Wayne Pacelle: A Humane Nation

Of Mice and Men

Earlier this year, the Congress amended the Animal Welfare Act to strengthen a section of law dealing with dogfighting, cockfighting and other forms of staged animal fighting. With these amendments, the law now bans any interstate or foreign commerce in fighting animals or cockfighting implements, and establishes felony penalties for violations.

It’s the strongest section of the Animal Welfare Act—one that seeks to halt a reprehensible form of animal abuse. The rest of the Animal Welfare Act seeks only to regulate conduct. It does not ban any use of animals, even though there are practices that should never be allowed under the law, such as surgery on live animals for purposes of sale demonstrations, or other forms of experimentation or educational use that are clearly out of bounds. (Reps. Steve Israel, (D-N.Y.) and  Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) have introduced legislation, H.R. 2193, to ban the use of live animals in sale demonstrations.)

What’s more, the AWA turns taxonomy on its head and excludes entire classes of animals from any protection whatsoever. For instance, the AWA does not at all protect animals used in agricultural production or research. And approximately 95 percent of all laboratory animals—mice, rats and birds bred for use in research—are excluded from any protection under the AWA.

This is wrong, and it is also scientifically unjustifiable. All mammals and birds (not to mention reptiles, amphibians and fish)—even the smallest among them—deserve minimal care standards and protection from needless use and abuse. Of all people, scientists should know that these animals can suffer, and that they should not be arbitrarily excluded from protection.

Just last week, the Albuquerque Journal reported on some hideous experiments on mice at the University of New Mexico. These experiments were not for some life-saving purpose, but were in fact conducted by a high school student and overseen by a former chair of the UNM research oversight committee!

In 2003 and 2004, the high school student taped several mice to a wall by their tails, forced others to swim until nearly drowning, and shocked still more with electrical charges, all to “measure hopelessness and depression.”

Talk Back: Taking Issue with Ted

In the world of humane-minded advocates, there are reasons to agree and reasons to disagree. Here is one example—a few readers have expressed disappointment over the inclusion of Ted Williams in my blogroll. Julianne French writes:

Wow, what a shock to see The HSUS endorse a wild horse hater like Ted Williams. I know of him from the inaccurate article he wrote in the Audubon Society and referred to horse advocates like myself repeatedly as “the horse mafia.” He said inaccurate statements about the Arizona Heber Wild Horses and people like myself who have campaigned for their protection from the Forest Service. He even boasted about a guy who killed a mustang and butchered it where it is now in his freezer.

I have been a great supporter of The HSUS and even was identified as a key grassroots activist. I have walked the halls for Congress on behalf of The HSUS as a citizen activist and shared The HSUS Scorecard among hundreds of Arizona citizens. I have collected thousands of letters to congressionals and secured co-sponsorships of lawmakers on H.R. 249 to restore protection for the Wild Horses and H.R. 503/S. 311 to ban horse slaughter. I have raised over $1,000 for The HSUS in Party Animals. I obtained over 1,600 signatures on the Humane Farming Proposition 204 Campaign. As Mr. Williams notes, wild horse advocates are effective, but we do it through logic, compassion and reason, exactly as The HSUS asks activists to be.

I contribute every month to The HSUS and was eager to participate in your blog. But now, I am rethinking my support. How The HSUS can actually have this wild horse hater on the blog defies what I have learned about The HSUS. When I participated in the Party for Animals, The HSUS sent me a video from the Fund for Animals that spoke to the plight of America's wild horses.

Now, The HSUS appears to want it both ways. By putting Mr. William's blog link on The HSUS website, it is promulgating the opinions of Mr. Williams. I urge The HSUS to rethink this schizophrenic strategy. There are many worthy animal welfare groups that are consistent in their support of animal welfare causes. Why should I support an animal welfare group that refers to their members as "horse mafia"? What are you thinking?

Mr. Williams uses his influence in the environmental community to misleadingly believe wild horses are like cattle and destroy the environment. They buy into it because the environmental groups and now organizations like The HSUS support him. I cannot condone this endorsement and hope to see The HSUS remove him from your blog.

We also received this comment from Craig Downer:

Please remove Mr. Ted Williams from your blog, as his prejudice against the wild horses is very obvious and he should not be allowed to continue to spread his disinformation about the free living, returned native wild horses in North America using the media of an organization that purports to be for the wild horses in the wild.

Thanks for sharing these thoughts. Many who wrote to us about Ted Williams have been fantastic supporters of The HSUS and of animals, and many thanks go to you for your advocacy on behalf of wild horses and other creatures. You and other wild horse advocates are a force to be reckoned with, and we are proud to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with you in support of Congressional efforts to ban the slaughter of wild horses—in fact, to ban the slaughter of all horses for human consumption.

Julianne, you and I share a view about Ted Williams' over-the-top piece on wild horses that appeared not long ago in Audubon magazine, where Ted has been a columnist for years. Ted's piece was sensationalist, and it grossly exaggerated the impact that horses are having on arid areas in the West. He complains about the effect of 32,000 wild horses and burros on the land and wildlife, even though there are more than 4 million livestock grazing on public lands in the West. It is the livestock that are having an enormous impact on wild lands, particularly riparian areas. I am not aware of a single environmental organization that opposed our efforts in Congress to provide protections for wild horses from slaughter—and that's telling indeed.

Fate of Whales Decided This Week

I really like to stay on the offense at The HSUS. I want to press ahead with new campaigns that keep our opponents on the defense—whether on horse slaughter, cockfighting, factory farming, canned hunts, puppy mills or the like—so that the industries responsible for these cruelties have to defend their practices and cannot as readily try to strike at gains we have already secured.

© NOAA

But defense is required from time to time. And that's the case with whales—a matter that should have long ago been settled by the world community in favor of the whales. 

The 59th annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission began yesterday and continues through May 31 in Anchorage, Alaska to consider whale conservation and management worldwide. Many people believe mistakenly that whales are safe as a result of our victories of the 1970s and 1980s, after many species were hunted to the brink of extinction. I wish it were true, but it isn’t.

At last year's IWC meeting, the pro-whaling countries secured an important symbolic victory when, by a single vote, they passed a resolution stating that the longstanding moratorium on commercial whaling was no longer necessary. This year, it appears the anti-whaling nations will secure the majority and be strong enough to prevent the three-quarters vote needed to overturn the moratorium. But more limited threats to whales will surely emerge (see our breaking news from the meeting).

The HSUS and its global arm, Humane Society International, have been a presence at IWC for more than 30 years. We are also active in the Whales Need US coalition of 20 non-governmental organizations—joined by more than 50 congressional representatives—who have called upon the United States to take a stronger role in whale protection (letters were recently circulated by members of the U.S. House and Senate urging renewed leadership within the IWC).

This year, four of our staff members will participate in the IWC deliberations and advise the nations that do not support expanded whaling. We’ve developed assessments of expected whaling proposals and continue to build a case for responsible whale watching tourism as an alternative to whaling.

Our opening statement to the IWC emphasized the uncertain impacts of global climate change as a factor in jeopardizing the well-being and survival of whales. Without scientific research to assess the likely threats to whales as a result of global warming, it’s irresponsible for the whaling nations to continue on their current course.

Remembering a Star for Animals

I arrived back from an overseas trip yesterday, and upon landing learned the news that my dear friend Gretchen Wyler had died. At The HSUS, we had known for some time that Gretchen was failing from the effects of metastatic breast cancer. We held to the hope that if anyone could overcome the odds, it was Gretchen, with that indomitable spirit of hers. But it was not to be, and now we grieve.

In the days and weeks to come, you can expect to read much more about the life and legacy of this amazing and wonderful woman. Enough for now to say that Gretchen was among the greatest figures of the animal protection movement, and one of the most admirable people it has been my privilege to know.

© Long Photography
Gretchen Wyler at the 20th Anniversary Genesis Awards.

I had the lucky circumstance to meet her two decades ago, and not long afterward to begin working closely with Gretchen at The Fund for Animals, where she served as vice chairwoman of the board of directors. It was under the banner of The Fund, in 1986, that she had launched the Genesis Awards—her inspiration to encourage the media and the entertainment industry to incorporate animal protection themes in their works. She had a gift for friendship, and somehow made each person among her legion of admirers feel a special tie. When she joined with The HSUS in 2002, and became vice president of the newly created HSUS Hollywood Office, it was as if a family member had moved back home.   

During her rich and full life, she was a star on Broadway, and later in films and television as well. When I told my father about my friend Gretchen, he said he went to the Broadway shows that Gretchen starred in after his Army service, and he said she was just fabulous—dancing and singing and dominating the stage. That was not hard for me to imagine, since every move and expression of hers had the refinement and sparkle of theatrical training.

As a star of the stage, Gretchen could have lived out her days content with the success and adulation that came with that achievement. But as accomplished and celebrated as she was for her acting, the performing arts were not enough to satisfy the spirit of this remarkable woman, who came from humble beginnings in Oklahoma City and scraped to find her way to New York and Los Angeles. Her greatest passion and her true vocation were to protect animals from cruelty. 

© The HSUS
Gretchen with her rescued horse Gypsy.

Gretchen loved animals—and not just in the abstract, but with the warm and personal touch she brought to everything. She delighted in their company, and never turned away from any creature in need. She abhored cruelty in any form. And whether she was fighting pound seizure, steel traps, horse slaughter, or the inhumane captivity for elephants, anyone who mistreated animals had a formidable foe in Gretchen Wyler.

In everything she did, Gretchen was relentless—a force of nature to which we at The HSUS learned to give wide latitude. I'll miss her calls at all hours of the day, that constant flow of good ideas for new plans and projects and passions. I'll miss her commanding presence at Genesis Awards dinners, and the perfectionist touch she brought to that annual affair. Above all, I think I'll miss her company—the warmth and sheer joy that she brought to the work we shared.   

If "unreplaceable" can be used to describe anyone at The HSUS, it was Gretchen Wyler. Gretchen's legacy—The Genesis Awards and the work of The HSUS’ Hollywood Office—will be carried into the future under the direction of her friend and successor, Beverly Kaskey.

We admired her, we loved her, and we'll always miss her. We've lost a figure like no other in the animal protection cause. And the animals of the world have lost one of the kindest and bravest friends they ever had.   

Talk Back: Michael Vick

Many readers have inquired about The HSUS’ involvement in the investigation surrounding Atlanta Falcons Quarterback Michael Vick and allegations of a possible dogfighting operation at his former Virginia home.

Reader John Gilligan asks:

Is the HSUS going to have an email letter to send to the NFL Commissioner on Michael Vick in regards to dogfighting? I would like to contact him to urge a suspension.

And reader Denise C comments:

I would like to see The HSUS take a position on the dogfighting charge that may be coming against Michael Vick of the Atlanta Falcons. In this day and age it is unacceptable for a man of his stature to have anything to do with such an awful activity!!! Maybe you can post a number or email for the NFL for people to express their outrage.

The HSUS has been involved in this case from the start. Wayne wrote to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell on May 3 and offered HSUS collaboration to investigate and eradicate any league players involved in illegal animal fighting. The HSUS has also created a way for you to take action—write NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.

Several readers also wrote to be sure that The HSUS was aware of the comments made by Washington Redskins player Clinton Portis, supporting Vick and dismissing the cruelty of dog fighting. Here are two of those comments:

I am not sure if anyone has seen it, but on cnn.com there is an article with comments from Clinton Portis and Chris Samuels of the Washington Redskins that just infuriates me. They are quoted as saying that Vick should not face any type of criminal charges because they do not feel dog fighting is a criminal offense. They basically defend dog fighting and say that it is okay. These are not the people I want my children to look at as idols as many sports players are depicted. I think people in the sports world should be held to a higher accountability for their actions because of the influence they could have over children. If they are condoning a felony then I think the NFL needs to look at their actions also. Illegal means illegal; not you can do it because you think it is right in your warped judgment. I am sorry to vent, but wanted to bring this article to the attention of those who care. —Amy Eanes

I think The HSUS should come out and say something about the senseless, ridiculous comments mocking the seriousness of dog fighting made by NFL player Clinton Portis and others. I'm appalled by this and his staff's attempts to hide it. Nancy Armour, AP Sports Columnist, wrote a fabulous column in retaliation to Portis' lack of compassion. Thanks. —Megan

The HSUS responded to Portis' comments in a statement on May 22, asking the NFL to demand an explanation from Portis and hold the star running back accountable, and renewed the offer to work collaboratively to root out any in the NFL who may be involved in dogfighting.

Below is a sampler of other reader reactions to the ongoing case:

Mr. Vick should be punished by law if found guilty (which it sounds to me!). If I had children, I would be very upset if they looked up to players in the NFL (i.e. M. Vick) that support this barbaric activity. Being an NFL fan myself, I will not root for Vick anytime in the future. The NFL should be comprised of upstanding citizens of our country, doing good for their individual communities; not promoting cruelty! Keep up the good work, HSUS! —K. Rose

I live in Atlanta and am truly disgraced by Michael Vick. I am a member of the Humane Society and so are many members of my family. I wrote a letter to the Atlanta Falcons expressing my concern for them continuing to have Michael Vick on the team and I also called for stiff action against him. My cousin has since sold his Falcons season tickets. Just over the past year I have read about two HORRIFIC animal abuse cases against dogs. Georgia has to get tough on these problems. Obviously young kids, who look at Michael Vick as a hero, see that he is involved in animal cruelty. Why should they think anything is wrong with it? I know that is not the core of the problem, but something has got to be done. It sickens my heart that people do these things and they are only slapped on the hand. —Vanessa Weiss

Environmental Protection, Past and Present

There are people whose life and work have changed the course of history. The late Rachel Carson is one of those people. Carson was the legendary biologist and author who transformed environmental protection with her groundbreaking 1962 work "Silent Spring."

© USFWS
Rachel Carson and Bob Hines conduct
marine biology research.

This Sunday, May 27, marks the 100^th anniversary of her birth. Her centennial anniversary has promoted a great renewal of interest in Carson and "Silent Spring," which called attention to the dangers of the overuse of toxic pesticides in the environment.

At The HSUS, we are commemorating the centennial with a six-part series that explores Carson’s activism concerning animal research issues, factory farming, humane education, wildlife protection and the safety of domestic pets. Carson’s legacy as an environmentalist is known worldwide, but far fewer people are aware of her deep commitment to animal welfare and her active participation in humane work during the 1950s and 1960s.

All too many people view animal protection and environmental protection as separate causes, but they are as tightly woven as the strands of our DNA, as Rachel Caron realized more than five decades ago. The connections between the two causes have always been apparent to me, and especially so during my study of environmental history in college.

I am proud to say that The HSUS has always operated with the understanding of the inseparability of the causes. Whether it’s litigation on behalf of endangered species, or efforts to protect the biological support systems upon which all life depends, the work of our Wildlife Land Trust, or campaigns to end the most egregious cruelties associated with factory farming, we are pursuing an environmental agenda every day. It's axiomatic that animals and people need a healthy environment to thrive and survive.

The issue of global warming reminds us more powerfully than ever of the linkage between environmental concern and the mistreatment of animals. "Livestock’s Long Shadow," a recent report from the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization, exposes livestock agriculture as one of the most environmentally destructive of human practices, including it as a serious contributor to global warming.

The report, which predicts that global meat consumption will double and milk consumption will nearly double by 2050 (from 2001), says that livestock agriculture already contributes 18 percent of all greenhouse gases—more than contributions made by all forms of transportation worldwide.

Power to Protect Animals

What has been most heartening since I launched my blog is that the comments are coming in faster than we can publish them. Rest assured that we are reading them, and we will continue to post samplers. I would like to keep the conversation going, so please keep your comments coming—pro and con.

Last week, one comment in particular, from "Peace," caught my eye:

You can either exhaust yourself pulling puppies out of the river all day and night, or you can run upstream and find out who is throwing puppies into the river.

Animal industries would prefer if no one really cared about animals, but if they must, they would rather us spend all of our time cleaning up after others' mistakes, and never, of course, questioning or opposing why these "problems" happen in the first place.

Animal industries want to exist in the moral vacuum that most other industries enjoyed during the Industrial Revolution.

I think Peace has captured the situation perfectly. Some of our opponents bellyache that The HSUS doesn't spend all of its money on hands-on animal care. 

© 2007
Two horses rescued from the slaughterhouse floor arrive
at the Cleveland Amory Black Beauty Ranch.

In fact, we do spend millions on animal care—running two superb wildlife care centers and the Cleveland Amory Black Beauty Ranch (which is the world's largest animal sanctuary, with the most diverse set of species) and operating our Rural Area Veterinary Services program (which provides care to about 40,000 animals a year), along with our disaster services work, cruelty investigations, animal fighting raids, and so much more. 

But we do spend millions of dollars—thanks to the generosity of our supporters—trying to get at the root causes of the problems animals face. We work to educate and inform the public about cruelty and abuse. We maintain a major Animal Protection Litigation section to see that once laws are passed that they be enforced. And we maintain a robust Government Affairs operation, active in Congress and almost all of the state legislatures. We have organized more than 25 successful statewide ballot initiatives, too—banning everything from cockfighting to hound hunting to steel-jawed leghold traps to gestation crates.

Those who defend inhumane practices want us to spend all of our time and energy cleaning up the mess they've made. Believe me, we recognize the need for hands-on care to relieve suffering, and we put our money where our mouth is. But we have the reach and power to enact new policies and to reshape cultural attitudes that will prevent animals from being harmed in the first place. 

Ultimately, that is, and should be, the goal of The Humane Society of the United States and its affiliated organizations.

Polar Bears Hunted in Dwindling Habitat

Make no mistake about it. Global warming is an animal protection issue. 

© The HSUS/Milani

Before the first club was swung, or the first shot fired this spring in Atlantic Canada in the annual orgy of seal killing, the Canadian government estimates that as many as 300,000 baby seals drowned because of melting ice. The vulnerable little creatures—though they are designed for life in a marine environment—cannot swim in their first few weeks of life. When the ice melted, they haplessly slid into the ocean and succumbed. 

The body count was staggering—about as many seals killed by the warmer climate as are killed by the sealers themselves. It's a wake-up call to us as individuals and to the entire humane community about the effects that greenhouse gases are having on wildlife. 

We cannot leave the battle on global warming only to our environmental brethren. The humane community must weigh in and stand shoulder to shoulder with them in working to slow and eventually stop human-caused warming.

The plight of the seals shows us that the debate over global warming is not an abstraction. It’s a real process, and it’s deadly for the animals we care about.

Perhaps the most iconic species for global warming is the polar bear—these awesome creatures so extraordinarily adapted to survive in a marine environment in the Arctic. We are all thunderstruck as we see footage of them skittering on thin ice or clinging precariously to a small and shrunken iceberg in a vast ocean, where they seem almost stranded at sea. They adapted to the arctic environment, but that environment is changing too fast for them.

© iStockphoto

The Fish and Wildlife Service has made a preliminary finding that polar bears should now be listed as “threatened” with extinction. Scientists report polar bears are having a harder time hunting seals because of melting ice, and they have reported drops in body weights and increased mortality.

And while global warming is the greatest threat to the polar bears, they also face peril from other human actions. It’s hard to believe, but trophy hunters are still killing polar bears in Canada. And most of the trophy hunters are Americans, who purchase hunting rights from natives in the north of Canada.

Cruelty by Design

The fur issue is one of the easiest moral questions to settle. The animals are killed only for human adornment, often in particularly horrible ways, and there are functional and fashionable alternatives. If our societal standards against needless cruelty mean anything, they should be applied to the actions of this industry. There can be no rational defense for wearing the fur of other creatures.

HSUS tests show major retailers are selling mislabeled fur
coats, some  containing fur from domestic dogs or raccoon
dogs (shown above).

Amazingly though, the industry continues to succeed in selling pelts and making money, even though the cruelty is obvious and the alternatives are abundant. And that indifference has been even worse when talking about fur trim—the little bit of fur that is stitched on to hoods or boots or gloves. Many consumers often don't even know what they are buying. Or they think that a little fur trim is benign in its effect.

But a recent HSUS investigation finally shook up the public and caused consumers to take note of the cruelty of fur trim. We tested a sample of 25 fur-trimmed jackets from a variety of designers and retailers and every single one was falsely advertised, falsely labeled or not labeled at all.

Most of the jackets contained fur from domestic dogs or raccoon dogs. Some of these jackets were advertised as "faux fur" and were actually made of real animal fur. Others were labeled as a different species of animal, such as raccoon, rabbit or coyote. In all cases, consumers had no idea what they were really getting.

The results of this investigation were reported on "The Today Show," "Good Morning America" and other major U.S. media outlets, and sent many retailers and designers scrambling. Most were not paying attention to the sourcing or species of fur trim they were selling. We communicated with all the companies in question, and urged them to drop all fur trim completely from their product lines.

© The HSUS/Karremann
Dogs raised for their fur in China.

Most fur trim comes from China, a country with no animal welfare laws. The killing is grotesque. Our investigators have been to the fur factories, and we've seen the appalling ways the animals are treated. Given the lack of regulation, designers and retailers simply can’t have confidence in what they’re getting. The pet food recall surrounding melamine added to pet food is a further reminder of the difficulty in regulating the conduct of Chinese companies. Best not to deal with these fur traders at all, we advised.

As a result of our investigative work and outreach, several companies—Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger, and Foot Locker—have agreed to phase out all animal fur. This was the best course of action, and these companies received the highest level of praise from us.

Others haven't gone quite as far yet, but we have offered some encouraging words nonetheless. DKNY, Sean John, Rocawear and Michael Kors have pledged not to use raccoon dog fur in the future. Burlington Coat Factory, Loehmann’s and House of Deréon have endorsed H.R. 891, the Dog and Cat Fur Prohibition Enforcement Act, which would require labeling of all fur-trimmed apparel and ban the sale of raccoon dog fur in the United States. While these companies have not gone entirely fur-free, which is what we aggressively advocate, we've opened a dialogue with them. We will continue to urge them to reconsider their broader fur policies, and we hope that they will eventually drop fur from their product lines.

Last week, when we announced that Foot Locker has completely given the boot to fur, we also thanked Michael Kors for pledging to stop using raccoon dog fur. PETA was not very happy with this announcement, and says we were wrong to offer encouragement to Michael Kors because the company hasn't gone far enough.

Talk Back: Readers Speak Up

Many readers responded to the two comments that were posted to the blog on Friday (see here). Below is a sampling of the remarks we received. If you would like to join the conversation, offer a comment below.

These are the types of comments that hurt deep inside and make you remember why you want to speak up for animals. The fact that people think they can do whatever they want with an animal because it is "theirs" is very disturbing. I wonder if they would say the same thing about their children or family members. To some of us, many in fact, that is exactly what our animals represent. I appreciate you posting this feedback as it helps me remember the very real "other side". Love your blog, by the way! —Ted

It becomes everyone's business when an animal is being hurt. To think animal cruelty is acceptable just because that animal is on your property is insane.

Animals are not property like furniture or cars—they bleed the same color of blood as humans. —Nicke

The answer is very simply expressed in this quote from a friend of mine: "The true measure of a community lies in how it treats the most helpless among us—our children and our animals. To the degree that another living being depends on us for its well being, we are diminished as "human" if we don't in some way "humanely" respond." (Joan Antczak)

Your inhumanity to "your" animals, does impact me as a member of the "human community," whether you think so or not. —Donna Chambers

A More Vivid Picture

You’ve probably heard the story of the blind man touching the elephant and thinking that the elephant is just the tail or the trunk. 

In the world of animal protection organizations, The HSUS is the biggest of them all—akin, in some ways, to the elephant or the whale. And if you’ve only touched The HSUS through one of our many programs, you may not comprehend the scope of our work.

© iStockphoto

We have created a new logo designed to touch people with a simple image or icon that paints a more vivid picture of our work. 

There are three elements of this logo worth spotlighting. First, there are 18 different animals in the logo. These are animals of all types, visually demonstrating that we work to protect all animals—not just predators, or dogs and cats, or farm animals. Your HSUS is there for all animals.

Second, the animals collectively represent a map of the United States. This configuration conveys the national reach of our work. The industries that do harm to animals—factory farming, the fur trade, animal fighting syndicates, puppy mills—are of a national and global scope, and they cannot be successfully challenged at a local level alone. 

Third, you won’t see images of injured or bloodied animals. While we work to fight against abuse and exploitation, and while we expose the consequences of human-caused cruelty when we must, we imagine a world where animals are healthy and alive. We celebrate the lives of animals, and that’s our goal—to prevent cruelty and to see them healthy and well.

© iStockphoto

The founders of The HSUS in the 1950s saw a need for an organization that could confront national cruelties. In 2007 and beyond, The HSUS has never been more capable in confronting these industries and shielding animals from cruelty and abuse. 

More than ever, we want you to join us in helping us advance our mission. We welcome your help in any way you choose to participate. But more than ever, we need you engaged in the many dimensions of our work. When we have informed and engaged citizens on our side, guided by the principle of human responsibility and mercy, we can change our country and our world for the better. 

Talk Back: Voices of Dissent

Two responses to the Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act and the blog:

I think that the people who voted for this bill need to butt out. We do not put bans on the things that you do and how dare you do this to us. I say if you don't want to watch TURN YOUR HEAD!!!!! —Very Upset Reader

Hello, I can respect the fact that animals should be treated with basic responsibility. I have had animals all of my life. However I can’t understand how it is any of your business what I do with my animals. My animals in no way affect your rights as an individual in this country. But you are trying to affect mine. Please explain this to me. Thanks —Ken Raymer

Rebuilding for a New Louisiana

© iStockphoto

Yesterday, I blogged on the efforts in the Louisiana legislature to rid the state of cockfighting. The fight in Baton Rouge is far from over, and the outcome is uncertain. But everyone agrees there is more momentum than ever to ban cockfighting. When that happens, and it appears inevitable, we will see dozens of cockfighting arenas torn down. 

Cockfighting symbolizes the old Louisiana, and the elimination or repurposing of these facilities cannot happen soon enough. Cockfighting is a blight on the state's reputation, and the stigma of cockfighting will be a drag on the state's image for as long as the activity has the protection of the law ("fowl" are exempted under the terms of the anti-cruelty code). If cockfighting continues, it would not only remind people about barbaric treatment of animals, but also about corruption, regressive thinking and other negative impressions and stereotypes of the state.

The prospect of razing cockfighting arenas happens at the same time that the Louisiana SPCA  has raised the roof on its new facility. The HSUS donated $2 million to the project, and we are proud to have played a part in its reconstruction, which has been led by Laura Maloney, the group's outstanding executive director.

The Dorothy Dorsett Brown Louisiana SPCA Campus is a wonderful and important symbol of the progress and renewal that has ensued since Hurricane Katrina struck. Today, HSUS staff members Lou Guyton, Melissa Rubin and Bernard Unti attended the ribbon-cutting ceremony. Melissa was one of the speakers, and she emphasized The HSUS’ continuing commitment to the Gulf Coast region, which includes spay/neuter partnerships with veterinary schools and continuing support for shelters and other facilities working to recover from the disaster.   

© The HSUS/Milani

The Louisiana SPCA’s Japonica Street facility was destroyed during Katrina. Fortunately, staff members were successful in evacuating all of the animals in their care. Ironically, the loss of the facility set the stage for the fulfillment of a longtime dream for animal lovers in the New Orleans area, many of whom have hoped for a shelter whose physical design would better accommodate its commitment to compassionate care and the cementing of the human-animal bond.

The Brown campus does this well. The animal areas are designed to minimize stress and bring in natural light. Six exercise yards allow volunteers and staff members to spend one-on-one time with the dogs. And adoptable cats occupy a kennel complete with soft bedding and a privacy area.

The new Louisiana versus the old Louisiana. Animal care centers versus cockfighting pits. In with the new, out with the old. All of us are a part of this cultural and economic transformation.

Big Wins for Cockfighting and Horse Slaughter Bans

There have been some signature wins in state legislatures this week—particularly on two of the worst forms of animal abuse The HSUS has been campaigning to stamp out through the law.

First, on Tuesday, in the Louisiana Senate, lawmakers passed an immediate ban on cockfighting by a staggering vote of 34–4. The politics of this issue have entirely flipped in the state, and only the most hardened pro-cockfighting lawmakers can stake out a position favoring continuation of the barbaric practice of staged animal fights. 

The anti-cockfighting campaign in the legislature has been championed by state Senator Art Lentini (R-Metairie)—one of the most articulate and clear-thinking lawmakers I have come across. As you may know, Louisiana is the only state in the nation to allow legal cockfighting. He has masterfully dissected the arguments of cockfighting advocates at every step of the process, and the votes he has garnered for his legislation are a testament in part to his skills and tenacity.

The Louisiana House also passed an anti-cockfighting measure, but they postponed the effective date for 14 months and inserted devastating amendments to the state’s anti-cruelty statute. The HSUS favors Lentini’s Senate bill, and we will be working for the adoption of the stronger provisions as the issue moves through the process.

© Fair Dinkum Farm
Willie, a foal born days after his blind
mother was rescued from the Cavel
slaughter plant by The HSUS.

Meanwhile, in Illinois, the state Senate approved a ban on the slaughter of horses by a commanding vote of 39-16. The state House passed the exact same bill two weeks ago by a wide margin, too, and the bill now goes to Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich for his signature. Blagojevich is one of the nation’s most pro-animal chief executives. He has worked hard to get this done and he has pledged to sign the bill as soon as he gets it.

Special thanks also go to Illinois Rep. Bob Molaro (D-Chicago) and Senator John Cullerton (D-Chicago) for leading this fight and getting the job done. The legislative win they have engineered is far more than a symbolic victory. Illinois has the last operating horse slaughter plant in the United States (Cavel International in DeKalb), which kills tens of thousands of healthy horses a year. This bill will shut down this abominable business in the state once and for all.

Some people say individual actions don’t make a difference. They are wrong. And some people also say that all politicians are the same. They are wrong about that, too. The Art Lentinis, the Bob Molaros, the John Cullertons and the Rod Blagojevichs are living proof that our nation benefits from having principled, caring lawmakers serve in public office.

Mad Pig Industry

The pork industry is bent out of shape about a two-sentence comment on the “possibility” that pigs may harbor a variant of mad cow disease, which appeared in my 16-page, single-spaced written testimony submitted to the House Agriculture Committee. 

In a section of my testimony where I urge the Congress to pass legislation to ban the mistreatment of downer livestock—animals too sick or injured to walk, who are dragged or pushed into the slaughterhouse—the following comment was included:

“Non-ambulatory cattle are not the only downer animals who may jeopardize the health of Americans. Scientific studies have pointed to the possibility that pigs, whose diet can include ground-up cattle remains, may harbor a porcine form of mad cow disease.”

© The HSUS

Mind you, this comment was buried in my testimony, and I did not mention it in my oral testimony.  Perhaps it would not have even gotten a second glance until the pork industry made it a public matter for debate by issuing a statement calling my comments not credible.

"Wayne Pacelle either misled Congress, or he's ignorant of the facts," said Barb Determan, a pork producer from Early, Iowa, and past president of the National Pork Producers Council.

The NPCC statement reads: "The nation's 67,000 pork producers would like to know if (Pacelle) intentionally misled (the) subcommittee, or did he fail to do research on the issue before testifying?"

Within the walls of The HSUS, I have a great expert to turn to on this matter—Dr. Michael Greger, The HSUS’ director of public health and animal agriculture. In 2006, he wrote "Bird Flu: A Virus of Our Own Hatching," which has been lauded by some of the most noted scientists who have studied avian influenza.

Dr. Greger focuses his work on the human health implications of intensive animal agriculture. I’ve asked him to offer his thoughts about the “possibility” that there may be a porcine form of mad cow disease. His perspective follows:

British government researchers proved that pigs are indeed susceptible to infection with bovine spongiform encephalopathy or "mad cow disease" in research published in 1990 in The Veterinary Record, the official scientific journal of the British Veterinary Association.¹ In a memorandum to the Veterinary Laboratories Agency of the United Kingdom, one of the researchers explained that the study provided “incontrovertible evidence of the transmissibility of BSE to the pig.”²

A number of studies have even suggested a link between pork consumption and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, an invariably fatal brain disease affecting humans. A study published in 1985 in the prestigious American Journal of Epidemiology,³ concluded that “consumption of pork as well as its processed products (e.g., ham, scrapple) may be considered as risk factors in the development of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.” The study was co-authored by Dr. D. Carleton Gajdusek, recipient of the Nobel Prize in Medicine for his research on these brain diseases.

Talk Back: Animal Welfare in Agriculture

Readers are talking about Wayne's entry on the House Agriculture Subcommittee hearing and the misleading statements made by industry witnesses. Below is a sampling of the remarks we received. If you would like to join the conversation, offer a comment below.

I wonder if our representatives of the United States of America realize the power of the people. We voted them into office and we can vote them out. Men/women who care nothing about animals and their treatment will also have the same regard for their fellow man. –JoAnna Sonnier

What a biased group. You were spot on when you said the industry fears animal advocates, closing their eyes and covering their ears to the idea that “non-human" animals do, indeed, have minds and emotions and are not simply expendable commodities to be used and exploited. Also, I've read the CCF's ramblings and rhetoric regarding the HSUS and, basically, every other animal advocacy organization. Ridiculous, ignorant propaganda. Yes, Mr. Pacelle, I believe you're right. They truly are scared. Thank you for all you've done and continue to do for animals and for making the HSUS what it is today. Well done, sir. –Debbie Hogan

Will Republicans not understand that they are losing voters like ME because of their failure to support humane treatment of animals?

I am a former Republican. I am an average, middle-class person. Animal welfare issues are mainstream now. I will not vote Republican again until the "confused old men" leading the party astray remember their constituents. Or the younger Republican men and women show the party the new direction it must take. –ted

NFL Star at Center of Dogfighting Investigation

He denies any wrongdoing, but the information that has come to light looks awfully incriminating.

Michael Vick, one of the most gifted talents in the National Football League and a quarterback with the Atlanta Falcons, is suspected of running a dogfighting operation out of his former Virginia home, which he has now sold.

Law enforcement raided his place on April 26 on the suspicion of drug activity, following the April 20 arrest of Vick’s cousin, who lived in the house. When they searched the Surry county property, however, they found an unusual stash—66 dogs, most of them pit bulls, many scarred or emaciated. They also found a blood-stained carpet, break sticks and medications—all indicators of a major-league dogfighting operation (read more here, here and here).

Vick denies involvement, claiming he rarely used the house and that his relatives took advantage of his generosity. But a local store owner reports that Vick often came in to buy syringes, tools of the dogfighting world used to inject the animals with steroids and medications in pre- and post-fight treatments. And according to Fox Sports Radio's Chris Landry, former Falcons teammate Ray Buchanan told him that Vick was deep into the world of dogfighting, though Buchanan now has retracted his statements.

Vick was well known to The HSUS as a suspected dogfighter. A website for his kennel, “Vick’s K-9 Kennels," advertises pit bulls and several other breeds of dogs.   

I wrote to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and told him that this situation requires his full attention (see my letter). Dogfighting is a serious crime—a felony in Virginia and a federal felony, too. Engaging in dogfighting is not like getting a speeding ticket. There is no form of animal cruelty with harsher penalties under the law.

Dogfighting is a sickening and barbaric activity, and state and federal law reflect the public’s utter disgust for the practice. If the investigation confirms Vick’s involvement, he should be dealt with sternly, no matter how talented a player he is. Stern action sends a signal to every NFL player, and every fan, that dogfighting is an entirely unacceptable business and no one who values his job or his freedom should have any involvement with the activity.

I also invited Goodell to work with The HSUS in a public awareness campaign and an outreach campaign to NFL players about animal fighting and other forms of animal cruelty. Another Atlanta Falcons player, defensive tackle Jonathan Babineaux, was charged some weeks ago with cruelty to animals for allegedly killing his girlfriend’s pit bull. And in past years several other professional football players have been linked to dogfighting. The Vick case may be just an indicator of a larger subculture of animal cruelty and fighting in professional sports.

The fact that every state, and the federal government, have laws against dogfighting indicates a zero tolerance policy for the practice. The NFL should have a zero tolerance policy, too. The HSUS will be watching developments in this case.

Alternatives for Pigs Crammed in Crates

There was a national Associated Press story out last week about some new research from Iowa State University regarding the confinement of breeding pigs in gestation crates. The story opens,

“A new study is raising questions about the effectiveness of small, metal crates for pregnant pigs that animal welfare groups say are cruel and inhumane.”

For decades, the nation’s top pig producers and the scientists in their employ have defended the practice of keeping these 500-pound animals in two-foot-wide crates for virtually their entire four-month pregnancies. The confinement is so harsh that the animals are unable to turn around. They can be subjected to this privation for as long as three years, or for as many as 10 successive pregnancies (video). For this reason, animal advocates have targeted gestation crate confinement as one of the most abusive agribusiness practices currently employed.

© Farm Sanctuary

As recent as this past Wednesday—at a hearing on an HSUS-sponsored bill (AB 594) that would ban gestation crates in California—industry has argued that not using gestation crates would put it at an economic disadvantage. This new study calls that belief into question; in fact, researchers found that group housing structures could reduce costs. On group housing versus gestation crate confinement, the AP story quotes one of the ISU researchers:

"What we found was that there appears to be no real difference in pig performance between the two."

My old boss Cleveland Amory once said that “human beings have an infinite capacity to rationalize their cruelty.” His words ring in my ears almost every day as I hear all manner of apologists for inhumane practices defend human conduct that is, to a common observer, plainly out of bounds.

Finally now, we are breaking through on the issue of intensive confinement of farm animals, though the situation is still too grim for these hapless creatures. Not only is the entire European Union phasing out gestation crates, but voters in Florida and Arizona have now ensured that their states will do the same. In the wake of the Arizona vote this past November, the U.S.’s and Canada’s largest pig producers both announced that they, too, will phase out their use of gestation crates. Now it is time for others to follow, including policy makers.

The success of the anti-gestation crate campaign so far further demonstrates just how out of step animal agribusiness is with the moral sentiments of most Americans, and it also shows what progress the animal movement is capable of when we take an aggressive, results-oriented approach to combating inhumane treatment. We are gaining traction on the issue, and it’s about time.

Long Battle Results in Powerful Law Against Animal Fighting

It’s been a long time coming. Last week, President Bush signed the Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act (H.R. 137), putting to a close a six-year battle in Congress to establish felony-level penalties for interstate and foreign commerce in dog fighting, cockfighting and other forms of staged animal fighting. Since President Bush has vetoed only two bills during his six-plus years in office, his support was no surprise, though the news was still very welcome and appreciated.

With commanding margins in the Senate and House, it was obvious that the legislation drew remarkable support from Democrats and Republicans. That’s how it should be for animal issues—opposition to animal cruelty is a universal value, and elected officials of every political stripe should support efforts to stop it.

The House co-authors were Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.), Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) and Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.)—three of the best friends animals have in Congress. The Senate bill was led by Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), John Ensign (R-Nev.), Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)—again, all major allies of animal protection.

© The HSUS

In the Senate, the bill also got a major assist from Senator David Vitter (R-La.), who worked hard to convince a few skeptical Republican colleagues that it was