UPDATE: ABC News reports HSUS donations will stop. Yellow Tail in pledge to Animal Ag Alliance (http://bit.ly/9dZrVS) said “Being farmers ourselves we support those who care for their land and their environment, just as we do. We are proud of our rural heritage and value a solid relationship with agricultural communities around the world…”
Dear Mr. Pacelle,
Your recent “urgent request for help” caught my attention. First I passed it off as another attempt to line your deep coffers with the goal of “raising $200,000 as a ‘counterpunch’ to one of our more persistent critics.” Then I rolled my eyes at hypocrisy of your description of Richard Berman and David Martosko as “shadowy flim-flam artists” and “an unprincipled group that gleefully stands in the way of all efforts to help animals so long as someone pays them to do it.” Given the fact that the Humane Society of the United States runs campaigns that Mike Rowe’s website has pointed to as “unethical” and law students held up as a bad example of fundraising, your name-calling seemed a bit extreme.
But I took note when you said that Berman & Martosko “openly encouraged factory farming interests to protest against a corporate partner of The HSUS. This partner company donated $100,000 to help cover the costs of our animal rescue efforts.” The only factory here is HSUS spin-doctoring. If you take a look at the backlash to Yellow Tail’s ill-fated decision to add to your $200,000,000 in assets (as reported to the IRS), it will likely give you a few tips about a genuine grassroots movement.
You see, those of us in agriculture care deeply about values such as community, work ethic and standing up for what’s right. While your sensationalized videos try to paint a different image, farmers and ranchers pour their lifetimes into their land and animals – because they care enough to do what’s right – even in 4 feet of snow, floods and hurricanes. Perhaps it’s difficult for you to relate to those values since HSUS only spent $7 million of the $34 million you raised around Hurricane Katrina for helping animals in that area. Given the way you’ve worked to divide sectors within agriculture, I know you understand that people in our business are independent-minded and don’t take kindly to being told what to do. That’s exactly why your theory of Berman & Martosko doesn’t fly. Let’s take a look at the timeline to see if this was a “corporate” effort or genuinely grassroots.
- Jan. 25 – 75 tweets mentioning YellowTail
- Jan. 27 – Sportsmans Alliance wrote a letter to Deutsch & Sons LTD
- Jan. 29 – 150+ mentions of YellowTail on Twitter
- Feb 3 a.m. – Troy Hadrick posted on Yellowtail’s facebook page, then mentioned it on Advocates For Ag FB page and Twitter
- Feb 3 –Yellow Fail Created on Facebook
- Feb 3 5:42 p.m. – Yellowtail tweeted an update
- Feb 3 & 4 – Over 1500 tweets/day mentioning YellowTail
- Feb 4 – Troy Hadrick blogs about YellowTail
- Feb 4 – 5:08 p.m. Yellowtail announced funds go to animal rescue
- Feb 4 – Yours truly blogs & tweets about Cute Kittens, Playful Puppies and HSUS Lies
- Feb 4 – Corn Commentary Blog
- Feb 4 – Hundreds of comments posted on YellowTail Facebook fan page
- Feb 4 – Drovers: Just Say G’Day to Yellow Tail
- Feb 4 – Agropinion blog
- Feb 4 – Beef daily blog
- Feb 5 – Discussion started on CNN and Fox FB pages after hundreds of comments are posted on YellowTail Fan Page
- Feb 5 – 1:45 pm Nebraska TV picked the story up
- Feb 5 – Twibbon was created by Brian Hoffman
- Feb 5 – Troy Hadrick posted video on FB
- Feb 6 – Facebook posts & tweets continue – many from outside of agriculture
- Feb 6 – Trent Loos goes on air with NTV
- Feb 6 – Mentioned in Lake County IL News
- Feb 7 – Blog on Toughsledding
- Feb 7 – Agropinion blog #2
- Feb 8 – Mentioned on agwired
- Feb 8 – Consumer Freedom mentions Yellow Tail in their daily update
- Feb 9 – Oklahoma Farm Report
- Feb 9 – Farm and Dairy
- Feb 9 – Going Local FB page posted & announced on Twitter to help people protesting YellowTail’s HSUS contribution learn how to support their local animal shelter.
- Feb 10 – Drovers article
- Feb 10 – High Plains/Midwest Ag Journal
- Feb 10 – Smarter Faster, SM blog
- Feb 10 – Animal Ag Alliance sent letter
- Feb 12 – PR Daily News mention of Drovers article
- Feb 13 – American Farm Bureau Federation Bob Stallman sends letter
- Feb 14 – New York Post
- Feb 15 – DR Vino Blog
And the list continues…with thousands of folks inside and outside of agriculture expressing their opinion to YellowTail. YellowFail on Facebook is getting more than two thousand views daily. Sportsmen and pet owners have spoken out with voices as loud as the farm community. Mr. Pacelle, this is a genuine grassroots effort because people want to let YellowTail know it’s wrong to support an organization with questionable campaigning. You can see that Consumer Freedom (Berman and Martosko’s group) didn’t post anything until several days into the YellowTail backlash. The reality is that people were distressed that a company selling a value-added farm product would support an organization that works to litigate, regulate and insult those who produce our food. The reality is that we don’t have a slick letter-writing, e-mail generating, spin doctoring machine like the HSUS media factory.
Yet, we can stand up for human values of integrity and truth. I’m proud of the farmers, hunters and pet owners leading this grassroots effort. The outcry against YellowTail involves people who wanted others to know the truth behind “not-for-profits” like HSUS. While I realize you may not relish that perspective, I hope you can appreciate the power of the movement, respect the individual voices involved and admire the way people responded through social media. That is, after all, what you spend the golden coffers of HSUS doing. In this case, it was done without a puppeteer pulling strings or spending any dollars.
Thanks for giving us a chance to show American citizens can make an impact through exercising our voices, finding others who share our interest in the truth and demonstrating what a community can do when it is genuinely grassroots. If it would help you feel better, I’ll be glad to buy you a dinner of pork, steak, or chicken – but without the YellowTail.
Regards,
Michele Payn-Knoper
On behalf of farmers, ranchers, sportsmen and pet owners
Gate to Plate Blog by Michele Payn-Knoper 
February 19, 2010 at 1:30 pm
Great job!!!!! Now that is GRASSROOTS!!!
February 19, 2010 at 3:16 pm
Jodi, you were right on top of this one! Appreciate your comments and hope you’ll share it with every hunter, family farmer and pet owner you know. Voices working together…
February 19, 2010 at 1:36 pm
Well said Michele, nice job!
February 19, 2010 at 3:15 pm
Thanks, I hope people will share it as an example of how 1.5% of the population can bring truth to light!
February 19, 2010 at 2:14 pm
Humanewatch.org is just out with HSUS’s 2008 tax return. Less than one half of one percent of HSUS funds went to animal care. HSUS is not charity, it’s a scam.
February 19, 2010 at 3:13 pm
Thanks for sharing – I ran out of room to list all of the resources. Facts are there on the IRS form, folks.
February 19, 2010 at 2:57 pm
What a fantastic article, Michele! I want to stand and sing the National Anthem!! Way to go, grassroots community!
February 19, 2010 at 3:13 pm
Thanks for the laugh, Lu. Family farmers like you were the reason behind the piece!
February 19, 2010 at 3:00 pm
Very well said. You Go Girl! Impressive list. Great research.
February 19, 2010 at 3:15 pm
Thanks, but I cannot take credit. Farmer, hunters and pet owners have been watching this very closely. Again, it is a grassroots effort.
February 19, 2010 at 3:16 pm
What a wonderful write up! I truly hope that people start opening their eyes to the truth of HSUS and PETA. At our National specialty dog show we have a HUGE wine drinking group. All of us have put down our Yellow Tail and will continue to do so. Keep up the good work and we stand with you!
I love to fish, hunt, and I’m from a proud farming family!
February 19, 2010 at 3:18 pm
Erica, what an excellent example. I love wine and Australian wine is a personal favorite (though we support American wineries, as well). Never thought much of Yellow Tail personally, but I wouldn’t feed the stuff to our cows now. Thanks for sharing the truth with your national specialty dog group.
February 19, 2010 at 3:36 pm
Thank you, Michele! Your expression of the grassroots farming movement against Yellow Tail’s donation is impressive and best I’ve seen yet!
February 22, 2010 at 9:11 am
Appreciate that support, Kim.The best thing you can do is share it with your friends and family so people know the truth.
February 19, 2010 at 3:47 pm
Thanks again for speaking from the heart and telling the truth about agriculture and farmers.
February 22, 2010 at 9:28 am
Chris, I appreciate your support, but the reality is that each person in agriculture must speak from the heart and have the truth be told. Your neighbors and friends need to hear it from you, not a professional speaker! 🙂
February 19, 2010 at 3:56 pm
The Humane Society does so much good for abused and uncared for animals. I hate to see you bash them in this way. While you may not agree with their tactics, they are only trying to help God’s creatures. I respect the ag industry and farmers everywhere, but no one needs to choose sides here. Everyone is just trying to do what they think is right. I thank you for your work on farming, and I thank the HSUS for their work protecting the most vulnerable.
February 19, 2010 at 4:03 pm
Bonnie, thanks for your comments. I am a pet owner and love animals. I support local shelters. But HSUS is not about helping God’s creatures – they are spending millions against the farmers you respect. I tried to provide the facts of HSUS campaigns – take a look at the links that clearly show their campaigning and expenditures. I’d urge you to consider giving to your local animal shelter.
February 20, 2010 at 8:28 pm
Bonnie,
Perhaps you really need to re-evaluate your decision making paradigm. This isn’t about one group (CCF) slamming and badmouthing another (HSUS) but about laying the cards on the table.
HSUS has never done anything to protect pets that they couldn’t turn a profit on.
Remember Michael Vick? Oh Yea, HSUS got millions in donations, but the truth (verifiable at that) is they demanded of the court that ALL the dogs were killed. This includes new born puppies. How did HSUS protect the most vunerable puppies by demanding their Death? So before you go drinking the HSUS Kool aid, you MIGHT want to research who you’re giving your money to.
February 22, 2010 at 6:54 pm
Bonnie,
It can be very confusing, but there is no connection between your local Humane Society and HSUS. We were just a local fund-raiser for our Humane Society. I could not figure out why they needed money. HSUS is posting huge dollars, why would our local Humane Society need any help. I asked them and they made it very clear that ALL Humane Societies are individuals. On a side note, less than 1% or HSUS’s budget goes to rescuing animals.
Ben
February 19, 2010 at 4:09 pm
Outstanding post Michele! 100% support from agri-marketers here in Iowa!
February 22, 2010 at 9:28 am
Great, glad to hear it, hope you’ll share it with everyone you work with in Iowa.
February 19, 2010 at 5:49 pm
Now, can someone PLEASE educate Oprah????
February 19, 2010 at 9:12 pm
Thanks Michele for the letter to Wayne. I sense a change in the air and its not good for HSUS.
February 22, 2010 at 9:29 am
We should always believe that truth will prevail. Keep help spreading that word, Bill.
February 19, 2010 at 10:18 pm
I was working on information for one of our Wisconsin NPR stations on this, and the many sides of it. Bad planning, grassroots, HSUS evidence and background.
Now I’m sending them the link to this page in hopes that THIS is the true story they discuss. Thank you for all your hard work.
February 22, 2010 at 9:32 am
Barb, hopefully this will clearly illustrate how farmers, pet owners and hunters worked to have their voices be heard. It’s ridiculous to say this was any sort of corporate effort. If they need an interview, I’ll be glad to visit with them over the phone or point them to a couple of farmers who have tracked this. Thanks for sharing the post.
February 20, 2010 at 12:55 am
Speak truth to power! Thank you! Donate to your local shelter where the help is needed and you know where it goes!
February 22, 2010 at 9:32 am
Agreed, and if you don’t know how to do that, the Going Local page on Facebook can help you. Thanks for your comments.
February 20, 2010 at 9:04 am
One can see where their money goes if you donate to local shelters. What if people who found themselves needing to rehome their animal for any reason, – FIRST tried to find a home for an animal themselves, before taking it to a shelter or animal control. If this reduced the shelter population by ten percent, it would be worth it. Please do not donate to HSUS – know that your money is actually helping animals.
Letter to Wayne was inspiring but when Wayne started trying to take food out of our mouths, he may have forgotten that farmers and ranchers are the backbone of the USA, that is, if you enjoy eating most anything!
February 20, 2010 at 2:04 pm
YES! What Michelle said!
My wife and I are dog owners and hobby breeders of a litter or two per year. We saw the whole thing unfold and it was the REAL thing, Wayne — a grassroots effort. When a real business gets involved with your lying (about where your money goes, the amount actually spent on pet animal care, the ‘benefits’ to animals from your legislation and litigation, and more) HSUS, people notice and they speak out.
Stick to raising your money from the kool-aid drinkers. Don’t bother the legitimate businesses.
February 20, 2010 at 4:02 pm
We CAN make a difference. Over the past 6-12 months, I see more and more people opening their eyes to what HSUS really is; more and more articles in the media as well. We dog owners/breeders have been fighting them for at least 15 years. There is so much anti-animal ownership legislation that they have introduced in that time, and sadly some have passed. We cannot support those that get into bed with HSUS. And we need to make a lot of noise! We can only hit them financially. Less money will make them weaker. HSUS is writing bills these days; this has got to stop!
February 20, 2010 at 7:24 pm
Great article!!! Says it in a nut shell. You go, girl!
February 20, 2010 at 10:25 pm
Cheers, stand behind you on this all the way well written!
February 21, 2010 at 1:47 am
Thanks so much for your recognition of the value of real people speaking out for what is right. Our farmers and ranchers are the ones working outside in this bitter winter to see that all of their animals receive care. HSUS is nowhere near. Thank you to every American farmer we can eat well!
February 23, 2010 at 9:32 am
REAL people are what make our world a better place, not organizations raising millions on false campaigns. You are correct that farmers & ranchers work outside in blizzards and blistering heat – and that we need to say thank you for putting food on our plate.
February 23, 2010 at 9:39 am
In addition, our agricultural production is the root of our society. We use agricultural products to produce so much more than just our food. As a nurse I see things like pig values for heart patients, medicines from animals and plants. Plastics, cosmetics, fuel, fibers, etc… come from ag. Not to mention the contribution agriculture is to our balance of trade. And, in America 98% of the people can choose some other career or job because less than 2% of the people provide food, fiber, fuel and so much more for everyone else. We have so very many reasons to be thankful and support our farmers and ranchers!
February 21, 2010 at 11:58 am
Telling it like it is, and politely. Thanks for all you do MPK! This Grass-roots revolution is just beginning.
February 23, 2010 at 9:31 am
Robin, it takes all of us “telling it like it is.” The beauty of the story is the thousands of people involved in getting the truth out there!
February 21, 2010 at 12:24 pm
This is the best movement yet and keep it going as HSUS intends to end all animal ownership. Everyone check your local animal advisory board for animal rights terrorists. Remember these people want to end all domestic animal ownership. A sentient being not only feels pain and pleasure, but a sentient being must also have other aspects of the mind and consciousness, such as creativity, intelligence, sapience, self-awareness, and intentionality (the ability to have thoughts that mean something or are “about” something). Pete Singers definition of sentience uses only part of the meaning. You cannot put animals on the same level as humans because they are not sentient beings. Domestic animals require human care to survive. You also have biology that to ensure the survival of all species designed each species to eat another species. You cannot go against biology and these people think they can fight mother nature with a false philosophy. Please note that 1 out of every 5 human beings cannot get protein from vegetable matter. Human beings are omnivores but we get important irreplaceable nutrients from meat. HSUS has brought out a dangerous dog food that cannot be fed to puppies because it is very low grade vegetable protein no meat. On top of that it is made in another country increasing the carbon foot print. They intend to have these nuts feed their dogs a vegan diet when dogs do not have the digestive system to get protein from vegetables. This how far gone these people are and they want to push this onto you. Right now HSUS is lobbying congress to ban interstate sale and trade on goats and sheep, chickens, dogs and cats by
February 23, 2010 at 9:30 am
Thanks for all of the background info. This is an important issue for pet owners, those who enjoy animals in entertainment venues such as circus, and people who hunt.
February 21, 2010 at 12:30 pm
Sorry did not get to repair last line of previous post. Look for this new scam in your city or state. Animal rights activists try to ban the sale and movement by using the latin terms for domesticated animals and list those that are wild while neglecting to mention that domesticated animals also fall into that category. See example plan below that almost happened in Arizona.
Monday. Representative admitted that The language for this bill
was provided by HSUS to the staff writers!
The title of this bill sounds good, doesn’t it? But, let’s take alook at the “dangerous wildlife” that “A person shall not import or transport into the this state, or sell, trade or release within this state or have in his possession possess any live wildlife exceptas authorized by the commission,as provided by section 17-321 or asdefined in title 3, chapter 16.”
* All species of the order carnivora. Common names include:carnivores,skunks, raccoons, bears, foxes and weasels. What this bill doesn’t point out is that the order carnivora INCLUDES ALL DOGS AND CATS!
* The family bovidae – which includes GOATS, SHEEP AND COWS but has an exemption for water buffalo! Although what makes a water buffalo less dangerous than a cow I can’t imagine. This bill would instantly put all the cattle, sheep and dairy farmers out of business in the state.
* Quail, turtles, grouse, fish and practically every mammal and non-mammal a person could think of having as a pet are listed as”dangerous.”
I don’t know what’s more alarming: The fact that these representatives didn’t understand the bill sponsored. Or the fact that they understand it completely and hope the citizens of Arizona don’t understand it.
February 21, 2010 at 12:47 pm
HSUS poll vote : Do you believe.
Scroll down to the bottom if you don’t want to read all the propaganda, vote
YES!!!!
We need votes here, on this group that drinks the HSUS Kool Aid daily.
http://www.care2.com/causes/animal-welfare/blog/hsus-targeted-by-watchdog-group/
Keep voting!
Please crosspost.
March 9, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Check up on the poll today. It’s at 61% yes. Keep those votes coming in folks.
February 22, 2010 at 12:30 am
Thanks for continuing your grassroots efforts. Like yours, the website, mikeroweworks.com is a grassroots effort with a focus on bringing the country’s attention to the need for a real PR campaign for hard work and to reduce or eliminate the stigmas associated with a trade job.
I just wanted to point out that while the article you reference is on Mike Rowe’s website, that particular article was written by SRW and not by Mike.
Thanks – and best of luck.
February 22, 2010 at 9:13 am
Hello, Sam, nice to connect with you. I’ve updated the article that it was Mike Rowe’s site – thanks for clarifying. I wondered who SRW is, but appreciate the clarification. Agriculture deeply appreciates the site’s continued focus on work ethic and truth.
February 22, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Michele,
Thank you for your kind offer to help with my WPR story idea. They have yet to respond. May I have your phone number (privately) please? They may wish to contact you as they’re making their decision.
Thank you
February 23, 2010 at 9:18 am
Glad we’ve connected through email.
February 23, 2010 at 9:20 am
As always, great job!
February 23, 2010 at 9:38 am
Wonder what H$U$ says about the racketeering lawsuit filed filed against them by Feld Entertainment http://humanewatch.org/index.php/documents/detail/racketeering_lawsuit_filed_against_hsus_and_its_lawyers
February 23, 2010 at 9:58 am
Okay, purely for the sake of argument, let’s assume, as most the commenters here are, that PETA and the HSUS are good-for-nothings that don’t help animals.
Does that someone mean that exploiting animals is okay now? No. In the end, no matter how “nice” or “humane” you are to your animals, they are killed simply for our own appetite. It is death caused by our own hands which is completely unnecessary for our survival or well-being. You can dog (no pun intended) HSUS or PETA or any other place (indeed, I won’t disagree with you that they have their downsides), but just because they have flaws doesn’t mean the immoral suddenly becomes moral. And I’d be happy to discuss the morality of eating/using/wearing animals at any time– because the moral argument has nothing to do with grassroots movements or non-profits or Twitter or anything else. It has to do with truth.
And put simply, using animals (causing them pain and suffering and denying them their right to live without being slaves to us) is wrong. Why? Because as I said, it’s totally unnecessary. So by using or consuming animal products, we knowingly exploit the helpless for the sake of our appetite or mere convenience. There is absolutely no way to justify it unless you are to be Descartesian and pronounce all non-human animals to be merely machines that cannot think or feel pain.
February 23, 2010 at 2:52 pm
Cody,
First, I fundamentally disagree with your positions regarding the morality of eating/using/wearing animals. I think your position is indefensible from the religious angle, the scientific angle and more. But my response is not about that issue. I respect your opinions no different than many others with which I disagree.
The issue with PETA/HSUS is far different than the Animal Rights argument. In the case of PETA, that someone should have to fear for their life for disagreeing with PETA’s positions is just fundamentally flawed and I won’t go there.
Regarding HSUS, the issue for many of us who have a love/care for animals in so many different ways really comes down to one word, deception. It seems HSUS always talks about how many shelters they have, plaster pictures of cute puppies and kittens all over their website, and than spend the vast majority of their donations fighting for more and increased regulations and laws that hurt so many family operations who provide excellent care and compassion towards the animals they have.
Or the heart tugging pleading for money when disasters such as Hurricane Katrina and the Haiti earthquake stike, and the reality that so little of this money goes where the donor is lead to believe.
Like I said, we have a fundamental disagreement about animal issues, but I respect your willingness to clearly state your beliefs. If HSUS was so open and transparent the frustrations felt by many animal lovers/care-givers would be much less I believe.
February 23, 2010 at 3:07 pm
I think you missed my point. I want to be clear that what PETA does or HSUS does is irrelevant in the big picture. We should be talking about the moral issues at stake here, and while we could make an argument for PETA/HSUS doing something moral or immoral in how they run their non-profit, I think that in the big picture, that isn’t very important.
With that said, the big picture (being the discussion over the exploitation of animals for food, clothes, entertainment, etc.) is what’s really significant here. In what way is my position indefensible? There is absolutely no need for eating animals, for instance, and we know scientifically (read: objectively) that animals have the ability to feel pain, and suffer, so even if you do not afford them the basic right to live without being human-controlled property, you must (unless you ignore science) acknowledge that they are not simply resources to be used, but are living, breathing creatures able to feel pain, fear, happiness, and security. And again, scientifically speaking, in the most basic of ways, non-human animals are not unlike ourselves. That is why they’re in the same kingdom with us.
I don’t need religion to defend my positions, though if you are interested in it, I’d love to talk about that with you, too. The only thing needed to defend my position is whatever innate reasoning tells us that killing another human is wrong, plus a little bit of basic science. Philosophy can be thrown in for good measure.
Put simply, knowingly doing something that is not necessary for one’s own survival or well-being but causes suffering or pain to someone else is essentially the definition of cruelty.
Whether or not HSUS or PETA are the world’s best non-profits or the scum of the earth non-profits, this is still a conversation that I feel is of utmost importance. Their proceedings have no bearing on what is morally acceptable and what isn’t.
February 23, 2010 at 3:32 pm
Cody,
please read a little more deeply into the issue of food for man. There is a specific vitamin that cannot be obtained from plant sources. CDC wrote a research article about the young women who delivered babies with sever birth defects because they were long term vegetarians and missing this critical nutrient.
Furthermore, plants are also living beings. Research shows that they communicate distress. For example corn plants suffering in drought actually make a high pitched cry that can be sensed by nearby plants. So it would seem we should not be pulling up their roots, and causing them pain either with your logic.
My religion does teach that God provided the animals for us to take care of, for covering, and for food. Yes we are morally expected to provide good care and when an animal is killed instantly in the current practices there is not a period of suffering. Temple Grandin has done great work to help livestock producers maintain animal comfort clear to the end.
Please also understand the basic science lesson says that we cannnot expect animal populations to grow exponetially without their suffering. There is a carrying capacity for each parcel of land. When a species within that area is overpopulated, they began to compete for food, water and space. Disease and death result, sometimes a slow starvation.
We simply do not have the resources to keep all of the animals alive, fed and reproducing at will in a “natural” state. That is actually unnatural because when you study nature, life does reward the fittest and the other ones don’t make it.
I realize we have different opinions and I have read and reread your post to understand. I hope you will do the same.
February 23, 2010 at 3:53 pm
Mary,
The vitamin you are referring to is vitamin B12. And the only reason it’s found in animals (and thus animal products) is because of bacteria. Livestock don’t magically produce B12, bacteria does. I’m well aware of B12. It is recommended that vegans take B12 supplements. The American Medical Association recommends that all adults take a multi-vitamin AND they have officially state that carefully planned vegan diets are appropriate for all stages of life, from infancy to the elderly.
Plants are living beings are as bacteria, fungi, and viruses. But only animals have central nervous systems and thus able to feel pain. A plant responding to stimuli is in no way similar to how an animal responds to stimuli. ALL living creatures will respond to stimuli. Yeast die when I put bread dough in the oven, but they have no way of feeling pain. The fact that they are alive means only that they have metabolic processes that cause them to grow or change does not mean that they feel pain.
As for religion, I assume you are speaking of Christianity. A point of interest is to note that God commanded Adam and Eve to eat only plant foods (Genesis 1:29). It was only after God sent a flood to destroy mankind because of our supposed wickedness that we were allowed to eat animals. It should be noted that when Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden, they ate plants only, according to the verse I cited.
The Bible also says to stone your wife if she’s not a virgin (Deuteronomy 22:13‐21), women should not wear fancy jewelry or braid their hair or wear expensive clothing (1 Timothy 2:9), adulterers shall be put to death (Leviticus 20:10), men with long hair are disgraceful (1 Corinthians 11:14‐15), women must be subordinate to men (Colossians 3:18, Ephesians 5:22‐24), women cannot speak in church (1 Corinthians 14:34‐36), the Bible doesn’t prohibit slavery‐‐ only regulates the treatment of slaves (Titus 2:9‐10), and slaves can be inherited “property” (Leviticus 25:44‐46). Hopefully you can
see why I think that quoting the Bible as an authority on issues of morality does not always make a whole lot of sense.
As for your reference to carrying capacity, I’m not sure what you’re saying. I don’t think any vegan has ever said that we should refrain from eating livestock but continue breeding them. Indeed, I would say that we shouldn’t exploit them at all. In a “natural state,” livestock wouldn’t exist. Livestock have been domesticated– without our exploitation, they cannot exist. No one is suggesting that we stop eating them but keep breeding them. This doesn’t make sense– I mean, as long as we are breeding them, we are still exploiting them.
And finally, I want to touch on your mention of Temple Grandin. Some praise her, as PETA has. I’d like to point out that there is no such thing as “humane” meat. How is it “humane” to cause pain and suffering unnecessarily? Hell, humane behavior is allowing assisted suicide for terminally ill human beings who wish to die, but we’ve outlawed that! Euthanizing suffering creatures is humane, enslaving and slaughtering them is not. Killing an animal when we do not need to do so can never be humane. It goes against the very definition of the word.
Thanks for your response.
February 23, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Cody,
I’d just like to touch on a brief point Mary brought up regarding over population. Even if people stopped breeding livestock, they would continue to breed on their own. Their natural insticts are to reproduce. So they will procreate naturally until they land can’t sustain them. For example, if cattle roamed free they would continue to reproduce until there wasn’t enough grass, water, and shelter for all of them. Naturally, if there isn’t enough food or water they die a slow painful death. There is a limit to the number of animals a piece of land can sustain. Left to breed on their own, it becomes survival of the fittest.
March 9, 2010 at 1:56 pm
There is another side to this debate, the natural world is not as nice a some would have you believe. We can do our best to be nice to one another, but in the wild it’s still a dog eat what ever it can catch and eat it world. Talk about suffering, we have laws about killing our food quickly and humanely. In the wild you can be torn apart and/or eaten while still alive. It’s not a nice world out there.
February 23, 2010 at 4:00 pm
Cody,
You make a very good argument about why you feel the way you do and why the rest of us should care.
I only have one question for you.
Do you refuse medical care?
February 23, 2010 at 4:14 pm
Why would I refuse medical care? That wouldn’t be “humane” to myself, now would it? No aspect of animal rights says that animals are more important than ourselves, just that animals have certain inalienable rights (like the right to live without being property). I oppose animal testing because many alternatives exist (in vitro, human studies, stem cells, computer modeling, etc), but I wouldn’t refuse emergency medical treatment. And it’s important to note that only certain specialized medical care relies on animal products or testing. For example, we are able to make insulin because animal testing and there is some debate about vaccines and animal testing, though one of the creators of the polio vaccine has stated that had they not used misleading animal trials, the vaccine would’ve been produced much earlier (but I digress).
I’m well aware that there are a fair share of medical procedures which derive from animal exploitation, but it’s not practical for me to die and in the big picture, there are much more important matters. Furthermore, steel and asphalt are often made with animal by-products (animal fat can be used as lubricant in steel production), but that certainly doesn’t mean I never use roadways or automobiles.
Veganism is about eliminating animal products and by-products from one’s life as much as practically possible.
February 23, 2010 at 4:35 pm
It’s good to know that due to advances in medicine involving animals and animal products, people like you and I can have a longer, healthier life.
February 23, 2010 at 4:39 pm
I am a registered nurse so I am well aware of the nutritional needs of people. One of the reasons AMA recommends a multi–vitamin is because we know the the majority of people do not manage their diet well enough to obtain good nutrition from their food.
Please be careful with assumptions because I did not identify my religion or state Biblical references. There are many different religions and many different religious groups that interpret the verses you quote in different ways depending on how they see the context. I only stated that my religion is accepting that as human beings we are expected to care for the animals and they can be used for food and covering.
Animals living in the natural state will continue to breed. For farmers and ranchers, their is selective breeding and management to provide for people. If we do not use animals for any human use, they would breed on their own, just like wildlife. When wildlife continue to breed uncecked by human management, they can become over populated in an area thus this space no longer has the ability to meet the needs of the population. Then, nature takes over and some become sickly, some lack adequate food, water or shelter and some die an early and many time painful death.
I understand that you do not see any valid reason to kill or use an animal so thus any killing even if painless, is wrong. On this we disagree and I respect your right to hold a different opinion.
I hope that you will consider how many ways our use of animals and agricultural production are intertwined in so many parts of our daily lives. Do you wear cosmetics, use skin care products, take medications? Would you recommend your child die instead of using a pig valve for a heart valve replacement? Would you have wanted people to die long an painful deaths from burns instead of using the pig skins we used in the past?
Our agricultural production system in the US is so efficient that 98 % of our citizens can choose to work in another career because less than 2% of the population raises enough corn, beans, vegetables, wood, and animals that the rest of us no longer need to raise our own food for our family.
Our economic prosperity has benefitted greatly from the agricultural contribution to the balance of trade.
The issue of the role that animals have in our lives is so much more complex than I could convey here. It is not so simple or so black and white.
I can assure you that the majority of the livestock that are cared for by American farmers are treated better than millions of the world’s poorest persons who need better sources of nutrients.
Not just food, water, and shelter, but things like the footcandles of desirable lighting for dairy cows, environmental temperature for pigs, minerals etc… are provided for the animals. I hope you will try to find a respect the hard working american farmer who is providing for the needs of animals even while you choose not to use animals.
This is America a nation that was established on the ideas of freedoms for the citizens and I can let you choose to be vegetarian but HSUS and others are determined to force the rest of us into their beliefs. That is also not humane in my religion.
February 23, 2010 at 4:41 pm
So it’s ok to benefit from animals with medical care – even though those were “exploited” or killed to develop techniques to save people.
If people really believe in not using animals they’d take that step. so far even among vegans I haven’t seen anyone who will sign refusing any treatment or technique developed from the use of animals. So that seems to indicate it’s ok to use animals as “I, vegan” sees justified but it’s not ok for “you meat eater” to use animals no matter how well they’re treated because “Ivegan” can get along without it (at least for awhile) so everyone else should also.
Even foods that can be gained without harming the animal.
February 23, 2010 at 4:47 pm
Do you wear cosmetics? I use vegan ones.
Do you use skin care products? Vegan ones.
Take medications? Only vegan vitamins. I don’t need actual medications at the present time, thankfully.
Would you recommend your child die instead of using a pig valve for a heart valve replacement? I’ve already addressed this question. And it’s just as likely that it could be a synthetic valve anyway.
“I can assure you that the majority of the livestock that are cared for by American farmers are treated better than millions of the world’s poorest persons who need better sources of nutrients.”
Then I’m sure you’re aware that the grain we feed to livestock in the US alone is more than enough food to feed all the world’s starving, right? Ecology 101 teaches that efficiency always goes down as you go up the food chain. Eating plants is more efficient than eating animals that eat plants.
As for religion, my apologies if you aren’t a Christian or regard the Bible in your beliefs, though I think we can both acknowledge that it’s by far what most religious people in our society would be referencing. There are also many religions which seek not to exploit animals, such as Jainism. At any rate, religion has no bearing either way on this argument, IMHO.
“I hope you will try to find a respect the hard working american farmer who is providing for the needs of animals even while you choose not to use animals.”
I do not fault any farmer, abattoir worker, or meat plant worker. Besides, they are not the ones that create the demand, they merely respond to it. Indeed, I foster no ill feeling to anyone. I’ve eaten meat before in my life– in fact, I have been vegan (and before that, a vegetarian) for less time than I ate animals previously. It’s not my place to fault or not respect anyone.
February 23, 2010 at 4:34 pm
Cody,
If my understanding is correct, you believe in good faith that it is wrong for humans to kill animals for food. You also believe in good faith that it is not wrong for humans to kill vegetables for food.
Cody, how do you reconcile these two beliefs?
Joe
February 23, 2010 at 8:47 pm
Cody,
lets make this as simplistic as possible.
your affirmation is to allow animals be as they would in nature. I’m totally content with that. As opportunistic omnivores, we would eat prey animals. Being evolved, we would find ways of coralling them to make killing them for food easier, we would find ways of fattening them up and after we follow this logical progression out, we would be… RIGHT WHERE WE ARE NOW.
The points where your arguement loses all credibility and steam is that you wish to force your beliefs, methodologies and principles onto other sanctioned beings. This is in complete contradiction to what you’re trying to sell here. If you wish to live as a Vegan, a Vegitarian or exist solely eating paste glue is a choice (note that word.. choice, not mandate)that you make for yourself. If you even attempt to raise children in that lifestyle, you violate your own principles.
Michele,
thank you for writing such a common sense stand up piece.
February 24, 2010 at 12:24 am
Cody,
I disagree with you, the grain that is fed to livestock is mostly not something that humans would or could eat. Our bodies are just not set up for it. There is no way that the grain we feed to livestock would keep the starving alive even if we could get it to them.
If you come right down to it, ruminants (cattle, goats, sheep etc.) do not actually consume the food they eat, they have bacteria in them that consume the feed. Ruminants actually consume the bacteria.
Consider the apes. Gorillas that eat only veggies have huge stomachs, since eating those veggies is not very efficient. Eating nutrient dense meat is what allowed us to build cities and machines. It allows time for art and music. If we were not meat eaters we would still be sitting with those gorillas stuffing our bodies with veggies and everyone would have an enormous potbelly.
February 24, 2010 at 2:32 am
It’s evident that Plants not only respond to stimuli but also “feel” It is also evident that the iron that omnivores receive from animal sources is not possible to obtain from any seeds or plants. This iron and some of the fatty acids are what makes our brains superior to those of the apes… It is evident.
February 24, 2010 at 9:56 am
@writenowbiz: As I’ve said many times now, the objective of veganism is to eliminate the use of animal products from one’s life AS FAR AS PRACTICAL. There’s nothing practical about me dying, is there? And furthermore, I support groups which fund and research alternatives to the use of animals on scientific research, especially in the biomedical field. For example, the Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing.
Indeed, I’m afraid you aren’t reading what I say, as I’ve already explained that steel and asphalt are often made with animal byproducts. If I gave those up, I’d have to live in the wild. In other words, it’s not practical. But finding alternative cosmetics, clothing, food, and entertainment is not only practical, it’s simple.
No matter what you think it “seems to indicate,” I am only saying that I seek to eliminate these products as far as practical. In our society, it is near impossible to 100% completely eliminate ALL animal products and byproducts because their use in goods is so pervasive– which is just another thing I hope to change.
I know you’re trying to paint me as some radical extremist or a hypocrite, but just because we don’t see eye to eye doesn’t make me radical.
As for “Even foods that can be gained without harming the animal,” please name such a food. Even milk or eggs cause pain and suffering to the animals. Dairy cows are mechanically milked and artificially inseminated so that they continuously produce milk. They live only a few years and within hours of giving birth to a calf, the calves are taken away to be “prepared” for veal. Imprisoning an animal for our own gains can be nothing other than “harm.” Unless you wish to say that keeping human slaves isn’t harmful, so long as you treat them “humanely”? I’m not comparing humans to animals (since I know someone will try to bring that up!), but there are obvious parallels here. And as for eggs, hens are kept in cages for most of their entire lives. The labels “free range” and “cage-free” have absolutely no real, legal meaning whatsoever. And male chicks are thrown away or ground up alive because they are of no use to the egg industry.
@Joe: not that I believe you asking me why killing vegetables for food is ok is a legitimate question or anything, but I’ve already answered that regardless.
@Russ: the phrase ‘opportunistic omnivore’ is somewhat redundant. An omnivore has the ability to eat a wide variety of things. And our bodies do not require animal products. Indeed, B12 which Mary Fleming brought up, is easily absorbed from tiny particles of soil that would naturally be left on foraged foods. This is how grazing ruminants obtain B12. There isn’t a single nutrient, be it vitamin or mineral, which cannot be obtained from non-animal sources.
At any rate, as far as evolution is concerned, we’ve been Homo sapiens for 200,000+ years and we separated from chimpanzees over 6 million years ago. We developed domestication of plants and animals (aka, “fattening up animals”) some 10,000 years ago. If you want to talk about what’s “natural,” we’ve been hunter-gatherers for > 95% of our evolutionary history. Do you hunt your own animals or forage for your own food? And if you do, I hope you use stone or wooden tools! Regardless of how we evolved, even if, for the sake of argument, we “evolved to eat meat” (which is, of course, debatable), we now have agriculture and no need to eat meat. Indeed, we have many reasons not to!
And to be “natural,” I hope you don’t consume dairy. Dairy wouldn’t have been a part of a Paleolithic diet. The reason many people are lactose intolerant is because the ability to digest lactose is actually a genetic mutation.
Finally, your second paragraph doesn’t have make sense. In no way am I “forcing” anything upon you. This is the Internet, I’m afraid, so it would be impossible for me to do that. We’re having a discussion, as you might notice by the huge amounts “of text I’m writing. And anyhow, in what way would I be violating my principles” if I “even attempt to raise my children in this lifestyle”? Every man and woman that’s ever had a child has ALWAYS had a huge influence on their children. Besides, I could just as easily argue (by the same logic) that you’re going to “force” the eating of animal products on your children long before they are able to make the decision for themselves.
@Michael: the science disagrees. And anyway, when you’re poor, low quality food is 100x better than no food, eh? No, ruminants don’t consume the bacteria. The bacteria are always in their stomachs. I’ll agree that the bacteria “actually” consume the feed, though I don’t see what difference that makes.
There’s absolutely no evidence that “eating nutrient dense meat” is what allowed civilization. Instead, there’s a huge amount of archeological and historical evidence that suggests that agriculture (i.e., domestication of both plants AND animals) is what allowed civilization. And your argument falls flat, anyhow. Chimpanzees are even more closely related to us than gorillas, and they eat meat. Why, then, do they still inhabit the forests just like the gorillas? It is not wise to make such bold claims with little evidence, I’m afraid.
@Margo: Iron is available in many non-animal sources. Iron from blood is 60% non-heme and 40% heme. The 40% heme component is more a little readily absorbed and found only in animal foods, but heme iron is also much, much more likely to cause disease, especially colon cancer.
There is no evidence that plants feel pain. If you want to make such a claim believable, I ask you to point me to the science that shows plants have a central nervous system.
March 9, 2010 at 2:06 pm
Laying eggs for a bird is not painful. It is part of what they have to do to propagate the species.
Milking a cow is not painful. We do not have to tie a cow down to take her milk, she gives it willingly. Cows enjoy getting rid of the pressure of all that milk. Did your mother find giving you her breast milk painful?
February 24, 2010 at 3:30 pm
Seriously Cody, Milking a cow causes them pain and suffering? WOW! Have you ever milked a cow or been around that sort of thing? lol It does not hurt them at all!!! In fact, it is just the opposite! If you wouldn’t milk a cow, especially after it starts lactating, it builds up pressure and becomes very uncomfortable for them and hurts them. Not all cows are artificially inseminated (but I do know what you were getting at)…and not all calves are taken away to get ready for being made into veal! Seriously, come on! Or maybe it would be better if we didn’t milk cows or house them in clean, healthy, safe environments. They could roam the earth to reproduce and then we could have cows, heifers, calves and bulls running all over the place in cities, towns etc. Where do you think that would lead? The government would have to have the species totally eliminated due to human deaths etc. They would contaminate the water you drink and the veggies you eat etc…..Seriously, what do you want to happen? I’m curious, please inform me. What is your solution? Free roaming cattle, hens, pigs etc etc…..?
February 24, 2010 at 5:12 pm
@Kelly Lee: Seriously! I would be greatly pleased if you’d take the time to actually read the lengthy responses I’ve already posted.
Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that milking doesn’t cause them pain. Is it okay to imprison an innocent human being, so long as you are nice to them? No. My argument has been (if you had read) that it doesn’t matter how “humane” we are towards them, they are still regarded as property. Not to mention that they’ll eventually be slaughtered anyhow.
As for “building up pressure,” it only builds up pressure when they don’t have a calf. This should be pretty obvious.
“Not all cows are artifically inseminated… not all calves…” No, not all. Just the huge, overwhelming majority. Just 4 companies in the US control 81% of all cows (beef, milk, etc). You can say “not all…” all you want to, but it doesn’t change anything.
But regardless if every cow on earth lived in a perfect pasture and lived to the ripe old age of 50 and we threw them birthday parties every year, they are still property, which I strongly believe to be immoral. I’ve said over and over that it’s not the treatment that matters– it’s the usage itself.
I’m not saying anything about cows running around everywhere… I’m against the usage of cows as objects instead of living beings. In fact, someone’s already proposed this question of “OMG, cows would be everywhere, right?” and I’ve already replied that if we somehow stopped the usage of livestock today, we wouldn’t keep breeding them as there’d be no need. We would (if this magical situation somehow happened in one day), take care of the ones that are alive and stop breeding them. Cows cannot survive without us because we domesticated them– we have buffalo, water buffalo, bison, yak, elands, etc. I don’t know why you’d think I’m suggesting we somehow try to make domesticated animals into wild ones.
Finally, you said “They would contaminate the water you drink and veggies you eat etc.” “They” already do both of those things. E. coli and Samonella that’s been found on lettuce, spinach, peanut butter, etc. comes from animals, not plants. The run-off from factory farms is already polluting rivers, groundwater, and the ocean.
March 9, 2010 at 2:15 pm
It is the nature of life to try to propagate itself. Cows turned loose in the early days of european conquest of America became long horn cattle that were very able to take care of themselves.
Pigs turned loose in the Americas have become wild and are very dangerous.
Dogs loose from their human protecters are very vicious. Feral dog packs are a danger to livestock in areas of the west and south west.
That kitty on your lap is still an efficient mouser and birder.
If we were to stop breeding animals they would take care of that part themselves. The sick and the injured would die horrible deaths. We at least give them a safe existence.
February 24, 2010 at 5:32 pm
Seriously you need to learn ALL your facts, not just what you believe to be true! And seriously…our plants are contaminated from animals…hmmm Or do you mean from the fertilizer that is used on these plants, which comes from animals? I guess you just need to know where to get your veggies from then, don’t you.
February 24, 2010 at 5:41 pm
Kelly Lee, regardless of whether it is run-off or manure from animals that is used as fertilizer, it’s still coming from animals, is it not? These pathogens do not come from the plants.
Anyway, if you’d like to present evidence that anything I’ve said is not true, be my guest.
February 25, 2010 at 12:55 am
Michele, thanks for the good work. Those of us who are entrusted to care for our animals (we have a dairy farm) do so with care, compassion and respect. We take pride in providing for their needs, comfort, safety and nutrition, and take our responsibilities seriously. I’m glad to see HSUS getting some ‘unwanted’ publicity, and want to see more of it.
March 8, 2010 at 2:10 pm
[…] promoter of farming causes detailed the evolution of the backlash against Yellow Tail wine on her blog, […]
March 9, 2010 at 3:56 pm
animals not cared for by people do not have a more pleasant existance. There is a pecking order that puts animals in dominance to one another. I have watched horned dairy cows attack the others and cause injury. I have seen how harsh our dairy goats are to each other when a new goat in put in the group.
Animals as property are taken care of. Dairy cows receive the right about of light for the perfect length of time in our most modern dairies, they have flowing water fountations, misters to keep them cool in summer, shelter to keep them warm in winter, a perfectly mixed diet, They are treated better than most of our people.
I hope you will visit some farms, research the questions and understand that some of what you are saying is just not the truth. The ecoli on spinach was from the WILD pigs, not the livestock farms.
April 6, 2010 at 12:46 pm
[…] an interesting dynamic that has actually served to bring agriculture together to effect change. See my Yellow Tail posting if you need a clear case study on the influence people can […]