within ourselves, it is the greatest of follies to harm others when there is no need to do so.
The less we care about others the lower our humanity, and the lower the quality of our own lives. The criminal destroys himself for this reason, because the more he takes from others the more he steals from himself, by robbing himself of his own humanity and self-respect. He may have lots of material things – quantity – in his life in the form of money and possessions, but he lacks all quality. That is because our quality of life is almost entirely an inner thing, non-material, the product of our mind, and largely to do with our opinion of ourselves. It depends on our self-esteem and integrity, which in turn is related to how much we care about others.
Killing and eating other creatures not only destroys their entire existence for something as trivial as our food habits, it also subjects them to unspeakable suffering and indescribable horrors.
Killing and eating other creatures not only destroys their entire existence for something as trivial as our food habits, it also subjects them to unspeakable suffering and indescribable horrors.
But unnecessarily causing other animals to suffer and die for our palate also has a direct effect on us. It is self-sabotage, because such actions are contrary to our fundamental caring nature, and rob us of our humanity as well as all hope of achieving the contentment we crave. So if we want to be kind to ourselves we must first treat others, including other animals, with kindness and respect. The natural consequence of this is that we must stop supporting all forms of animal agriculture, as well as fishing.
Our treatment of animals that we raise for food is horrendous. We treat them as if they were nothing. They are sensitive, intelligent cousins of ours, but we regard them as no better than lumps of rock, sacks of coal, logs of wood, good only for cutting up, cooking up, and eating up. For the dead-hearted people involved, these sentient beings represent nothing more than money.
Yet as intelligent creatures with the brains to examine our actions, to self-inspect, and evaluate our behaviour, change is always possible. Because our nature is fundamentally good, we know in our heart when we see how animals are raised for food, that we are committing terrible crimes that cannot be justified on any grounds. We can never rest with a clear conscience while we abuse others so terribly.
Because our nature is fundamentally good, we know in our heart when we see how animals are raised for food, that we are committing terrible crimes that cannot be justified on any grounds.
These days it is easy to adopt a vegan diet, that is just as delicious as any other, and is healthier both for us and the planet. Covid-19, and all other ‘spillover’ diseases, came from eating animals, not plants. This is a good time to start transitioning to a cruelty-free vegan diet. We will discover how much better we feel about ourselves.
Paul Stevenson has a lifestyle block in Northland, New Zealand, and is Dad to a number of kunekune pigs.
Is Eating Meat ‘Sinful’?
The remark this week by American broadcaster Jim Cramer that ‘Eating animals is dirty, broken and sinful’ prompted End Animal Slaughter’s Sandra Kyle to consider why so many Christians continue to eat meat.
In animal rights circles, you don’t often see the word ‘sin’ used, but growing up as a Catholic schoolgirl in New Zealand, it is a very familiar term to me.
Apart from its obvious connotation with organised religion, and its negative association with fear and punishment, the word ‘sin’ has a general meaning which is ‘wicked and immoral behaviour’. I would like to discuss this definition as far as it regards other animals. Although the concept of sin is in all the Abrahamic religions, I know more about Christianity than Judaism and Islam, so will confine my remarks to this.
I think most Christians would agree that Jesus’ essential message is about love and mercy. The nuns and priests instilled this in me from a young age, and even now, the iconic image of the ‘Sacred Heart’ (Heart of Mercy) comes to mind when I think of Jesus. I wonder what He would say if he were alive today, and entered a slaughterhouse. Do you think He would condone what goes on there? Seeing animal after terrified animal having their brains shattered and throats slit? Do you think there might be factory farms and slaughterhouses in Heaven? In Hell, perhaps, but what did innocent animals ever do to deserve to be punished? Didn’t Jesus challenge us to live mercifully? Isn’t His own example of caring, rescuing, and healing what Christians should aspire to, and for all sentient beings not just humans?
If Christians believe they are to live with mercy and compassion, then it stands to reason that causing animals suffering is morally wrong. If factory farming and the associated mutilations, drugs and imprisonment are not cruel and ungodly; if lining up tens of millions of knowing, terrified individuals every single day to have their throats slit is not cruel and ungodly; then I am at a loss to know what is.
Many Christians think that causing pain to an animal is not the moral equivalent of causing pain to a human being, and so this exempts them from sin. They believe that humans are special, fashioned by God to be above the rest of creation, and entitled dominion over it.
But if the victim can suffer, and feel pain, then surely the moral obligation is there not to hurt them.
That animals suffer in the same way we do has been well established by Science now. ‘Even’ fish have analogous pain pathways to mammals. And if it were not already obvious, studies have shown animals suffer when deprived of their natural behaviours, such as walking, and being in the company of their family and friends. As innocent, sentient beings, with natural desires and inclinations, do they not have the moral right not to have suffering inflicted on them? And why do we create differences between species? ‘Why’ as the say goes, ‘do we love one and eat the other?’
I know I am asking a lot of questions, and here’s another one: Why doesn’t a sentient calf, pig, and chicken have the same rights as our own cats and dogs not to be abused and killed? Is there not a major disconnect in our thinking that maintains that they do not?
I know I am asking a lot of questions, and here’s another one: Why doesn’t a sentient calf, pig, and chicken have the same rights as our own cats and dogs not to be abused and killed? Is there not a major disconnect in our thinking that maintains that they do not?
If God created animals, then He created them with needs, wants, and a design for their life. Animals in intensive agriculture are completely denied these basic rights. If Christians believe that God created pigs and chickens, then doesn’t it follow that He created them to live according to their natural instincts and inclinations, including to roam free in the outdoors, root around in the soil for their food, build nests, mate, and properly nurse and care for their babies? It is well-known that in factory farming they can do none of these things.
In fact such is our entitlement of dominion over animals that we have turned ourselves into God, manipulating and controlling every aspect of their lives, thwarting their every natural desire to our own ends. We genetically alter them so they grow bigger and fatter to be more profitable, no matter what the cost is to them. Broiler (meat) chickens have upper bodies that grow six times faster than they did when I was born seventy-one years ago, and throughout their entire lives they suffer from lameness, crippling leg deformities and fractured bones, because their legs can’t keep up with the artificially-induced growth. Enter into any meat chicken shed anywhere in the world and you will find many birds just lying in their own faeces, unable even to move, a percentage already dead before they reach the slaughter weight of 5 or 6 weeks old. And speaking of poultry, genetically-altered turkeys cannot even mate naturally any more. But whether raised intensively or not, all farmed animals have to suffer. They are all trucked, without food or water, to a hellish death at a slaughterhouse, against their will, and at only a fraction of their natural lifespan.
Everyone agrees that their beloved pets should be protected legally from the worst abuses, but why do tens of billions of equally sentient animals have no such protection under the law? Farmed animals regularly undergo painful procedures such as castration, debeaking and dehorning without painkillers, which would be unthinkable for our pets. In slaughterhouses there is even evidence of cattle having their legs hacked off while they are still conscious, and in traditional halal and kashrut slaughter, they have their throats slit while completely conscious and able to feel the searing pain for some minutes before they die. If castrating your dog without painkillers is not OK, if giving growth hormones to your cat so that she gets disproportionately so big that she cannot even walk, if slitting your dog or cat’s throat open and hacking off their limbs while they’re still conscious is not OK – then why is it any different to do this to a farmed animal? What part of the word ‘sentient’ are we not understanding here?
If castrating your dog without painkillers is not OK, if giving growth hormones to your cat so that she gets disproportionately so big that she cannot even walk, if slitting a dog or cat’s throat open and hacking off their limbs while they’re still conscious is not OK – then why is it any different to do this to a farmed animal? What part of the word ‘sentient’ are we not understanding here?
I no longer consider myself a Catholic, but the idea of the Sacred Heart of Jesus has been a guiding principle throughout my life, and for me it means mercy for all sentient beings, not just human beings.
That is why I cannot understand why at many religious people, including the majority of Christians, continue to eat meat. Is not persisting in causing horrific suffering to animals unnecessarily immoral behaviour? As Christian and Animal Rights Activist Matthew Scully, author of Dominion, says:-
“When a man’s love of finery clouds his moral judgment, that is vanity. When he lets a demanding palate make his moral choices, that is gluttony. When he ascribes the divine will to his own whims, that is pride. And when he gets angry at being reminded of animal suffering that his own daily choices might help avoid, that is moral cowardice.”
If we believe in a merciful God, and we continue to cause sentient beings pain and suffering just because we like the way they taste, then we had better get down on our knees and pray for forgiveness.
The good news is that once we become aware of the inconsistency in our moral behaviour regarding our food choices, there are clear and immediate practical steps that we can take in response. We can begin to reduce, until we have eliminated altogether, our consumption of animal products.
I wish more Christians would try it. I know Jesus would approve.
Sandra Kyle started the website End Animal Slaughter in 2018 with the goal of ending animal slaughter by 2025
Factory farms are manufacturing our modern diseases
KEY POINTS
– As well as Covid-10, this century we’ve had a long list of diseases spilled over from animals.
– The number is increasing in recent years owing to population increase, global travel and trade, and also in the ways modern farming forces humans, animals and microbes together.
– Scientists have demonstrated a link between intensive poultry production and the emergence of highly pathogenic forms of avian flu, and a link between intensified pork production and swine flu.
– Infectious disease is not the only consequence of industrialised farming. Others include antimicrobial resistance and elevated greenhouse gas emissions.
– To avoid pandemics in the world we need to take a long, hard look at our relationship with the natural world, and particularly with other animals.
– We need to acknowledge that we are manufacturing our own diseases, start talking about our lifestyle choices and the industries that satisfy them.
– The time to do that is now.
Read the Time article here
Mother’s Day: Nothing To Celebrate For Animals Raised For Food
It is May 10th – Mother’s Day – when we celebrate the sacred bond between mother and child.
Mother-Infant bonding is strong in nearly all species, but the animal agriculture industry holds this natural bond in contempt.
Dairy mothers have their babies taken away from them almost immediately, so they cannot drink their mother’s milk. Some calves go to slaughter at just 4 days old; others are raised in isolation to produce veal.
Sows in factory farms are socially isolated in tiny cages where they can scarcely move in a cycle of pregnancy, giving birth, and nursing their piglets. Their strong maternal instinct to build nests and properly care for their babies cannot be realised. Consequently, these highly intelligent animals live lives of endless suffering.
Chickens in factory farms never meet their mothers, and never know their affection and protection.
Some mother cows are pregnant when transported to slaughter, and give birth in the truck or the kill floor. The calf’s life ends as soon as it has begun.
But there are some good news stories too. The day after this year’s Oscars, Joaquin Phoenix helped liberate a cow and her newborn calf from a Los Angeles slaughterhouse. Phoenix named the mother Liberty and her daughter Indigo.
This is another heartwarming story about Charlotte, delivered after her mother was slaughtered for meat.
Read the Sentient Media article here
Wading Into Murky Waters: The Truth About Duckshooting
Duckshooting in New Zealand is a centuries-long activity. It’s time to bring it to a stop, writes End Animal Slaughter’s Sandra Kyle.
In a few short days, the pitter-patter of tiny bullets will be heard near wetlands all over New Zealand. The air will be thick with the smell of gunshot, and dead and injured birds will rain on the ground. In an estimated 25% of cases these birds will not be killed outright, but will suffer an agonising, lingering death. Is this the kind and compassionate New Zealand our Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern keeps talking about, or is it government-sanctioned carnage?
The opening of the gamebird season – generally the first weekend of May, but delayed this year because of Covid-19 restrictions – has been part of New Zealand’s history since the early nineteenth century. Although it is declining in popularity, over 30,000 gamebird hunting licences are still sold in New Zealand annually.
Every year during the weeks-long season, shooters get up before dawn, don camouflage suits and war paint, trek down to lakes, ponds and rivers, and install themselves in hidden huts called maimai, or sit in dingys near reeds, away from the ducks’ keen eyesight. The first rays of daylight reveal a bucolic scene. Sleeping birds rest their heads gently on their backs, next to their lifelong partners, also sleeping.
Suddenly shots fire out, and the quiet scene become turbulent with panicking family and friends, the air filled with their cries.
Terrified, they take to the sky in an effort to escape, only to be picked off by shooters who fist pump and whoop in delight when they strike their mark. This wetland was the birds’ refuge, and now, cruelly and senselessly, their life is over.
Birds who do not die outright (it takes a good marksman to kill them immediately) may perish in the mouths of retriever dogs, or have their necks wrung by shooters. Many will just lay where they fell, undiscovered, until the life ebbs from them.
There is so much wrong with duck shooting that it is hard to know where to begin, but we could start with sentience.
Ducks are animals, like us.
They know hunger and thirst, heat and cold. Like us, they can feel excitement, joy, and fear, and form attachments to their families and friends.
Their perception of pain is analogous to ours also. Vets use a combination of opiods, corticosteroids, anti-inflammatories and local anaesthetics to manage the pain of birds. I have looked after birds as a volunteer for bird rescue organisations, have applied pain relief, and seen the results for myself. Universally, animals in the wild generally do not show their pain or weaknesses, because it makes them vulnerable. It is hard by looking at a bird to know if they are in pain, but you can almost immediately see them relax and settle once pain relief is administered.
What about the ethics of shooting ducks? It is called a ‘sport’, but a sport requires two equally matched parties playing by the same rules. Duckshooting, and hunting in general, is hardly a ‘sport’ ‘Carnage’ is a better word. And not only ducks are shot. Protected species are also killed and injured because of incompetent shooters, or those who are deliberately flouting the rules.
It is certainly not heroic either. For all its macho image, duckshooting is a cowardly activity. The shooter lurks in a hiding place and employs deceptive techniques such as decoy ducks and hooters to lure his mismatched opponents. This would be laughable if it were not so tragic.
There is not one compelling reason for shooting ducks.
It goes without saying that we don’t have to kill them for our food. In fact many shooters don’t bother eating their prey. While some may dine out on duck for weeks, others simply discard their bodies at the sides of roads and in rubbish dumps, or bury them.
The conservation reason is also a myth. Contrary to the belief they would “blacken the sky” if left alone to breed, Nature has her own way of culling. When numbers are low, and the environment can support them, species breed more, and vice versa. While no one wishes starvation, disease or predation on waterfowl, shooting an animal because he or she might starve or get sick is arbitrary, and in the end, pretty much useless. Professor Richard Kingsford, who directs the Centre for Ecosystem Science at the University of New South Wales, has been conducting yearly surveys of waterbird populations across eastern Australia for three decades. New South Wales is one of the Australian states where duckshooting is banned, and Professor Kingsford and his team have not detected an increase in numbers of birds as a result of the ban. If anything there is a slight decline, but it is due to habitat loss and not hunting. It is frankly unbelievable to me that shooters kill birds for conservation reasons. They even cooperate with the government to establish wetlands, so, as the Fish and Game website states, that they can have more ‘fun’ next year.
For the princely sum of $23.00, a parent can buy a child’s season’s pass to kill ducks. A few years ago Fish and Game promoted the season by showing a young boy with a firearm over his shoulder and holding a string of dead ducks. What traits are we fostering in our children and in our communities by perpetuating the annual duck shooting season? Indifference to suffering? Irreverence towards other forms of life? Cruelty?
Why don’t we recoil from seeing children take up arms and shoot harmless animals?
Why aren’t we modelling kindness and compassion to our children? Why don’t we teach through our own behaviour a respect for all life, and for other species’ natural right to share the planet?
Why as a society would we encourage any activity that serves to dull our compassion and pity?
Are we not aware that violence breeds violence? Is the parallel between killing animals and hurting human beings not clear?
Why can’t our Prime Minister see that?
Duck shooting is the unnecessary taking of life. The only conclusion we can draw for its popularity is that shooters enjoy killing.
Now there’s a thought.
We really are wading into murky waters now.
Sandra Kyle is a full-time animal activist. She started End Animal Slaughter in 2018, with the goal of closing all slaughterhouses in the western world by 2025.
