I live in Sonoma County and I have been following this issue for some time. Usually, our county is fairly progressive on issues such as the environment and animal welfare. I grew up on a farm in PA where we, among other things, raised chickens. Seeing the videos makes me sick. When the evens happened, the local press seemed to make light of the protesters; they were somehow "radicals." After giving this much thought, I have come to the conclusion that "money talks." The farmers raising the chickens and the manufacturers seem to have inordinate power. These farms and processing plants employ many workers. And I think the constant painting these protesters as "radicals" has made an impact on the public. It is my hope that when this does go to trial, the jury will see the TRUTH. I am NOT a radical "animal rights" person; they HAVE done things I don't agree with across the country. However, I just want animals raised for food to be treated humanely. Let the people SEE the evidence. I hope a jury agrees.
I so much agree with you: When we rescued Oliver from horrifying conditions at a dog meat farm in Yulin, China, the US government supported us and national media applauded us as heroes. Why should things be different for a chicken or pig?
*one friendly note. you write that “industry standards don’t define the law.” from my understanding, they actually do… “Farming” practices deemed “necessary” are exempted from every state’s animal cruelty statutes, and “necessary” has in turn been partly defined as whatever are considered “Customary Farming Practices,” i.e., practices that are common across the industry. Thus, industry standards do quite literally define US law. David Wolfson and Mariann Sullivan’s article, “Foxes in the Hen House,” is the best read i’ve seen on the topic.
As a sidetone, this US standard has been cited abroad to justify the same exemptions (e.g., “One tendency, dominant in the USA and Canada, exempts established agricultural practices from the applicability of animal protection laws.” HCJ 9232/01 Noah v. Att’y Gen. [2003] IsrSC 215, 231.)
I live in Sonoma County and I have been following this issue for some time. Usually, our county is fairly progressive on issues such as the environment and animal welfare. I grew up on a farm in PA where we, among other things, raised chickens. Seeing the videos makes me sick. When the evens happened, the local press seemed to make light of the protesters; they were somehow "radicals." After giving this much thought, I have come to the conclusion that "money talks." The farmers raising the chickens and the manufacturers seem to have inordinate power. These farms and processing plants employ many workers. And I think the constant painting these protesters as "radicals" has made an impact on the public. It is my hope that when this does go to trial, the jury will see the TRUTH. I am NOT a radical "animal rights" person; they HAVE done things I don't agree with across the country. However, I just want animals raised for food to be treated humanely. Let the people SEE the evidence. I hope a jury agrees.
I so much agree with you: When we rescued Oliver from horrifying conditions at a dog meat farm in Yulin, China, the US government supported us and national media applauded us as heroes. Why should things be different for a chicken or pig?
Hopefully the rescuers will be supported and the public can see the truth of what occurs in the so called humane organic poultry producer!
hey Wayne. great article, as always.
*one friendly note. you write that “industry standards don’t define the law.” from my understanding, they actually do… “Farming” practices deemed “necessary” are exempted from every state’s animal cruelty statutes, and “necessary” has in turn been partly defined as whatever are considered “Customary Farming Practices,” i.e., practices that are common across the industry. Thus, industry standards do quite literally define US law. David Wolfson and Mariann Sullivan’s article, “Foxes in the Hen House,” is the best read i’ve seen on the topic.
As a sidetone, this US standard has been cited abroad to justify the same exemptions (e.g., “One tendency, dominant in the USA and Canada, exempts established agricultural practices from the applicability of animal protection laws.” HCJ 9232/01 Noah v. Att’y Gen. [2003] IsrSC 215, 231.)
thanks for writing these,
-n
Perhaps prime time public service announcement’s to enlighten consumers