Few are in a position to speak for the animals like Wayne Pacelle. As President and CEO of The Humane Society of the United States, he leads the nation's largest animal protection organization in the mission of celebrating animals and confronting cruelty. Read more »
The
HSUS has been battling against the slaughter of American horses for human consumption for
many years. With kill plants shuttered in the United States, the field of
battle is increasingly on foreign soil; our neighbors in Canada and Mexico are
taking in American horses and slaughtering them, while European and Asian
nations (Belgium, France, Italy, Japan, and others) are importing that
processed horse meat for
human consumption.
In
all these nations – thanks to the work of our investigators and program staff
with The HSUS and Humane Society International – we are finding a trail of
cruelty and deception, which is fomenting public concern among
European citizens about the integrity, honesty and wholesomeness of the global
horse slaughter enterprise.
Kathy Milani/The HSUS American horses being loaded onto a double-decker truck in Texas, bound for slaughter in Mexico.
A
recent HSI investigation found horse meat to be a “hidden ingredient” in
several types of cheap convenience foods sold in local markets, and that most
Europeans have no interest in consuming horse meat. In the last few weeks,
major supermarket chains in Ireland, Spain, and the United Kingdom were found selling
beef burgers and other products that contained as much as 29 percent horse meat
(according to DNA tests). Millions of burgers have been recalled, and in the
U.K., Burger
King has dropped a supplier that was linked to the burgers contaminated
with horse meat.
We’ve
said all along that this is a disreputable, predatory industry, with no
authentic standards or professionalism. The fact that horse meat is being
comingled with other meats is no surprise to us, though it has been a major surprise
to European consumers.
The
European Union, which restricts imports of American pork because pigs
are treated with ractopamine, and American poultry because chickens are treated
with chlorine, should not be permitting adulterated horse meat to enter their
economic markets. It is indisputable that American horses – whether they
come off the racetrack, out of the show ring or from a ranch – are treated
throughout their lives with drugs prohibited for use in food producing animals,
both here and in the EU. The fact is, Canada and Mexico do not have
sufficient protocols for safety testing, yet somehow the EU is allowing these
products in.
There
are many very good reasons to oppose horse slaughter, including the malevolent
presence of killer buyers misrepresenting their intentions at auctions, inhumane
long-distance transport, and cruel
and clumsy slaughter methods. But if altruistic and humane
concerns are not sufficient to convince policy makers to act, then consumer
protection standards related to food safety and authentic labeling should be
enough to put the horse slaughter industry out of business.
In a paper published and released yesterday and widely
reported in the mainstream press, professional wildlife biologists associated
with the Smithsonian Institution and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service claim
that domesticated cats kill as many as 3.7 billion birds and more than 15
billion small mammals each year in the United States through acts of predation
(Loss, Will and Marra). In coming up with these numbers, the authors
tried to assess the behavior of owned and un-owned cats – which we could categorize
as feral (un-owned), free-roaming (owned or semi-owned), and indoor-outdoor
owned cats (owned or semi-owned). If the real number for cat predation is
even one tenth or one one-hundredth of the numbers invoked by the authors of
this study, it warrants serious attention from the animal protection movement
and from everyone else concerned about cats and about wildlife.
This subject is hardly a new one for The HSUS, and its
conclusions are no revelation. The HSUS has been examining this question for
decades, and in fact, our Humane Society Institute for Science and Policy
hosted a major conference that featured scientists, environmentalists,
government wildlife managers, humane and conservation organizations and government animal care entities on this very subject just last month. No group is better suited to fairly
examine the multiple facets of this problem than The HSUS, given that we house one of
the most expert and experienced companion animal programs in the world and we
also employ more than 125 wildlife professionals, including wildlife-care
personnel at our three wildlife rehabilitation centers.
In our examination of this issue, both as a matter of
measuring impact and also prescribing solutions or mitigation strategies, here
are some of our core conclusions, opinions, and recommendations.
There are, indeed, tens of millions of domesticated cats who spend time outdoors, and many of these cats exhibit predatory behavior toward wildlife. But it’s virtually impossible to determine how many cats live outside, or how many spend some portion of the day outside. Loss, Will, and Marra have thrown out a provocative number for cat predation totals, and their piece has been published in a highly credible publication, but they admit the study has many deficiencies. Their work is derivative of what others have done on the topic, and they have essentially rolled up what they could find in the literature and done their best to attach some numbers. We don’t quarrel with the conclusion that the impact is big, but the numbers are informed guesswork.
A responsible, loving cat caretaker – who typically provides sound nutrition, monitors the cat's health and provides regular and emergency veterinary care, and social enrichment and stimulation in the form of play and toys – provides the safest environment for a cat and offers him or her the opportunity to live a long, complete life. While the outdoors is going to be highly stimulating for cats, indoor cats can be psychologically healthy, assuming that the caretaker works hard to stimulate them and provide them with a rich life. Outdoor options can be safely added to a cat’s routine through the use of enclosures or leash/harness walking.
Humane organizations and volunteers are the leaders in dealing with the problem of cat predation on wildlife. All across the country, they are working to mitigate the effects of cat predation by encouraging people to keep cats indoors, by encouraging the adoption of un-owned cats, and by promoting spaying and neutering – which is the best way to lower total numbers. There is a vast network of cat advocates, and many of them are conducting Trap, Neuter, and Return programs. These programs can slow or eliminate growth of feral cat communities. The figure below demonstrates the long term impact of the animal protection movement’s efforts to get people to keep their cats indoors.
It is morally wrong, publically unsupportable, and practically impossible to catch and euthanize the feral cats in our communities. There is no labor force large enough, or willing, to conduct such activities.
The HSUS has composed an extensive white paper on this broad topic, which was posted on its website today, along with a review of the many facets of this issue. Our in-house authors take a serious, science-based look at the problem, but from the orientation that respects the interests of both cats and wildlife. While the problem of cat predation is real and very significant, there is nothing to be gained by demonizing cats or suggesting Draconian and far-out solutions. The best approach involves sterilizing cats, conducting robust TNR programs, support for innovative cat programs through shelters and rescues, and educating owners on how keeping cats indoors is valuable for both cats and wildlife.
The HSUS has long been a leader in using technology to improve the
lives of animals, building a network of more than 1.6 million advocates through
our main Facebook page and
making our award-winning videos widely accessible through the pioneering HumaneTV app.
Now
we are bringing our remarkable magazine, All Animals, to readers in digital
form – and it’s got some amazing bells and whistles. Combining the best of our
storytelling assets and engagement tools – investigative reporting, compelling
writing, stunning photos and video, beautiful graphic design, sharing features,
and live blog and Twitter feeds – this digital version of our bimonthly
publication leverages the most popular tablet platform to deliver top-notch
advocacy journalism to a broader audience.
Developed
in partnership with Daily Interactive Networks, All
Animalsfor iPad is a window into the world and the work of The HSUS
and its affiliates. In the current issue, now available on Apple’s Newsstand,
readers can visit the colorful streets of a Philippine city and see an open-air
spay/neuter clinic in action. They can watch rescued pets reunite with their
families after Superstorm Sandy, learn how to plant berry bonanzas for wild
visitors to their backyards, and share the story of a groundbreaking program to
bring pet care to underserved communities. Best of all, they can take action
within the app, signing up to support our campaigns or receive our Meatless
Mondays recipe of the week.
Our next issue, on the Newsstand at the end of February, will
take readers into the underworld of captive parrot breeding and, through an
interactive quiz, allow them to test their own knowledge of what really makes a
pit bull a pit bull (hint: the much-maligned “pit bull” isn’t actually a
recognized breed). It’s all right there within the app, this package of
information about humans and their attitudes and behavior toward animals – a
story that’s rich in complexity and contradictions, full of heartache and
inspiration.
Already
mailed in print form to more than 550,000 subscribers, the paperless version of
All Animals has the potential
to touch millions with stories about our great cause. Download it, read it,
watch it, swipe it, scroll through it, and most of all, use its sharing tools
to spread the word through email, Facebook,
Twitter, and Pinterest. You never know
whose eyes you’ll open or whose lives you’ll touch.
I received an outpouring of responses upon announcing the untimely passing of Billy, the little Chihuahua rescued from
a North Carolina puppy mill and adopted by Animal Rescue Team leader Adam
Parascandola. The video
showing a playful Billy with Adam became an Internet sensation.
I am posting just a few of your comments today in response to the news. I
hope that the vast majority of you, in addition to expressing your rightful
sorrow about Billy’s demise, will also use the memory of this troubled little
dog to motivate your involvement in ongoing legislative and public awareness
campaigns to crack down on puppy mills and establish humane breeding standards.
We expect anti-puppy mill bills in more than a dozen states this year,
including North Carolina, where The HSUS has conducted more than a dozen raids
on mills in recent years. Lawmakers should realize that this sort of cruelty
can be prevented with the adoption of humane breeding standards.
By the time many dogs are rescued from a mill, they are suffering from
ailments as severe as Billy's, or worse. Often, it's almost too late by the
time we find them. Please check out our Stop
Puppy Mills page for ways you can help.
Thank God this dear little dog at least had some time in his life where he received humane treatment and lots of love and affection. I think your humane rescuers are great people and it makes me think that there are some good people left in this world. - Judy Pizarro
Wayne, sorry to hear about Billy, but I am glad he was rescued and had a happy life until his unexpected death. You have my sympathy at his passing. May Billy rest in peace knowing he was free. - Cynthia Brown
Please end the suffering of those that cannot help themselves! These animals deserve laws that will protect them. - Lynn Stowers
Billy was happy in the end and we are so grateful to you! May God bless you for all you do and may He keep Billy safe and free from pain and suffering. Puppy mills suck! Please adopt from shelters! This just broke my heart. - Elba
I'm so sad...for a little guy I didn't know personally. The video of him being rescued made me cry, and I can't stop crying now. I am glad he had the love of a family, and didn't succumb in that rusty cage. I hope Billy is now free to live his true life in eternity. - Felicia
Rest in peace you beautiful little guy, Billy. I am so sorry you suffered so much but am thankful you did get some much deserved love from Adam. May you rest in peace little Billy. - Ruth Loutchan
I am so, so saddened to read this blog about Billy's passing. - Luvcats5CT
Sorry to hear of your loss. At least he went with a happy heart and a smile! - Mary Reid
I hope whoever did this to Billy lives out the rest of their life in a cage... jail is the only place for them. - Diane
So sorry for your loss! Billy was so adorable and I'm happy that you and your family rescued him and he was able to be so loved for his last few months. I also hope you can rescue another fur baby soon... God Bless. - Mary
Wayne, sorry to hear about Billy, but I am glad he was rescued and had a happy life until his unexpected death. You have my sympathy at his passing. May Billy rest in peace knowing he was free. - Cynthia Brown
Oh Lord, have mercy on us. Rest in peace, Billy. - Lilia Cruz
I've posted this on Facebook. Too many innocent loving creatures suffer like this, without hope of rescue. Keep up the good work! - Rebecca
OMG this made me cry! How sad that Billy passed, but at least he's not in pain anymore and had a great family that cared for him in the end. - Blake
Wayne Pacelle: It’s
difficult to build a discussion around a single factor, since there are so many
interrelated forces that shape our world, but I am quite sure that capitalism
has not made the world better for animals. So many people and businesses view
animals as property and treat them like things, whether it’s in factory
farming, the fur trade, the wildlife trade, or so many other sectors of the
animal economy.
John Mackey: The
economic system reflects the consciousness of the people who are in it. Unfortunately,
the free enterprise capitalist system has allowed us to exploit animals more
thoroughly than ever before. Animals didn't have any rights, any value in the
era of industrialism. But as people’s consciousness evolves, conscious
capitalism has the potential to radically improve conditions for animals.
Communications tools for The HSUS are dramatically superior to those 25 years
ago. Now we can link together with people throughout the world, and this has
enabled people to learn about our issues and pass on information faster. There
is more transparency; bad things cannot be hidden away. Great progress can be
made, perhaps not as fast as we would like, but I see great evolution
occurring. It’s the fault of the consciousness of human beings and as that
consciousness evolves higher so will our treatment of animals.
John Mackey, Co-CEO of Whole Foods Market
WP: Isn’t factory
farming an example of a form of agriculture divorced from so many of our core
values in society?
JM: Factory
farming is an example of less conscious livestock raising. It recognizes only
one value: make money by increasing production for lower cost. However, we can
create other alternatives that make money. It’s not that the motive is wrong, but
it is too narrow – not conscious enough. The practitioners of capitalism are
evolving and so will their treatment of animals, especially with the help of organizations
such as The HSUS.
Slavery was legal in nearly half of the states 150 years
ago – 14 of 29 states – in 1863. Women did not have the right to vote
anywhere in the world 100 years ago. Colonialism was a primary force in
creating the world map that we knew, even as recently as 75 years ago. We had
racial segregation not long ago. Twenty five years ago, half the world still
thought communism was the right way to organize ourselves politically. These
are all examples of consciousness evolving. In 1910, only 9 percent of adults
in America had a high school degree – today it’s 85 percent, and 40 percent
have college degrees. Even though our educational system has major defects,
it’s an example of rising consciousness. Every ten years, the Flynn effect,
measuring our IQ, has gone up 4 percent.
WP: You are a vegan,
and Whole Foods Market provides so many products valued by vegans. You also
sell meat, but you were the first supermarket to adopt the Global Animal
Partnership standards for livestock welfare, creating a multi-tiered rating
system for animal products so consumers can get more information about welfare
standards and make more conscious choices.
JM: That’s what the
market wants. However, we are also leading our customers and teaching them to
eat fewer animal foods. When I got started 35 years ago, organic hardly
existed, and now it’s growing every year and it’s seen throughout the
marketplace. We have a much greater percentage of vegans today; 35 years ago it
was an unfamiliar term, and you were considered enlightened if you were a
lacto-ovo vegetarian. Today, for me, if you are lacto-ovo, you are not
enlightened about what’s happening with dairy cows or laying hens.
WP: That has to cost
a company a lot of money.
JM: We may be
sacrificing some short-term profits, but we are also differentiating ourselves
in the market. It will eventually be good for WFM, because millions of people
will see that we have authenticity and that we won’t sit still on this
important issue. We will continue to raise our standards higher over time. We
want a race to the top, whereas factory farming is a race to the bottom.
WP: Do you see any
conflict between your personal beliefs about veganism and your company’s
commerce in animal products?
JM: I really
don’t. I get criticized on this quite a bit – people call me a hypocrite. But I
believe that diet represents an individual choice at this point, with each
individual purchasing and consuming products according to his or her
conscience. I do that in my life, and I encourage my friends to go vegan. I
have personally converted many, many people, and it’s my goal to have everyone
exhibit higher consciousness through their eating choices, whether or not they
are vegan. WFM has come up with principles of healthy eating and we recommend predominately
plant-based diets.
What the abolitionists leave out of the equation is that
most people go through a gradual evolution in their consciousness. As people
become more conscious, they will grow and evolve their diets. Sometimes people
feel so guilty – they don’t want to know – and they walk away from a harsh
video or a stern lecture. The five-step GAP program allows people to start
looking at it. It allows people to change at a pace that is normal and natural.
This is a better strategy for changing consciousness, from my perspective.
WP: Is it working as
an economic model?
JM: It’s
progressing a bit slower than I would like. It is raising prices in the meat
department. People who are conscious are eating fewer animal foods, and the
people who are less conscious tend to also prefer less expensive choices. On
the other hand, it is the right thing to do and I'm confident that over the
long-term it will be quite successful. Given our collective consciousness at
WFM, we cannot sell factory farmed products because there is too much cruelty.
WP: Your book is a
manifesto and a learning manual for business leaders. I think that it also
provides guidance to nonprofit leaders and boards. What are some of the key
principles for these leaders to pay attention to in their work?
JM: I am on five
nonprofit boards. I’ve thought a lot about this. The nonprofit sector can teach
the profit sector about higher purpose, that’s the great intellectual capital it
offers. The problem for nonprofits is they are not as efficient, effective,
professional, and skilled as they should be. They have a tendency to limp along
based on the level of funds that they receive, whether they are effective or
not. Nonprofits need greater accountability and greater effectiveness, and
business can help. I do believe that businesses and nonprofits need to partner.
Our Whole Planet Foundation works with hundreds of microfinance groups all over
the world. We will drop those that are not that effective.
WP: Why are you a
board member of The HSUS? What attracts you to invest your time and money in
the organization?
JM: I am glad to
be on the board. When I first joined The HSUS team I had no idea of the tremendous
scope of its activities. It has remarkably far-reaching and diverse programs,
with global impacts. It is, most of all, an effective nonprofit organization,
with a high degree of professionalism and a real sense of strategy. Every
organization, including The HSUS, has limited funds and can’t do everything. At
The HSUS, you leverage your resources and conduct effective legal, information
and education, and corporate campaigns. It is by far the most effective animal
protection organization in the world, and may be more effective than the
combined efforts of most of the other groups.
I live across the street from a Whole Foods Market
store. When Whole Foods opened for business there a dozen or so years ago, the
neighborhood wasn’t all that great – not many businesses were around and it
wasn’t very safe. After the store opened, there was a remarkable economic
and social transformation. It’s now one of the most livable, fun, and
commercially active neighborhoods in Washington, D.C. People were shopping;
there was a huge uptick in pedestrian activity; other businesses soon opened;
condominiums rose. Whole Foods Market was the key to the area’s revitalization.
It reminds me that the impact of Whole Foods is
felt far beyond the check-out counters on its properties. There are many ways in
which its supply chains snake throughout the country, and indeed the
world. With its wide range of vegetarian and vegan options, it has helped
grow such companies as Tofurky, Field Roast, Gardein, Silk, and Daiya. Consumers
looking for meatless or dairy-free alternatives are provided with fantastic options
never before available. In 2005, Whole Foods decided it would sell only
cage-free eggs. Subsequent to that, it adopted a five-tier rating system for
the animal products sold in its stores, under a certification program called
the Global Animal Partnership. As with the vegetarian and vegan products,
providing shelf space to more humanely produced animal products gives consumers
options they’ve never had, and it provides markets for farmers who do not
confine animals in cages or crates, changing the way agriculture is conducted
throughout the U.S. and putting pressure on other major food retailers to adapt
when it comes to animal welfare.
John Mackey is the co-CEO of Whole Foods Market,
and he co-founded the company more than a quarter century ago. By any measure
it’s a remarkable company, with $12 billion in sales, more than 73,000
employees and 350 stores. Its presence in the marketplace has been transformational
– in terms of the look and in-store atmosphere, the products it sells, and its
commitment to organic products, sustainability, and animal welfare.
I’ve known John for many years, and he serves on
the board of The Humane Society of the United States. We also serve
together on the board of the Global Animal Partnership. He has written a
tremendously compelling and insightful book that was released a week and a half
ago called “Conscious Capitalism,” and you’ll soon see it on best-seller lists,
based on the attention it’s received and the sales numbers I’ve seen on Amazon.
I sat down with John, and asked him about the book
and the ideas in it. I’m publishing our interview in two parts for blog
readers, and part one is below.
Wayne
Pacelle:
The thesis of your book is that capitalism is heroic and made the world a
better place. Share with us some of the highlights of your argument that
supports that claim.
John Mackey: Two hundred
years ago, the average income for 85 percent of the people on the planet was
less than a dollar a day. Today it’s only 16 percent, and that’s changed
because of economic progress and growth. One day, in the 21st century,
we’ll probably end abject poverty across the planet. Two hundred years ago, 90
percent of the people were illiterate, and now it’s only about 13 percent. For
most of history, until late in the 19th century, the average life
span was only 30, now it is 68 across the world, and it’s 78 and gradually
climbing in the U.S. There are still wars, still diseases that kill us,
but we are making remarkable progress because of capitalism and vibrant economic
activity lifting everyone up. It used to be that poor people used to be very skinny,
but now they are obese. A smaller percentage of people than ever lack for
adequate calories.
WP: The name of
your new book differentiates your brand of capitalism from the standard
version. What’s distinctive or different about your view of capitalism? In
other words, what’s wrong with unconscious capitalism?
JM: Today we are no
longer truly practicing free enterprise capitalism. It is government-controlled
and regulated – a type of crony capitalism. There are too many regulations and
special tax breaks. To avoid the fiscal cliff, they passed taxes on just one or
two percent of the public, but they retained the tax breaks given to a lot of
politically connected people and created some new ones that didn't exist
before. Even in its distorted version, it is still freer in the U.S. than most
other places, but we've fallen from a No. 3 ranking in the Economic Freedom
Index in the year 2000 down to only a No. 18 ranking today, and our collective
prosperity is now contracting. When people can freely produce and trade,
widespread prosperity is the result, when that freedom decreases so does our
prosperity.
Conscious
capitalism says that every business has a higher potential beyond just making
money. Doctors make a lot of money but their true purpose is to heal. Teachers
don’t teach to just make money. The HSUS has a higher purpose – celebrating
animals, confronting cruelty. The first principle of conscious capitalism is to
discover what your higher purpose is. Every enterprise can have a higher
purpose. Business cannot run without making a profit; without making money,
it cannot renew itself. My body cannot exist if it doesn’t produce red
blood cells, but my purpose is not to make red blood cells.
The
second principle is that business has a broader responsibility than to just
shareholders. Customers, workers, suppliers, and others matter. When you
have happy employees, you have happy customers, who in turn make happy
investors. A conscious business recognizes interdependency and creates value
for everybody involved.
Business
has always done this, but it’s been more unconscious. Business is the greatest
value creator in the world for all stakeholders. No one is coerced to
trade and it is ultimately based on voluntary exchange for mutual benefit. It
isn't a zero sum game with winners and losers like sports. Rather it is a
win-win-win system of mutual value creation.
WP: For companies only
concerned about profit and the bottom line, how can conscious capitalism
compete against them? I assume it’s because consumers will value these
products more because they reflect their core beliefs about animal welfare, the
environment, worker protection, and other social subjects.
JM: More energy is
unleashed by a conscious business. It will have greater loyalty among workers
and customers, it will treat its suppliers differently, and it will have more
creative employees and suppliers. Conscious businesses have outperformed the
S&P by a staggering 1000 percent over the last 15 years! The 100 Best
Companies to Work For also easily outperform the S&P.
There
is a myth that once you go against a ruthless competitor, you’ll get
slaughtered. This isn't true. A conscious company doesn’t mean it’s perfect,
but it has so many strengths and many fewer vulnerabilities than a less
conscious business. They are very successful at competing with less
conscious businesses. You can find faults at WFM, but we are working hard
to constantly get better. You can find fault with anyone. You can find
fault with The HSUS.
WP: It’s difficult
to build a discussion around a single factor, since there are so many
interrelated forces that shape our world, but I am quite sure that capitalism has
not made the world better for animals. So many people and businesses view
animals as property and treat them like things, whether it’s in factory
farming, the fur trade, the wildlife trade, or so many other sectors of the
animal economy.
JM: The economic
system reflects the consciousness of the people who are in it. Unfortunately
the free enterprise capitalist system has allowed us to exploit animals more
thoroughly than ever before. Animals didn't have any rights, any value in the
era of industrialism. But as people’s consciousness evolves, conscious
capitalism has the potential to radically improve conditions for animals.
Communications tools for The HSUS are dramatically superior to those 25 years
ago. Now we can link together with people throughout the world, and this has
enabled people to learn about our issues and pass on information faster. There
is more transparency. Bad things cannot be hidden away. Great progress can be
made, perhaps not as fast as we would like, but I see great evolution occurring.
It’s the fault of the consciousness of human beings and as that consciousness
evolves higher, so will our treatment of animals.
While a handful of members of Congress delayed action on a
recent bill to phase out the use of chimps in invasive experiments during the
lame-duck session, yesterday a National Institutes of Health Working Group tasked with
examining the NIH’s future role in chimpanzee research made
sweeping recommendations to further the goal of phasing out
chimp use. The panel’s recommendations include phasing out all current
biomedical research grants involving chimpanzees in laboratories, ending
chimpanzee breeding, and retiring the vast majority of government-owned
chimpanzees to sanctuaries. These recommendations are bound to
please more
than 30,000 members of the public who urged this very set of actions in letters that we
delivered to the agency in
June of last year.
A chimpanzee stares out from her cage at the New Iberia Research Center. Over a dozen chimps were recently transferred to Chimp Haven from the NIRC, the first of 113 that will go to sanctuary.
This working group, formed in response to a
groundbreaking Institute of Medicine report in 2011, also tackled the important question
about what kind of environment is “ethologically appropriate” for
chimpanzees — in other words, what kind of environment is necessary to meet the
complex needs of chimpanzees. The group concluded that only certain sanctuary
settings, such as Chimp Haven and
Save the Chimps, can meet the needs of the animals. It’s important to note
that, based on the criteria set forth in the report, not one laboratory could
be considered ethologically appropriate. As a result, the working group urged
retirement of more than 300 government-owned chimpanzees to sanctuaries that
meet certain standards.
While we are extremely pleased with the working group’s
report, we have concerns about the recommendation to keep approximately 50
chimpanzees available for potential future use. Importantly, however, such
research would have to meet very strict criteria as assessed by a group of
various stakeholders, including members of the public. In addition, the
recommendations made it clear that any chimpanzees remaining in laboratories
need to be kept in more ethologically appropriate conditions set forth in the
report. The NIH will be making a final determination on these recommendations in
late March after a 60-day public comment period.
In other exciting news from yesterday, I’m happy to announce
that the first of the 113
government owned chimpanzees from New Iberia Research Center have arrived at Chimp Haven
where they will spend the rest of their lives in the peace and comfort they
deserve. The HSUS has pledged $500,000
toward construction costs for these chimps, thanks to help from one of our most
generous supporters.
With the NIH announcement yesterday, it is clear that our
challenge ahead is to augment capacity at the limited number of chimp sanctuaries
that now operate. The government certainly must play a major role in providing
these resources (since they are already paying to warehouse these chimpanzees
in laboratories at significant cost, and sanctuary care is much less expensive)
but we also call on pharmaceutical companies that have used chimpanzees to step
up and help support sanctuaries. With their enormous profits and balance
sheets, and their history of using animals in research and testing, it’s the
least they can do to help meet the needs of these chimps.
We’re
there raiding dogfights with law enforcement; digging out tortoises to save
them from being buried alive in construction projects, and then relocating them
to protected lands; medicating and sterilizing dogs and cats on remote Indian
reservations; capturing, sterilizing, and vaccinating street dogs in the
Philippines; nursing injured birds and rehabilitating them to return to the
wild in Central America; coming to the aid of dogs in puppy mills and working with emergency placement partners to
adopt them into loving homes; rushing into disaster zones while residents are
rushing out; training dogs for good behavior and operating free wellness clinics in inner city Atlanta; feeding
starving horses and taking them out of crisis; caring for thousands of
animals at the largest network of animal-care facilities in the nation. These
are just some of the ways we conduct the world’s most robust, diverse, and
far-reaching direct care programs for animals. No matter where animals are in
crisis, we’re there.
Kathy Milani/The HSUS The Fund for Animals Wildlife Center is an oasis in Ramona, Calif., where we treat injured and orphaned wildlife with the goal of releasing them back into the wild.
Animal
care is, of course, just part of what we do. We are working to prevent
cruelty and drive transformational change through our policy, awareness
building, and corporate campaigns. But we are also the biggest provider of
animal care in the animal welfare field. In 2012, The HSUS and its affiliates
provided direct care or help to more than 100,000 animals – our biggest total
ever. In all the ways we help – through our veterinary programs, international
street dog efforts, animal care centers, Animal Rescue Team, Wildlife
Innovations and Response, Humane Wildlife Services, and others – it’s an
extraordinary amount of life-saving activity for animals.
In
2012, our Animal Rescue Team deployed more than 30 times, rescuing more than
3,500 animals from life-threatening cruelty. We rescued 1,499 animals in danger
because of natural disasters, including Super Storm Sandy, Hurricane Isaac and
wildfires. We also rescued 1,529 animals from severe neglect situations, 1,126
dogs and birds from animal fighting, and 1,096 dogs from puppy mills. Among
the many cases we responded to, we rescued 11 exotic animals (three tigers, three
cougars, two leopards, two wolf-hybrids and a monkey) from a roadside zoo in
Collins, Miss., as well as 137 pet birds from horrible cruelty in Ohio.
Below
is a list of animals directly cared for by The HSUS, organized by category. In
addition to the 100,000 animals we helped through those programs, our sponsorship
of World Spay-Day efforts around the globe touched an additional 55,000 dogs
and cats.
I
am proud of all of our people and volunteers on the front lines of helping
animals. And I am grateful every day that so many people in the U.S. and
throughout the world support this work to help animals in crisis and in need.
With
President Obama’s inauguration and second term around the corner, I thought it
would be a good opportunity to take a look back at his animal protection record
over the last four years. How well has this administration responded to animal
protection concerns?
Viewed
with a wide lens, and examining the big subjects within the jurisdiction of
multiple agencies (e.g., the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department
of the Interior), the administration has performed in a mediocre way – not failing,
but far from stellar. There have been some positive steps, but also some
harmful actions. The biggest problem has been the administration’s inordinate
delays and inattention to these issues. In fact, I don’t believe the president
has said one word about animal protection, except for his early announcement
about a federal rule prohibiting most downer cattle in the food supply. Animal
protection has been off his radar screen. It’s safe to say that there’s been no
vision staked out by the president on these issues, and a very limited vision
from his cabinet secretaries whose daily work puts them in closer touch with
these questions.
2009-2013
Animal Protection Record: B minus
*Overall
grade reflects weighted ratings.
Animal
protection issues are spread across a number of departments, but some agencies
have accomplished more than others. Here is a brief breakdown of the key agencies
with jurisdiction over animal issues and their accomplishments over the past four
years.
U.S.
Department of Agriculture
The
USDA has oversight of a large number of animal protection issues, but the
agency only completed five rulemakings to help animals in the past four years. During
the president’s first 50 days in office, he announced that the administration
would finalize a pending USDA rule to close a loophole allowing slaughter of
adult downed cows. The rule was finalized about a month later.
Kathy Milani/The HSUS
The
next set of final rules to benefit animals would not appear until 2011, and
then again in 2012. USDA issued two final rules to benefit horses by: (1)
closing a loophole on the ban of the use of double decker trailers for
transporting horses to slaughter; and (2) requiring Horse Industry
Organizations to impose uniform mandatory minimum penalties for violations of
the Horse Protection Act. At the end of 2012, the agency
finalized a long awaited rule to keep track of traveling exhibitors by
requiring them to submit itineraries for all trips, and issued a final rule to
require disaster preparation for research facilities, dealers, and exhibitors
regulated under the Animal Welfare Act.
The
agency also made reforms to humane slaughter oversight. This included the establishment
of an Ombudsman in the Office of Food Safety to focus on humane handling issues
and provide agency employees with an avenue to raise concerns. The agency
addressed enforcement of humane slaughter by issuing training modules for
inspectors, guidelines for video surveillance in slaughterhouses, and new
procedures to ensure uniform enforcement for immediate humane euthanasia of all
downed adult cattle.
Unfortunately,
administrative delay has kept the USDA from completing three top priority rulemakings:
(1) responding to a petition that The HSUS submitted in 2009 to require that downer calves be humanely euthanized just as USDA
requires for adult downer cows; (2) finalizing a rule to prohibit the
importation of sick young puppies from foreign puppy mills; and (3) finalizing
a rule to crack down on puppy mills that sell large numbers of dogs to
consumers over the Internet without any federal oversight.
In
addition to the frustration created by its administrative delay, the USDA has
failed to take any actions to address programs that provide taxpayer giveaways
that directly harm animals without requiring any animal welfare changes. For
example, the USDA continues to sanction the use of lethal methods by Wildlife
Services, an agency program that kills predators and other wildlife as a subsidy for private
ranchers and other special interests, and has failed to shift the focus of its
resources to nonlethal alternatives. The agency has also continued to give
millions of dollars to the pork industry without mandating any animal welfare
reforms. The pork industry can continue immobilizing animals in small crates,
polluting waterways, and dosing animals with antibiotics, threatening the
public health of our nation, with no accountability.
Although
we hoped the administration would have completed more rulemakings to help
animals during its first term and made changes to programs that have long been
a concern to animal welfare advocates, the USDA made positive steps in
enforcement to ensure that important animal welfare laws were being upheld.
This includes cracking down on puppy mills and roadside zoos by increasing
enforcement under the AWA and imposing higher fines. The agency also increased
Horse Protection Act enforcement and worked with U.S. Attorneys to seek
criminal prosecutions.
There
are still areas, however, where the agency could improve animal welfare
enforcement. For example, although the Office of Inspector General audited the
horse transport program in 2010 and recommended numerous changes, including
prohibiting transport of horses to slaughter by individuals with outstanding
fines, the agency has failed to take significant steps to ensure that only
individuals with no outstanding fines can transport horses to slaughter. As a
result of this enforcement failure, transporters have no incentive to transport
horses humanely which has severe consequences for horses going to slaughter
facilities.
Finally, we were glad to see that the administration made increased transparency a priority. Some of the actions the USDA took
include posting AWA, HPA, and Humane Methods of Slaughter Act enforcement
actions online along with posting on the Internet inspection reports for animal
dealers, exhibitors and research facilities regulated under the AWA.
U.S.
Department of the Interior
The
DOI has jurisdiction over a large number of wildlife issues and The HSUS has
made a number of requests to the administration for important regulatory
changes. Over the course of the past four years, the DOI has responded to a number
of The HSUS’ requests by taking some necessary steps to protect endangered and
threatened species.
iStockphoto
One
of DOI’s first actions under this administration, done in conjunction with the
Department of Commerce, was to revoke President Bush’s eleventh hour rule
undermining Endangered Species Act protections by eliminating the important
consultation requirement. By revoking this rule, federal agencies must again
consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries
Service before taking any action that may affect threatened or endangered
species.
Next,
the agency took several important actions to protect specific species during
President Obama’s first term. For example the DOI acted to
protect dwindling polar bear populations by submitting proposals (in 2009 and 2012)
to move the species to Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, which would halt trade in polar
bear skins. In 2010, the agency designated more than 187,000 square miles as
critical habitat for this threatened species under the ESA and upheld a ban on
polar bear trophy imports.
The agency issued a final rule to protect manatees, including
the establishment of a manatee refuge in Kings Bay, Florida. Although the
agency has not yet finalized increased protections for chimpanzees and lions,
the agency found that The HSUS’ requests to list all chimpanzees (currently
only chimpanzees in the wild are designated as endangered) and African lions as
endangered under the ESA may be warranted. The agency is currently conducting a
formal review of the status of these animals.
Another
very important action the agency took was to issue a final rule listing four large constrictor
snake species as “injurious” under the Lacey Act, which prohibits the
importation and interstate transport of these dangerous snakes as pets. Large constrictor snakes can suffer in the pet trade, can
pose a danger to the public, and can become an invasive species when unwanted
pets are released outdoors. However, the agency unfortunately did not list the
other five species of large constrictor snakes, including reticulated pythons and boa
constrictors, which together have killed more U.S. citizens than any other
constrictor snakes, and were respectively identified as medium and high risk
invasive species by the U.S. Geological Survey. We hope the USFWS will consider listing the other five species of snakes in the near future.
Unfortunately,
it cannot be said that the DOI has only acted to protect animals during
President Obama’s first term. In fact, in some areas, the DOI has taken
harmful actions, or failed to protect iconic species. For instance, the agency
supported a budget rider that congress attached to an Fiscal Year 2011
appropriations bill, directing the USFWS to delist the Northern Rocky Mountain
Distinct Population Segment of gray wolves (in Idaho,
Mont., Utah, Wash., Ore.). The DOI also delisted the Western Great Lakes
Distinct Population Segment of gray wolves (in Minn., Wis.
and Mich.), and the Wyoming population of wolves. All of these actions are a
disservice to the iconic species which can now be hunted and trapped under hostile state management
plans. The department also failed to improve its wild horse program by failing
to increase the number of mares treated with immunocontraceptive fertility
control and by removing far more horses from the range than the agency is able
to adopt out.
Further,
the agency sought to decrease protections for African elephants and bobcats
under the CITES. Fortunately, neither proposal succeeded.
As
for enforcement, the USFWS deserves accolades for working hard to crack down on
the illegal wildlife trade, and took several high-profile actions to bust wildlife smugglers. The agency also made strides in increasing
transparency under the ESA permitting program.
U.S.
Department of Commerce
The
DOC has not been very active in working to protect marine mammals despite its
responsibilities under the law. However, the agency has taken a few significant
actions to protect marine mammals. For example, in 2010, the DOC protected the
commercial whaling moratorium at the International Commission meeting. The DOC
also listed the Insular stock of false killer whales in Hawaii as endangered
under the ESA and mandated restrictions on commercial fisheries that have
annually entangled and killed members of this small population. The agency also
issued an important rule to force groundfish fishing fleets farther away from
Western sea lion rookeries in Alaska to prevent the fisheries from generating
excessive competition for the fish that are key prey for the sea lions. The
agency also proposed a rule which would promote the conservation and
sustainable management of sharks, a much needed action to protect dwindling
shark species worldwide.
In
some areas, however, the DOC has failed to sufficiently protect marine mammals
and shark species.For instance, the DOC has agreed to allowthe
killing of up to 92 California sea lions each year for eating salmon near the
Bonneville Dam on the Columbia River. Sea lions are estimated to consume less
than four percent of ESA-listed salmon and in each of the past two years have
eaten only around 1 percent of the spring salmon at the dam (other factors, such as overfishing and habitat
destruction, are responsible for much greater shares of salmon loss). Also, due to
industry pressure, the agency failed to follow through with a gillnet fishery
closure that had been mandated due to the fishery’s failure to comply with
mandatory risk reduction measures meant to reduce drowning deaths of harbor
porpoises. The closure would have likely saved hundreds of harbor porpoises. In
another negative move, the agency failed to protect the porbeagle shark by
denying petitions to list the species under the ESA and the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. The agency also failed to protect North Atlantic right whales by issuing
biological opinions allowing three North American fisheries to continue to
operate in a manner resulting in deaths and serious injuries to this critically
endangered species. Finally, the agency took a move which could negatively
affect many marine mammal species by authorizing the construction of an
undersea naval warfare training range off the coast of Florida. This range
would use sonar testing and other training activities known to cause harm to
marine mammals.
On
another unfortunate note, the agency has delayed the issuance of two top
priority rulemakings that would help protect North Atlantic right whales: (1)
issuing a necessary rule restricting the speed of large vessels in specific
areas along the east coast where this critically endangered species is found in
the largest numbers during certain times of year, and (2) issuing a rule to expand
critical habitat for the whale, which the agency committed to publish in the
latter part of 2011 but has not yet released.
U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services
One
of the agencies to make significant changes for animals during the president’s
first term was HHS, ushering in very positive and encouraging actions. In 2012, the National Institutes of Health
announced it had ended its contract with the New Iberia Research Center and
that all 110 government-owned chimpanzees were now “permanently ineligible” for
future research. The HSUS supported the termination of the contract and
collaborated with NIH, Chimp Haven, and other groups, to develop a plan to move
all the chimpanzees to sanctuary at Chimp Haven, located in Louisiana. This
announcement came after a 2011 Institute of Medicine report, stating that the
current use of chimpanzees for biomedical research is unnecessary, with very
few exceptions. The NIH put together a working group on the use of chimpanzees
in NIH-supported research to provide suggestions on how to implement IOM’s
findings, and this report is expected to be released next week.
The HSUS
The
Department of Health and Human Services also made other strides with animals
used in invasive research by: (1) phasing out the use of dogs and cats obtained
from Class B random source dealers (including pets acquired through theft and
fraud); (2) implementing new procedures that avoid using animals in testing
Botox; and (3) announcing a $70 million commitment to collaborate with the
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to develop a chip to screen for safe
and effective drugs far more swiftly and efficiently than current methods that
rely on the use of animals.
One
area on which the Agency needs to improve is curbing the misuse of antibiotics
in animal agriculture. In 2012, the FDA issued final guidance with the intent
to inform the public of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s current
thinking on the use of medically important antimicrobial drugs in
food-producing animals. The guidance included evidence establishing that the
administration of antibiotics to food-producing animals poses a hazard to human
and animal health. In response to this, however, the FDA issued guidelines that
only establish a voluntary program with a long phase-in period, which continues
to put the public at risk if some operators do not comply with the voluntary
restrictions. These guidelines also do not satisfactorily address the routine use of
antibiotics in animal agriculture for “disease prevention” (when they are fed
to animals to keep them in unsanitary, overcrowded conditions where they will
predictably get sick).
There
are a number of other federal agencies with responsibilities that impact animal
welfare, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Federal
Trade Commission. The EPA approved the first fertility control vaccine for wild
horses, which we applaud. Expanding the use of this proven contraceptive should
lead to a significant reduction in wild horse round-ups. The agency also
removed the “restricted use” classification for a contraceptive for pigeons.
This new classification will make this product more readily available for
communities to control pigeon populations humanely and effectively. As for
animal alternatives, the EPA’s collaboration with The L’Oreal Group to create alternatives
to animal-based toxicity tests that test substances used in cosmetics should be
applauded.
Finally,
the FTC issued a proposed
regulation in 2012 that fails to correct an inaccurate and misleading use of
the industry trade name “Asiatic raccoon” on fur labels to describe the raccoon
dog (Nyctereutes procyonoides). The HSUS opposes this action because it does
not give consumers an accurate description of the product they are buying,
especially when fur from these animals is among the most highly mislabeled fur
available in the market today. The FTC did begin enforcement of the Truth in
Fur Labeling Act, which requires the labeling of all animal fur trim regardless
of dollar value, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection took action to
investigate and shut down a New York business selling domestic dog fur.
President
Obama’s Second Term – More Action Needed to Protect Animals
There are numerous actions that the administration did not
complete, and one of the significant problems with the first term
was ongoing regulatory delay. We encourage the administration to begin its
second term by addressing the following regulatory issues in the next 100 days:
Finalize the puppy mill retail rule and puppy mill import
rules
Issue a rule to close the loophole on downer veal calves
List
all chimpanzees as an endangered species and phase out invasive experiments on
chimpanzees
List
the African lion as an endangered species
Issue a rule listing the remaining five large constrictor
snakes as an injurious species prohibiting the importation and interstate
transport of these snakes as pets
Increase fertility control and decrease round-ups for wild
horses
Grant petition to declare horsemeat as condemned and
unqualified for human consumption and implement the Office of Inspector General’s
recommendations for strengthening horse slaughter transport, including refusing
to provide shipping documents to individuals who violate humane handling
regulations and who have outstanding fines
Phase
out the use of predator poisons Compound 1080 and sodium cyanide and audit
Wildlife Services, especially its lethal predator control program
Issue two important rules to protect North Atlantic right whales:
(1) a rule to restrict the speed of large vessels in areas where this species
is found, and (2) a rule to expand critical habitat for this species
Require animal welfare reforms before granting pork subsidies
Billy,
the endearing puppy mill Chihuahua who
touched hundreds of thousands of people when he appeared in a YouTube video
with his rescuer and new caretaker Adam Parascandola, died peacefully but
unexpectedly over the holidays. More
than 600,000 people watched our YouTube video, released months after The HSUS’
Animal Rescue Team took him from a mill in North
Carolina, where lawmakers have resisted imposing
any state-based humane breeding standards. HLN’s Jane Valez
Mitchell featured Billy and Adam on her show just weeks ago.
Like
so many breeding animals confined for years at puppy mills, Billy had many
chronic health conditions. He was scarred both physically and psychologically
as a consequence of living in a cage for years, denied veterinary care or any
meaningful human attention or affection. When I met Billy a few weeks ago at an
event at the Washington Animal Rescue League, I saw a bundle of joy, but with
obvious problems – most noticeably, his repetitive circling (dozens of times)
before he would urinate or defecate. A portion
of his lower jaw was missing due to years of chronic untreated periodontal
disease, and he had other ailments. Our rescue team, and Adam
specifically, provided him with the best vet care and endless doses of
affection, but he succumbed despite those acts of kindness.
At
this point, he becomes something of a timeless ambassador for what happens to
dogs in puppy mills, memorialized in the video that features him. At the
same time, his own happy spirit, despite his travails, reminds us of the
capacity of animals to forgive and to love. We, as a species, can learn
more than a thing or two from Billy about putting those principles into action.