Love For Animals

I remember it like it was yesterday. I was around 16 years old, and my friends and I would go to Marine World (renamed Six Flags Discovery Kingdom) during the summer. We saw a couple of scattered people standing near the entrance of the parking lot. They had signs and they were shouting. They were protesters, and they were protesting against keeping marine mammals in captivity. My friends started commenting about the protesters, saying, “They’re stupid. What the hell are they doing?” We just didn’t understand why they were making a big fuss because being the young kids we were, we grew up knowing these places to be popular family places with cute shows involving highly-trained animals. We naturally believed that if it existed and was legal, it can’t be seriously bad like these protesters were making it out to be. However, when I saw them, it caught my attention…but we drove past them and forgot about it all in an instant.

Specifically speaking of marine mammals being held in captivity at theme parks (e.g. SeaWorld or Discovery Kingdom), why do we do it? Primarily for entertainment. Research, while also using them as entertainment? Is that really all we have to say for taking these beautiful wild mammals from their vast home — the oceans that stretch out into an infinite horizon. They have about 75% of this world as their own, and they’re taken away from all of that and dumped into a small chlorine pool. In the wild, they travel long distances all the time in big “family” groups. They’re not meant to be stuck in the confinements of a “puddle.”

Marine mammals, along with many other animals, are being captured and exploited so we can sit in awe and clap in amusement. We know that dolphins will even gladly come up to ships or swim alongside random boats, even the capture boats. They don’t know, and they become an easy capture. The captivity of marine mammals is also considered by many to have an adverse effect on their lifespan. This is a life we’re giving these intelligent creatures. If they could make the choice, honestly don’t you think they’d choose the wild instead? It probably won’t seem like a big deal to some people. I can only speak for myself when I say that when everything is said and done, it just feels wrong.

In early October, I posted a blog entry urging California voters to vote yes on prop 2. As someone who loves animals very much, this prop was really important to me. I am glad to report back and say that yesterday (Tuesday, November 4, 2008), California voters passed prop 2, a measure that will improve the standards of confining practices for CA farm animals. I tracked the polls last night on California’s propositions, and ‘yes’ on prop 2 led the way with a pretty wide margin even from the beginning. Take that agri-corporations!

Even farm animals, those raised for food, can experience a more decent quality of life. This measure isn’t going to solve all the problems associated with cruel treatment of animals in factory farms, but it’s a step towards the right direction. Animal rights supporters and organizations can now add this onto their list of achievements for bettering the lives of many animals in the food industry. 

“All animals, including those raised for food, deserve humane treatment.”

Thank you to all the California voters who voted yes on prop 2! We did it!

P.S. I am aware that three-fourths or 75% of props that pass get overturned by the courts, but I am confident that prop 2 (Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act) will not be short-lived.

_

Is it wrong to declaw your cat? I hear of people declawing their cats pretty often, but in my opinion, it just seems a little excessive and inhumane. Although some cat owners do it to protect their household furniture from being clawed at, is it really the only way? I’ve heard about vinyl nail caps (probably best for indoor cats) and scratching posts, yet some cat owners say they have no luck with getting their cat to use the posts. It’s not my intention to blame a pet owner for their pet’s overall behavior, but I do believe that the habits of an animal depend on how the owner raised or trained it (that is, if you raised your pet since they were young). I think that training or familiarizing your pet to certain habits works best when the animal is young. I just don’t want this declawing procedure to be abused by the percentage of pet owners that are just looking for a quick fix.

Hypothetically speaking, even if declawing a cat was the only way to maintain a beautiful home (furniture and all), I don’t think it’s reason enough to physically alter or amputate a part of a cat’s anatomy. After all, that is what happens in the surgery room—the doctor has to cut bones, ligaments, and tendons during this procedure. It is not equivalent to pulling out a human finger nail. With surgery comes possible complications that can occur during the recovery period. Surgery should be performed under extreme circumstances or needs, but is protecting furniture one of them?

On November 4, 2008, please vote yes on Proposition 2. By voting yes on Prop 2, you support the view that confined farm animals should have the ability to lie down, turn around, and stretch their limbs. If passed, Prop 2 will secure this right for farm animals, particularly egg-laying hens, pregnant pigs, and veal calves. This is a sensible measure that aims to stop cruel living conditions among animals in factory farms. Additional points in favor of Prop 2 include improving our health and food safety, supporting family farmers, protecting air and water and safeguarding the environment.

Cramming thousands of farm animals into small cages can aid the spread of animal diseases, which could transfer over to humans. California family farmers support Prop 2 because they believe that improved farming practices will promote quality food and safety. Yes on Prop 2 will also protect the environment and communities by eliminating safety issues, such as keeping factory farm waste from contaminating waterways, lakes, groundwater, soil, and air. With better confinement practices for farm animals, we can help maintain a more sanitary environment for both animals and people.

If passed, Proposition 2 will take effect in 2015, which gives factory farms a sufficient amount of time to initiate change within their confinement practices. Opponents of Prop 2 argue with regards only to egg-laying hens, in which they say that if we allow hens free outdoor space, we are putting them at risk of catching diseases (e.g. bird flu). They also charge that the proposition will increase prices of California eggs, costs thousands of California jobs and puts farmers out of business, costs $615 million in economic activity, and contributes to global warming. The costs are unknown at this point, and I think Prop 2 opponents are just trying to use scare tactics to influence voters. According to the industry’s own economist, it costs less than one additional penny per egg to stop cramming hens in cages. As for cage-free hens and diseases, the broad majority of chickens in the food industry aren’t confined in cages, which goes without any mention or objection from Prop 2 opponents.

The bottom line is that there is nothing wrong in allowing farm animals to live in a space where they can stand up, turn around, and stretch their limbs—to say the least. I could see why agri-corporations would be opposed to Prop 2 because it requires them to contribute time and money into restructuring housing methods, not to mention possible fines if they don’t fully commit to the proposition (should it pass). However, I wouldn’t doubt that they’ve always put profit before animal welfare, so I just can’t take anything they say seriously because their motive is clear to me.

To California voters, please vote yes on Proposition 2.

“All animals, including those raised for food, deserve humane treatment.”

–www.yesonprop2.com

A few mainstream organizations supporting Prop 2 include:

• Consumer Federation of America
• Humane Society of the United States
• Union of Concerned Scientists
• Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production
• Sierra Club California
• California Clean Water Action

Suggested related link:

www.yesonprop2.com

“The idea that it is funny to see wild animals coerced into acting like clumsy humans, or thrilling to see powerful beasts reduced to cringing cowards by a whipcracking trainer is primitive and medieval. It stems from the old idea that we are superior to other species and have the right to hold dominion over them.” —Dr. Desmond Morris, anthropologist, animal behaviorist, author

____-

I never liked circuses and I never cared much to go to a circus when I was a child either. The only time I ever went to a circus performance was when I was about 12 or 13 years old. I remember watching the act with tigers. The trainer in the ring seemed cruel to me as he lashed his whip around, hitting the animals from time to time. I didn’t like it at all. Even at that age, I didn’t agree with the idea of a “circus animal.”

These animals did not make the choice to become circus animals; instead, they are being forced to live this way. It isn’t rocket science to understand what is going on within the circus industry and its animals. Wild animals are simply being exploited for money and entertainment. It’s not just the act of taking animals out of the wild and holding them in captivity, but it’s also the idea that most circus animals are kept in terrible living conditions and abused. These animals are wild creatures that are not accustomed to the same life that humans lead. Just because circus animals seem well-tempered during a show or performance doesn’t mean anything. They are wild by nature, and the only way to get an animal to submit to humans is to train them through aggressive (and often cruel) techniques. The most common tool used in the training of elephants is called a bullhook (also known as an ankus), which is a sharp metal hook attached to a long pole or handle.

The bullhook is used to pierce the elephant’s skin to a depth based on the discretion of the trainer. It may not sound violent in words, but in action, it causes elephants a great deal of pain as heard in their screams. If you haven’t seen a video that depicts circus elephants being abused, you cannot possibly know what goes on behind the circus curtain. Note that some videos are a lot worse than others. Other tools and methods used for training circus animals include the use of chains, food and water deprivation, use of whips, clubs and blunt objects, and electric prods. Trainers have to break their spirit; they have to tear the animal down psychologically before the trainers can actually teach them “tricks.” This type of training is usually done when the elephant is just a baby. However, there are instances where grown elephants are taken from the wild and “broken.” This is done by restraining the elephant with short chains to a small area as someone repeatedly beats the animal with a bullhook. I’m not exaggerating these occurrences. If anything, I’m trying to explain this as best as I can without being overly detailed and inaccurately dramatic. Without food or water and under heavy abuse, these wild elephants do eventually submit to their keeper…

The example of elephant abuse in circuses is one of many. All animals in the circus should not be subjected to such a life. As for circuses that say they’re helping to conserve exotic wildlife, that is just a lame excuse.  I’m actually starting to notice how conservation has become a popular excuse for many people to do whatever they want with wildlife. They’re using animals for their benefit. Once an animal transitions into a “circus animal,” there is no returning to the wild. They are slaves, physically punished if they don’t obey and only rewarded if they do obey. All they know is to obey and go against their natural tendencies. They are treated like objects, like cargo. They are animals, living creatures, that are exposed to traumatic experiences that are damaging to a healthy state of mind.

Please do not support animal circuses. If you enjoy other non-animal performances that circuses provide, there are also animal-free circuses you can go to. If you want to get more involved in the cause to end circus animal cruelty, research ways you can help. For instance, contact venues that book animal circus acts and try to persuade them to drop that particular booking. Go to circuses that are in town, rally up a few people for extra help, and hand out leaflets. Since most people go to circuses for their children, a pretty good leaflet can be found here. Remember to make sure to avoid any conflict with circus employees while you are passing out leaflets. Participate in your city council meetings, in which you will have an opportunity at the end of the meeting to bring up the issue of circus animal cruelty; ban circuses from visiting your city. The idea is to make sure that animal circuses don’t get an audience, therefore, they don’t get money—put them out of business.

Suggested Related Links:

List of Animal-Free Circuses

Born Free USA united with API - Animals in the Circus: A Lifetime of Misery

Born Free USA united with API - Get the Facts

Elephant Training in the Zoo and Circus

USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service - Animal Welfare Inspection Reports

Circuses.com - Introduction (Footage on tape caught by an undercover PETA investigator included)

ASPCA - Circus Cruelty

As autumn approaches, so does hunting season. I’m sure that most hunters do not actually hate animals. As weird as it may sound, some hunters probably appreciate and respect wildlife. This can be apparent if you’ve ever heard a hunter talk about how “beautiful” an animal is in all its size and glory. As to why they kill animals, is beyond me. The idea of hunting animals as a recreational sport just boggles my mind. I cannot understand the point in it.

I really don’t believe in the “conservation efforts” of hunting. I think it’s ridiculous. It’s just a way to mask the controversy over this “sport” and to allow it to continue. Many conservation agencies support hunting because they say it helps to control over-population issues. And according to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the NRA-ILA, hunters (and fisherman) “fund nearly 75% of the annual income for all 50 state conservation agencies. Through license fees and excise taxes on arms and gear, sportsmen contribute $200 million per year for wildlife conservation.” This fact is something to really consider. I personally don’t think hunting is necessary to control over-population; I think nature will handle the “problem” on its own and that the ecosystem will suffice without the help of hunting. Yet, the sport of hunting continues to gain support as long as hunters keep putting money into the pockets of certain associations and agencies. And with support comes excuses that will try to undermine ethical objections against hunting.

For example, conservation agencies know who provides the bulk of their funding and, for the sake of that, those agencies support hunting. Not to mention, conservation agencies probably see hunting as a “liability” that nature can withstand if carefully regulated (thus, the creation of hunting season). The idea here is that every group is appeased in some way.

Aside from the excuse that hunting is a conservation effort (which, by the way, is pretty much the only real reason that allows them to even get close to having a sound argument in support of hunting), there’s just no point in hunting animals for sport. There’s something eerie in wanting to kill for the pleasure of killing or “just because.” Maybe some hunters don’t see anything wrong with hunting because it’s been a tradition within their family. But that’s exactly the point too—among so many other reasons I won’t get into right now. There are just so many people that have become so desensitized by the fact that we can do whatever we want if nothing else gets in the way. It’s like some people don’t even have their own ethical belief structure anymore, but a belief structure based purely on the law itself and what it allows. The law isn’t always influenced by ethical choices, but more commonly by special interests. So don’t just look to the law and think that things are right because some guys in suits said so.

Hunting is not a sport. It’s killing for entertainment, pleasure, and sense of pride. In the early days of hunting, it was done as a means for survival, but now, it’s just developed into this recreational sport—a sport that celebrates the idea of stealing life away for the naive and obnoxious pleasure of killing. Basically.

Suggested related links:

Animal Rights: Arguments For and Against Hunting

Thoughts on Hunting

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: What Do Hunters Do For Conservation?

Why do some pet owners say they saved their pet’s life by taking it in, when in fact their pet was never in real danger of dying or being put down at a shelter in the first place? There is just much difference in actually adopting a shelter animal, rather than just providing a home for a non-shelter puppy who, at that point, had no real threat to its life anyway. By no means am I saying that providing a home is any less helpful to an animal because it is still an admirable thing to do for one. To take an animal under your wing and give it a good home is a great commitment.

However, the act of merely providing a home for your pet (whose life was never in danger) does not exactly translate into literally saving its life, which some pet owners like to stress of their “deed.” There are a lot of animals in shelters that need to be adopted for the sake of their lives. To go into a shelter that uses euthanasia on their animals is a heart-breaking experience. To really see a date set for their euthanasia appointment (or rather their “time of death”) is never something that you can get used to in a normal day-to-day sense. The whole euthanasia issue almost doesn’t seem real in our lives as humans—it’s either that, or we’ve just become desensitized toward our ability to play with life—but for these animals, this is their reality.

By adopting a pet from a shelter and giving him a good home with love and care, you really are saving his life. And that date—that says he’s due for euthanasia tomorrow morning or in two days or in three days, or whenever—is void the day you go in there and make a promise to this animal that you’ll do your best to love and care for him forever.

We don’t need to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on pure bred dogs, or even more money on exotic mixes such as the Ashera, a hybrid between the African serval and the Asian leopard cat (see YouTube video below). It’s crazy to think we created this exotic breed to be bought and sold while we have animals put to death everyday, which is being done for a seemingly shallow reason of not having enough room in our society… As if this world isn’t their world too.

YouTube - SEE ONE OF THE MOST EXPENSIVE PET CATS IN THE WORLD

If you’ve ever wanted to get a pet, please consider adopting one from a shelter, preferrably a high-kill shelter. All shelters, spanning from no-kill to high-kill, are the best places to look for animals urgently in need of a good home. If you’re not ready to take an animal into your life, or you simply do not have the resources or the time, please help to support no-kill shelters and their cause by donating (remember to make sure that your donations are going to sincere and humane no-kill shelters as not all of them are true to the cause). And if your heart can bear it, try volunteering for a kill shelter or even a no-kill shelter, and do what you can to get these animals adopted or well taken care of. Every little bit counts. Help save a life.

Suggested related links:

No-Kill Shelters Spotlighted on National Stage: SFSPCA Shows It Can Be Done

Animal Liberation Front: List of No-Kill Shelters in the US, Canada, Scotland, Mexico, & Columbia

Humane Societies and Shelters

Animal Euthanasia - A Call to Ban the Gas Chamber

Tales of Rescued Dogs: Luna’s Story

Kill vs. No-Kill Shelters (A Comprehensive Outlook on the Issue)

Wikipedia - Animal Euthanasia Methods