Below was written by Andrew Kirschner:
In the process of employing various strategies to prevent the use of animals for food, it's also vital to work to improve conditions for the billions of animals we will not be able to save. While nobody celebrates a less horrific death, we can take some comfort knowing that a pig may have more space to walk around or will die without having his head slammed against the ground or that pain management will be used during tail docking. We wish for these defenseless animals the same mercy we would wish for ourselves if we had to face death -- the least painful experience possible.
Given the reality that we have no short term solution to end the massive scale of animal agriculture spanning nearly 200 countries, we should embrace these steps if we determine they reduce suffering for animals we can't save. Embracing a kinder life for animals in factory farms isn't an endorsement of animal agriculture and it doesn't mean we don't simultaneously work on projects to reduce production and consumption.
For this reason, on the heels of Mercy for Animals' undercover cruelty investigation, I embrace Tyson Foods' announcement on animal welfare, which may improve conditions for animals. While it's easy to say that we should advocate for abolition or nothing, where does that position leave animals if we don't achieve that goal? What is the plan to stop billions of people from eating animals? In what countries, states, cities, or towns are the results of this abolitionlist-only plan currently on display as a model we can replicate?
When I make these difficult decisions, I think of what I would want for myself if I knew I was going to die. If you told me I may live a less painful life and I may die a less horrific death and that you will still continue to work to save my life, I would embrace the idea. While I realize not all welfare reforms improve conditions and many agriculture companies are disingenuous, some reforms do help (see Florida's 2008 gestation crate ban) and some form of mercy is better than no mercy at all. We should also recognize that the animal protection organizations that embrace these steps have no less concern for the well-being of animals than any other animal advocate or organization. They cry the same tears and share the same dreams of a more humane world. It is misguided to suggest that these dedicated and courageous people want anything less than complete abolition simply because they use a multipronged approach to achieve our shared goal.
For more information, please read Matt Rice's article and click the link within the article to read Tyson's letter to its suppliers."
http://www.mfablog.org/2014/01/progress-for-pigs-tyson-does-a-turnaround.html
Below is an enlightened person's wonderful comment. I could not say it better than this.
"This is a very complex issue and there are, unfortunately no good answers. I think both approaches are necessary. Ultimately, it is about raising consciousness. There is not one way that works for everybody. Before child labor was banned completely, people raised awareness by educating people about the harmful conditions associated with child labor. It was similar for women, who gained rights and "equality" not in one fell swoop, but by making small inroads, and obtaining concessions in piecemeal fashion. One of the earliest laws in this regard was a law that a husband could not beat his wife with a stick that was thicker than his thumb ("rule of thumb"). At the time, it was considered progressive. Obviously, the law should have said that men must not beat their wives, and making the "rule of thumb" maliciously implied that it was okay for men to physically abuse their wives. But it ultimately proved to be a step in the direction where we find ourselves today on women's rights and the protections against domestic abuse that are in place and that have long supplanted the "rule of thumb.""Humane slaughter" laws remind me a lot of the "rule of thumb" -- and hopefully they will end up the same way, if we just keep educating and raising awareness."
I am against animals in zoo. In the meantime I want to see zoo animals have more humane conditions. I know if I were incarcerated in a zoo and could not leave, I would at least want more humane care.
Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates is a wildlife rehabilitator licensed by the California Department of Fish and Game and the USDA. Mary Cummins is also a licensed real estate appraiser in Los Angeles, California.
- Mary Cummins LinkedIn
- Mary Cummins Meet up
- Animal Advocates custom Facebook name
- Mary Cummins Real Estate blog
- Animal Advocates on Google maps
- Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates
- Mary Cummins biography resume short
- Mary Cummins Real Estate Services
- Animal Advocates fan page at Facebook.com
- Mary Cummins Animal Advocates Squirrel Rescue
- Mary Cummins Animal Advocates on Flickr photos
- Mary Cummins Animal Advocates on Twitter.com
- Mary Cummins on Picasa web photo albums
- Mary Cummins on MySpace.com
- Mary Cummins on Google Blogger Blogspot
- Mary Cummins on YouTube.com videos
- Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates on Classmates
- Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates on Google+