HSUS Whistleblower Sheds Light on Shady Tactics

It's no secret that I'm not a HSUS super-fan. For evidence, look no further. Their gross interpretation of animal welfare and the haughty assumption that all farmers and ranchers are animal abusers is enough to make me gag.

Photo credit: National Hog Farmer

Well, apparently I'm not the only person who is tired of HSUS' bullcrap tactics - a former undercover videographer for the animal rights group is coming forward to speak the truth and share what really happens at HSUS.

According to an interview with HumaneWatch, directors at HSUS were guilty of lying, encouraging undercover videographers to ignore animal welfare and even accusing all farmers/ranchers of being animal abusers.

Here is an excerpt of the interview, courtesy of Drovers CattleNetwork:

• Guilty of something: “Day one of training, I was basically told every single farm is doing something illegal.”
• Twisting words, splitting hairs and downright lying: “Let’s say that I went to a livestock auction and there’s a small calf running around. And let’s say this calf falls over.  If I’m filming this and send this in a report, I would say, “Calf fell over due to its own momentum.”  Mary Beth [Sweetland, HSUS Director of Investigations,] would correct that and say, “Could be malnourished or kept in hobbles the whole time.” I wouldn’t be allowed to draw something that I could see plain as day in context.”
• Recording more important than reporting: “I was never told to contact law enforcement. If you see a crime, stop that crime. Don’t wait. How many other animals must be abused down the line to accomplish this? That seems like basic, common sense.”

I'm not really surprised by any of this - are you?!

If you want to see the full video click here. You can also read more of the interview where this whistleblower explains how his eyes were truly opened to HSUS' tactics and motives and how he has changed his mind on gestation stalls.

No bones about it folks, HSUS doesn't care about animal welfare. The massive lobbyist organization cares about $$ and abolishing animal agriculture.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

PETA Uses Kids as Pawns

I think we can all agree that exploiting children to get ahead is pretty low-down and dirty. I figure only the most conniving, manipulative organizations would be willing to target children with propaganda in an effort to create a whole generation of like-minded individuals. 

Would you be surprised to find out that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has been targeting children with animal rights propaganda for more than a decade? I didn't think so.



PETA is targeting their kids and they don't care if you like it or not
Source: Center for Consumer Freedom

The second edition of the Center for Consumer Freedom's (CCF) report, "Your Kids, PETA's Pawns," explores the tactics that extreme animal rights groups use to indoctrinate children using violent and sexualized animal-rights propaganda and protests outside of elementary schools.

Additionally, and this is probably the most sickening, is the blatant use of children as props for their shocking campaigns. The runny icing on this burnt cake is that psychologists and school officials have denounced PETA's actions as "despicable," "traumatizing," "beyond insensitive," and "an absolute atrocity." Does that stop PETA from exploiting children? Not at all. You may recall, I have blogged about their atrocious actions in the past and they appear to have no remorse.

Picture this - you're an average height adult viewing an ad on the side of a bus. All appears normal until your five-year old starts crying saying that the images on the bus are scary. You can't imagine why your child is upset, until you lean down to his/her point of view and find that the imaging on the bus at a child's height level is violent, graphic images of animal abuse. Not cool, PETA. Not freaking cool.

I'm not a parent and I'm furious that PETA is doing this to kids. I can't imagine how parents of children who have encountered this propaganda may feel.

If you want to read the whole report, feel free to check it out here. Thanks to the Center for Consumer Freedom for investigating the shady dealings of manipulative animal rights organizations.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

HSUS Contributions Declining

 

Rooster and Cricket have a good home and are spoiled rotten - but lots of other pets aren't as fortunate.
If you want to help puppies and kittens, please donate to your local shelter!

Yep, you read that right.

The genius' over at HumaneWatch were combing through tax records and financial statements for our favorite animal rights organization, the Humane Society of the United States (H$U$). What they found is a little bittersweet. So let's do the sweet part first:

- In 2013, contributions to H$U$ totaled $104.5 million - that's not the sweet part. The sweet part is that in 2012, that number was a lot higher. In fact, contributions were $16.6 million less in 2013 in 2012. Win!!!

- The bitter part is that bequests, or people leaving the organization money in their will, increased by $8.6 million. So that sort of knocks the whole overall number down a bit but still:

 

H$U$ experienced a decline in income by $8 million in one year!

I hope this means that folks are seeing the light, doing their research and realizing that they can help puppies and kittens more by donating to their local shelter, rather than sending money to a lobbyist organization.

"I hear those H$U$ folks don't donate very many bones to local shelters.
Donate to your local shelter today!"

Unfortunately, to no one's surprise, H$U$ is still only donating 1% of it's budget to local groups to help dogs and cats that needs homes. But again, no surprise there. If you or your family want to help save pets, please donate your time or dollars to your local shelter. Share this message on your social media outlets - please continue to spread the word that H$U$ is a lobbyist organization, not a rescue organization.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

p.s. - Two posts in one week - look at me go! Wahoo!

 

The thoughts and opinions of this blog post strictly represent that of Brandi Buzzard Frobose and are NOT representative of any other entity or organization.



Rabbit Meat is the New Horse Meat

If you haven't seen the news lately, you've missed out on the ruckus Whole Foods Market is causing by selling rabbit meat in select locations in North Carolina and the D.C. metro area. Obviously, close-minded American up in arms. I forgot that if a food product isn't widely consumed in the U.S. it must be wrong to eat it elsewhere in the world. Silly me. Does this sound vaguely familiar?


Rabbit carcasses in a butcher shop
photo source

Hmm -  that's right. This sounds like the horse meat argument all over again. The vast majority of Americans are against the consumption of horse meat as well. Something to do with companion animals - nevermind the fact that both rabbit meat and horse meat are widely available and consumed in other countries like Germany, France and China.

According to FOX News, several activist organizations banded together for a day of action where participants were encouraged to reach out to shoppers of Whole Foods and explain "... what wonderful animals rabbits are and remind them how popular rabbits are as pets." Guess what else is a popular pet that we eat? Fish. Sorry, Goldie.

This whole issue boils down to one small group of very vocal people striving to take control of society's consumption patterns. Nevermind the fact that Whole Foods Market developed a slaughter system that is in line with the high animal welfare standards they already in place for beef, pork and chicken. Nevermind the fact that, apparently, customers of the high end grocery chain have been asking for rabbit meat for years. Nevermind the fact that if you don't want to eat it, don't buy it.

While I was in France for a study abroad trip in 2009, I saw rabbit carcasses in the window of many butcher shops. It was perfectly normal - there were no animal rights groups staging sit-ins or attempting to sway consumers away from their purchases. Alternative meats are the norm outside of the U.S. - when are we going to start being more civilized and catch up with the rest of the world?

What's your take - would you eat rabbit meat? Do you think rabbits should be for pets only?

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~


The thoughts and opinions of this blog post strictly represent that of Brandi Buzzard Frobose and are NOT representative of any other entity or organization.

PETA is Happy Detroit Went Bankrupt

image credit

 



Why? Because it gives the animal rights organization the opportunity to get some good press. PETA president Ingrid Newkirk offered to give $100,000 to the city of Detroit, which filed for bankruptcy recently, if the city will offer vegan only meals in government buildings.

No lie.

Furthermore, Newkirk offered to purchase ad space on government vehicles like firetrucks and police cars to keep those public works funded. Obviously, this is great opportunity for PETA to get some face time and I'm guessing the organization is more interested in publicity than helping out the city of Detroit. Read here for the full story but you get the idea.

I think I'd rather be broke than in cahoots with PETA. Stay strong, Detroit. Like a rock.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

If Americans Weren't So Spoiled, We'd Appreciate Horse Meat

image from here

 

We're spoiled. You're spoiled. I'm spoiled - Americans in general are spoiled. No, this isn't a political rant. Those things don't belong on a blog and frankly, there are few very bloggers who are actually qualified to rage against "the man" without looking stupid.

Americans are spoiled by our endless food choices and although it's great to live in a country with abundant, cheap food it has definitely spawned some spoiled, whiny folks who want all people to eat the same way.

Except no two people have the same dietary requirements, restrictions, desires or tastes. Additionally, no two people have the same income restraints that play a massive role in the quality, quantity and type of food that ends up in the refrigerator. There are folks like the Ninja who will eat pretty much anything (except cottage cheese) and then there are folks like me who like meat, carbs, meat, dairy, meat and fruit [and meat]. It's asinine to try to force us to eat the same things because I would starve and he would inflate like a balloon from eating all the things I didn't want.

I previously blogged that this restaurant in Philadelphia was going to be serving horsemeat on its menu. However, the chef/owner recently decided to take horsemeat off the menu because he was receiving death threats. Why is it ok to threaten to kill humans over animal lives? I will never understand how folks can have so much hate built up against others.

Furthermore, regardless of the fact that Valley Meat Company in Roswell, New Mexico, has met all the requirements for federal inspection and have been given the "everything is OK" checkmark, the USDA still hasn't sent an inspector to the plant. Why are so many people dragging their feet? This is an opportunity to jumpstart the economy in Roswell and improve the welfare of unwanted horses.

I've already listed the advantages of horse slaughter but if you don't want to go back and read my previous posts on the topic, I've written them again below:

1. Job creation - The plant would create approximately 100 jobs for Roswell area residents and during an economic recession when so many folks are wishing for a decent job - voila! Reopening plants will increase the number of jobs and boost local economies.

2. Exports - the U.S. slaughtered 94,000 horses in 2005, the last full year of horse slaughter before federal inspection funding was repealed in 2007. Without a slaughter plant in the U.S., more than 197,000 horses were exported to other North American countries last year for slaughter. That's double the number from 2007 slaughter exports. What does that mean?

3. Animal Welfare - It means thousands of horses have endured excruciatingly long drives to Canada or Mexico on trains or trucks that aren't exactly the most welfare-friendly. Opening a slaughter plant in the U.S. would prevent thousands of horses from being improperly transported across U.S. borders.

4. Horse meat is a delicacy - maybe not to you or I, but in several other countries around the world horse meat is consumed quite often and is a staple in many diets. The U.S. is missing out on valuable export dollars by not opening horse slaughter plants. For example, between January and November of 2012, the UK imported ~$80,000 worth of horsemeat into the UK. That doesn't include the rest of the EU, Japan, China or the Asia-Pacific region. In short, this could provide a boost to the total agriculture GDP. Every little bit helps right?

Growing up, our parents told us to mind our own business if said business didn't affect us. I believe the same rules apply to those who are opposed to horse slaughter, but will never eat horse meat, own a horse or have a stake in the industry and are simply chiming in because they think eating horsemeat is wrong. If the horsemeat is just to be exported to other countries, why invest so much time and pure hatred towards those trying to improve the local economy, welfare of horses and provide more protein to a hungry world.

I deeply care about not only my own horses, but about every other horse in the U.S. I am a lifelong horse owner and will fight for measures that improve the welfare of those animals who are unwanted.

So again, I ask you - what do you think? Weigh in below.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

California Bill 343 - Turn That Video In Pronto!

Hey folks, I just read this article about a bill in California. Not a GMO bill. Not a gestation crate bill. A bill about videoing livestock.

Photo courtesy awesome blogger and cattle gal Meg Brown

The bill is California Assembly Bill 343 and it forces those who video animal mistreatment a mere 48 hours to report it to local authorities such as the sheriff's department.

You may think - wow! That's just like the  bill that was submitted in Iowa that outlaws people from coming onto the farm and videoing the livestock...but it's not. This bill forces action in a timely fashion instead of videographers waiting until a more opportune time to submit the footage. It doesn't make it illegal for those wanting to go undercover to gain employment but does place some pressure on their motives.

Photo courtesy awesome blogger and cattle gal Meg Brown

The auction yard owner quoted in the article says he supports the bill because "I want to know if we've got a problem...let's do something about it now."

Read the article and then comment below what you think - do you think the bill is good for agriculture or bad?

And don't forget about the giveaway - entries close on Monday night. Head on over there and check it out!

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

Which Food Service Companies Ban Gestation Stalls?

 image from here

It seems like almost every month another food service provider breaks with the news that they are going to be phasing out gestation stalls. I have scoured searched a little bit on the internet for a succinct list of all these food companies but haven’t been very successful. Then I thought to myself, “Self, I bet there are other people who would like to know this information – you should find and combine all of this for the folks on the internet to find.” So here is my list. I may not have found all of them but if you know of one I have missed, please let me know and I’ll keep the list updated!

These are the companies who have committed to sourcing pork from producers who don't use gestation stalls or are phasing them out of their own facilities:

Applebee's ARAMARK Arby’s Atlantic Premium Brands - supplier to Wal-Mart Au Bon Pain Bon Appetit Management Company Bruegger's Bagels Burger King Campbell Soup Cargill Carl’s Jr Carnival Cruise Line Chipotle Compass Group ConAgra Costco Cracker Barrel Denny’s Dunkin' Brands Einstein Noah Restaurant Group Fresh Enterprises (Baja Fresh, Canyon's Burger) General Mills Hardee’s Harris Teeter Supermarkets Heinz Hillshire Brands (Jimmy Dean, Ballpark) Hormel Foods IHOP Jack in the Box Kraft Foods/Oscar Mayer Kroger Marriott International McDonald’s Metz Culinary Management Quiznos Red Robin Gourmet Burgers Royal Caribbean Safeway Smithfield Foods Sodexo Sonic Subway Supervalu Sysco Target The Cheesecake Factory Wolfgang Puck-owned restaurants Wendy’s  Whole Foods Wienerschnitzel Williams Sausage Company Winn-Dixie

Not only have these food service companies decided to phase out gestation stalls, there are nine states - Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Maine, Michigan, Ohio, Oregon and Rhode Island – who have already passed laws to ban the use of gestation crates from pork supply chain practices. Unfortunately, I don't see this pattern of phasing out gestation crates ending anytime soon. So, until the next company issues a press release here is the list. Again, please let me know if I missed any. Until next time, ~ Buzzard ~

Animal Welfare and AgChat - Questions Answered!

 Fresh, clean bedding for new baby lambs in the middle of winter = great animal care

For those of you who are unfamiliar with AgChat, it's a weekly conversation held on Twitter in which anyone can ask questions revolving around a predetermined topic. The topics change every week and the participants change often too - all are welcome to engage and communicate. Tomorrow night, be sure to search #agchat around 7 pm CST and join in on the convo!

Now that we're all on the same page, I must admit that very rarely is there a topic on AgChat in which I have enough expertise to positively contribute. Soil conservation, generational planning, herd management - these things don't play a role in my life yet. They will in the future, but for now it's me, the Ninja and a few select domesticated animals that rock out at the FroBuzz Ranchero.

However, AgChat on January 22 was right up my alley. The topic was animal welfare and since I have a M.S. in animal behavior, well-being and health, I consider myself relatively knowledgeable on the topic. But, insert a wedding anniversary and a KSU vs KU basketball game and participating in AgChat was made impossible. Shucks.

My solution is to answer all the questions from the 22nd in this blog post - there were about 15 questions and I'm going to answer them here to the best of my ability and in my opinion (I"ll even try to stick to 140 characters per 'tweet'). I would love to have you all chime in and contribute your own thoughts and ideas as well!

Q1 - Please tell us about farm and ranch efforts to care for animals in the frigid temps much of the country is experiencing.
A -- Increase bedding in shelters, make sure that adequate shelter is provided and increase forage intake to increase body heat. #animalwelfare

Q2 - To farmers & ag peeps, how many nonfarm folks have you had convo with regarding farming methods in last three months?
A -- Approx five. Was at a bach party and topic of grass-fed vs grain-fed beef came up. Made sure everyone knew that all #beef is raised humanely

Q3 - How has the livestock industry improved animal welfare over the past decade.
A - Better handling facilities in the race, more efficient and safer ways of stunning. Less stressful handling has been developed i.e. quieter

Q4 - What are some of your best practices for speaking with opposing groups about animal welfare? Do's and Don'ts?
A - Don't preach. Do be honest. Don't get defensive. Do find common ground and work from there. Don't attack opposition. Verbally or otherwise

 Even though this horse is dirty (he likes to roll), he isn't being poorly cared for. It's muddy outside but he is in out of the wind and is fat; meaning he has access to lots of food which keeps his body temp up during cold weather.

Q5 - Animal welfare is something that can be hard to explain. How would you describe it?
A - The overall wellbeing of an animal. Physiological responses, behavior patterns & health status in one collective term. VERY hard to measure.

Q6 - What are the public's biggest concerns when it comes to animal welfare?
A - Industrial farming, antibiotics and slaughter plants. No question about it.

Q7 -What is the perceived value of of certifications such as Animal Welfare Approved & Certified Humane?
A - Cert is valuable but issue is if people will pay for it. Many see labeling and feel good abt purchase, even if they don't know what it means

Q8 - How can we encourage veterinarians to be more engaged in talking about animal welfare?
A - My initial thought is that they are so busy on office and farm calls they probably don't have time to chat.
A - But on 2nd thought, talking to small animal vets who don't have a lot of large animal background could help in the long run.

Q9 - How much value do producers actually put on the results of animal welfare research?
**This was my question, so I'll post my answer and few other answers that were provided**
A (mine) - depends if they 'approve' of the investigator/company/institution that funded the research. Everyone plays politics, unfortunately.
A - (from farmerhaley:)  Q9 - A LOT! The methods in which farmers use to care for their animals today all evolved out of available research. #agchat

A - from (diana_prichard:) Q9 Value is dependent on methodology. If the research is sound, I put a tremendous amount of value in it. #AgChat

A -  from (judgingcoach:) Q9: Research is only as good as the people doing it. Non-producers regularly question how it's paid for/who's putting it out? #agchat

 ** There will be a blog post regarding that last answer early next month**

 

Q10 - What are the biggest public misconceptions about farm animal welfare?

A - Where to start!?  nutrition, health care, housing, handling etc. Slaughter houses, antibiotics and nutrition are the big ones in my mind.

A - Bigger is bad or cruel. If a farmer has more than 50 animals it makes them a corporate jerk. Technology shouldn't be allowed in animal ag. 

Q11 -  Why do farmers and ranchers spend so much time, $$ and effort to keep animals healthy?
A - Because it's the right thing to do and farmers and ranchers have souls like everyone else.
A - Also, healthier animals are more productive and yield more. This means more food for a hungry world.

Q12 - How are animal welfare and antibiotic usage in livestock related.
A - Both are about responsibility at their very core. And both also contribute to a stronger, healthier and more productive animal.

Q13 - Let's help each other. Who are the animal welfare experts you recommend learning more about or from?
A - Well, I am one so first I try to come up with an answer myself. But I've worked with Temple Grandin on projects and learned a lot from her.
A - Bud Williams is also an animal handling pioneer and has some great methods.

Q14 - How can animal agriculture be more proactive in welfare?
A - Allow more tours of slaughter plants and handling facilities. Public is afraid of unknown. Make them familiar & they'll be more accepting

Q15 - This year, I will personally do ____ to foster convo regarding animal welfare.
A - I will do a better job of posting more animal welfare related posts that are easy to comprehend and can connect with consumers better.
** I think this post is a good work on my answer for number 15**

So those are my answers - if you want to see what the rest of the Twitterverse said regarding animal welfare, you can check out the archives.

Anyone want to add anything? Discuss methods, my answers, your opinions? Any non-ag folks out there with questions about animal handling or processing? I went to school to answer questions just like this and have worked, done trials and seen different methods in lots of different settings and would love to chat with you! Feel free to ask me any questions regarding animal behavior or welfare and I'll do my absolute best to answer them!

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

PETA Targets Kids With Christmas Billboard

Apparently, PETA knows no bounds. They have now taken to targeting children with their venomous lies about animal agriculture and the most recent incident is a billboard that poses the question:  "Kids, if you wouldn't eat your cat, why eat a turkey?"

I can answer that - a cat is a pet. It sleeps on your bed, eats mice (yuck) and coughs up hairballs.

Turkey, on the other hand, is a farm animal that was created by God for consumption. They eat grain in a farm setting and wild turkeys eat acorns, seeds, flower buds, insects etc. I'd much rather eat some grain, acorn or insect fed turkey than a cat that eats rodents. I've eaten bugs before but I would have to be pretty desperate to eat rat.

The video also says that PETA hopes kids will choose tofurkey for Christmas dinner.

Scuse me? You've got to be freakin' kidding me. Most kids will eat what is put on their plate but I don't know a single child who would request tofurkey over real turkey. People be crazy these days.

Check out the video below - what do you think? Has PETA crossed the line....again?



I'm starting to believe that PETA is desperate for people to take them seriously. I think they need some serious PR help.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

PETA @ the Kansas State Fair

I'm going to the Kansas State Fair this weekend and I'm pretty excited about it. I haven't been in about 4 years (where has the time gone?) and I am also very excited to see a particular booth....

As you probably guessed from the title, I'll be stopping by the PETA booth. If you haven't seen this news yet, it reports that PETA cannot show its graphic and very highly likely, false, undercover videos on large screens so that people will be drawn. I agree with the judges decision because if I was a parent, I would want to control what my children could watch and showing a graphic video on a large screen would prevent me from doing that. And here are some of his thoughts:

In rejecting the group's request for that restraining order, Marten said restrictions imposed by fair officials were minimal and did not constitute any significant infringement on PETA's free speech rights. However, Marten declined to dismiss PETA's lawsuit, as the state had requested.

Marten noted fair officials are not preventing PETA from showing its undercover video. Instead, he said, this could be as simple as turning a TV screen away from the public flow down the aisle

Just to clarify, I am going out of pure curiosity. Not to rile anyone up, cause a ruckus, rock the boat or upset the fruit basket. I just want to know what their goals are and perhaps how they decided on the Kansas State Fair as a venue for outreach.

Has anyone out there ever had a conversation with animal rights activists or extremists? I'd love to hear you experiences!

Oh and although yesterday I said that that is wasn't a fashion blog (because it's not and I'm rarely put together) I did put another outfit today. Mainly because I'm working on one of my 101 in 1001 goals this week and that requires skirts/dresses which requires a little more planning than a top, plain pants and flats. Which is my usual get-up. I'm very exciting and like to take risks (sarcasm intended). Without further ado...

Blazer: Maurices

Blouse: The Buckle (many moons ago), similar

Skirt: Banana Republic clearance at factory store, similar from PiperLime but no tie front

Shoes: Maurices(many moons ago), similar from JCP

Necklace: some wild safari thing with a tiger head from Charlotte Russe, similar

Steer horn bracelet: R.M. Williams (Australia), similar

I have a few favorite fashion blogs, if you have a spare second you should check them out!

Wimmer Wimmer Chicken Dinner - Sheridan is so stylish and cute, it's ridic

Uber Chic For Cheap - this girl puts together outfits from affordable pieces and also posts sales and hairstyles

Farmer's Trophy Wife - you can send in requests for outfit building and she whips them right up! Also finds affordable stuff and great decorating ideas too!

Until next time,

~ Buzzard ~

Animal Rights Activists Aren't Stupid

There are A LOT of people out there who make comments like "those guys are such idiots" and "they're so stupid - why do they act that way?" in regards to  animal rights activists. This is infuriating on two levels.

1) Animal rights activists are NOT dumb, contrary to popular belief. The board of directors and the leadership of The Humane Society of the United States are comprised of lawyers, MBAs, PhDs (in biochemistry, wildlife ecology and management and economics) veterinarians, doctors, CPAs and individuals with history and literature degrees (cough: Wayne Pacelle and Mark Markarian). These folks are most assuredly not stupid. I have a Masters of Science in Animal Science and it was a rough process and journey in my life. Getting a PhD is not any easier.  

 PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals - by the way, I don't know anyone who isn't for the ethical treatment of animals) is not much different. 'Leaders' armed with degrees in communications, journalism and accomplished debaters man the helm of perhaps one of the most extreme animal rights groups in the world.

2) I have said before how I am a very passionate person about a few things: rodeo, agriculture, K-State and my family. Because of this personality characteristic (which some cite as a flaw), I have deep respect for others who show that same amount of passion towards their hobbies and causes. Unfortunately, that respect flows over to people who want to put my family and I out a job. Ironic, eh? So these folks may be misguided - they don't rely on proven science when it comes to livestock production and they do crazy stunts to get people's attention - that's passionate and smart, even if it is misguided.

By thinking that the other side is stupid, we're putting them at a huge disadvantage. Underestimating our opposition is a costly mistake. Growing up playing softball, basketball, volleyball and roping I was taught to never underestimate the talent of the other team/individual. Just because someone may not consistently be winning doesn't mean they won't whup you if you're not playing your best. You see it in college sports all the time - the underdog wins by a small margin because the bigger, better team thought it would be a cakewalk (cough: KU here, here and here).

 Lastly, although they may be extreme, the actions taken by groups like PETA are effective because they garner hordes of media attention and they go after celebrities who don't align with their views. Here are a few examples:
 - Convincing Calvin Klein to stop designing with fur after leading a raid of his office, 
 - Pressuring GM to stop using animals in crash tests by storming the auto company’s float in the Rose Parade
 - Lobbying Gillette to halt tests on animals by wheeling a TV into the company’s cafeteria to show graphic undercover footage of the gruesome experiments.

Don't forget stunts like this:

 or this

 or this

and this commercial that somehow tried to connect veganism and bedroom activites (although it was met with harsh criticism as being too sexually abusive in nature).



These were all smart campaigns and they won't stop happening. The sooner that we as agriculturalists stop saying "they're stupid" and start respecting their ingenuity and meeting it head on with our own intelligent acts, the sooner we can make headway on our own endeavors. I know that agriculture is doing a much better job than we were 5 years ago at outreach and engagement but we can always do better.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~


As usual, this is my sole opinion and is not reflective of any other entity or individual's thoughts or ideas.

OH! and p.s. - I am not a fashionista and this is not a fashion blog but I was so proud of myself for putting together a professional outfit that I just have to post it here! If you want real fashionista looks check out Sheridan's blog

 Dress: Banana Republic  - clearance at Outlet Store (it has pockets!!)

Shoes: Guess - courtesy of Rebecca Acheson

Necklace - Francesca's Collections in blue (turquoise is gone)

Cuff - Maurices

Turquoise Ring - South African gift from hubsy

 

Another One Bites the Gestation Crate Dust

While the rest of the U.S. is abuzz about a case of BSE being found in California - something I am not scared about at all, since I know the safety of our food supply (more on that here) - I am more concerned about this recent piece of news.

Burger King becomes first US national chain to pledge cage-free pork, eggs

That's right, another chain has jumped on the bandwagon.

I recently wrote an article about the quickly disappearing use of gestation crates in the U.S. and worldwide on http://swineweb.com.  I won't paste that article here because I want you to visit the site so please do so by clicking on this link.

The state of our animal agriculture industry concerns me - I hope that I never live to see the day that a real live Hunger Games era exists.

Until next time (probably two weeks),
~ Buzzard ~

Who Takes Credit for Agriterrorism?

If you haven't yet heard, earlier this week Harris Ranch in California was the victim of a horrible animal rights activist attack in which fourteen of their trucks used to transport cattle were set on fire and completely destroyed. After news reports surfaced, the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) stepped up to take credit for the horrendous acts.

I'm sorry. Took credit?

Generally, people take credit for an accomplishment. This was a malicious attack, NOT an accomplishment. Harris Rach CEO, John Harris, is appalled at the "senseless and alarming attacks" which are, in my opinion, easily classified as domestic terrorism. These actions are unwarranted and unacceptable and I hope that the Fresno County police can get to the bottom of this whole thing.

A direct quote in the email authored by the activists says:

"We weren't sure how well this was going to work, so we waited until there were news reports before writing this," the statement said. "We were extremely pleased to see that all 14 trucks 'were a total loss' with some being 'completely melted to the ground.'"

The e-mail ended with, "Until next time."

People, pay attention. These so-called activists (I prefer the term agriterrorists) are not playing nice or fair. Apparently, it's common-practice within their circles to start cattle trucks on fire and endanger human lives for the sake of making a point (a poor point, at that). It seems that they will stop at nothing to push their cause. In fact, the United States Department of Homeland Security classifies ALF as a "domestic terrorist organization."  Their stated objectives are:

• To inflict economic damage on those who profit from the misery and exploitation of animals.
• To liberate animals from places of abuse, i.e. laboratories, factory farms, fur farms etc., and place them in good homes where they may live out their natural lives, free from suffering.
• To reveal the horror and atrocities committed against animals behind locked doors, by performing nonviolent direct actions and liberations
• To take all necessary precautions against harming any animal, human and non-human.
• Any group of people who are vegetarians or vegans and who carry out actions according to ALF guidelines have the right to regard themselves as part of the ALF.

These are not the objectives of a sane organization interested in reaching compromise. These are the objectives of extremists, whose goal is get rid of our industry. I am sick of it.

To the so called activists - whoever you are. You have done nothing but inflame the malcontent that the entire agriculture community feels towards you. Before, we just despised how you used money, fancy wording and sensational advertising to push your false agenda. After this malicious attack, you can rest assured that we are even more ticked off than before. You have physically and forcefully attacked our way of life, our livelihood, livestock and families. You have been warned - our efforts to inform society of your true goals and sneaky tactics will increase hundred-fold. I can only hope that the guilty parties are found and brought to justice.

So how do you feel? Are you ticked? I sure am. Leave me your thoughts below.

If you want to read up on the attacks click here, here or here. To read John Harris's full statement, click here.

Until next time,

~ Buzzard ~

E6 Ranch Suffers the Consequences

Whether you care to admit it or not, we're all probably at least a little bit happy about this news update. Regardless of who committed the cruel acts at E6 Ranch, someone needed to be charged and punished for the inexecusable acts.

About two weeks ago (yes, I am this far behind on my blogging) Dairy Herd Network's email newsletter informed me that seven people, including ranch owner Kirt Espenson, had been charged in the E6 Ranch case. Bravo. Espenson was charged with Class A Misdemeanor animal cruelty (he wasn't engaged in the acts on video) and the six employees charged with felony animal cruelty. If found guilty, which in all actuality should and probably will happen, the felony charge carries a two year jail sentence and the misdemeanor charge is a one year jail stint.

Nathan Runkle, executive director of Mercy For Animals, said "We hope that this case and the action by law enforcement sends a strong message to the dairy industry that animal cruelty will not be tolerated." Espenson told officials that he had fired four employees over the horrible acts and hired a professional trainer to lead training programs in humane handling and proper euthanasia.

Thus far, I've been unsuccessful at finding out a court date, as dockets weren't available for most of July and August. But I'll be sure to keep the blogging world updated on the goings on of this case. It's essential that the world knows that farmers and ranchers don't tolerate or condone this type of behavior and that it is not the norm in our industry.

What are your thoughts? Do you think justice is being served appropriately? I'm anxious to hear feedback on this one.

Until next time (I promise it won't be another 8 days before my next post),
~ Buzzard ~

Which Is More Appropriate: Slaughter or Harvest?

Is 'Involuntary Conversion to Protein' PC Enough For You?

In today's animal agriculture society, it's nearly impossible to go a single day without overhearing a conversation, reading a newspaper story or watching a news release about animal welfare.

Let me start off by saying that I don't really care for the term animal welfare because many people tend to confuse it with animals rights - which is wrong. I prefer animal well-being, but that's not what this post is about. Yes, I know you're anxious to find out, but first please familiarize yourself with the definitions below.

Animal rights (animal liberation) - the idea that the most basic interests of non-human animals should be afforded the same consideration as the similar interests of human beings (Taylor, Angus. Animals & Ethics).

Animal welfare - the physical and psychological well-being of animals. The term 'animal welfare' can also mean human concern for an animal's welfare or well-being (Hewson, Caroline J. 2003). I'd like to point out that farmers and ranchers believe in animal welfare/well-being, and do so by providing humane care and supervision to livestock to ensure a safely produced and consumed product. However, very few, if any, farmers and ranchers believe their animals should be afforded the same rights as humans.

Ok - you know the difference now, right? Great. Moving on.
As with all things, the way a person words or speaks a phrase can strongly alter the connotation. For example, in the animal science world, a hot button issue is the harvest vs. slaughter terminology debate. Meaning, when animals are ready to be sent to the packing plant and rendered into savory, delicious meat products, should their death and passage into the afterlife be labeled as with other food sources like corn (harvest) or as what is really occurring (slaughter)?

I recently conducted a survey on Twitter of what is preferred and here are some of the replies I got back.

As you can see the agriculture industry is rather divided on this topic.

Temple Grandin, world renowned animal behaviorist, has said, "We are slaughtering these animals. We are raising them for a purpose," and I have personally had a conversation with Temple where she said, "We harvest crops, not cattle." So, it's safe to say that Temple is pro-'slaughter'.

However, many other agriculturalists prefer 'harvest' because when chatting with a consumer foreign to the agriculture industry, 'harvest' is much friendlier to the ears and conveys a more appealing visual image. I understand their point - harvest doesn't scream the direct killing (i.e. blood) of an animal but subtly allows it to creep into our minds as an afterthought. "Oh, animals are harvested. How nice."

There are also many people who prefer the term process however, regardless of the jargon used to explain what happens to an animal before it becomes the scrumptious main feature of my dinner, it's critical to realize that animal well-being must always be at the forefront of slaughter/harvesting facilities and practices. The terminology doesn't matter if the care isn't present.

I'll save my opinion on this one for another day (or maybe you've already deduced what I prefer); what I'm really interested in is YOUR opinion. Leave a comment and tell your friends, what do you prefer? What do you say in your daily conversations? I'm really anxious to hear what comes from this.

Until next time,
~ Buzzard ~

After-thought: Above, I said Temple is pro-slaughter. She is highly in favor of using the word 'slaughter' but stresses that the practice should be low stress and humane. Just wanted to reiterate that. :)