Farmed Animal Watch: Objective Information for the Thinking Advocate
[missing header image]
[missing header image] Subscribe to Farmed Animal Watch

February 23, 2007 -- Number 6, Volume 7

1. NEW JERSEY FARMED ANIMAL STANDARDS UPHELD

A 3-judge New Jersey appellate court panel has unanimously ruled against a coalition of animal protection and public interest groups in their attempt to block new state standards for farmed animals. The N.J. Dept. of Agriculture had been directed by the state legislature to develop and adopt humane care regulations (see: http://tinyurl.com/32f8ok). The coalition had cited practices such as amputating cows’ tails, intensively confining (crating) pregnant pigs and calves, and transporting nonambulatory animals to slaughter as being inhumane. The state veterinarian countered that cow tail amputation is now only occasionally done, animals can only be taken to slaughter if there are no concerns about disease and they can be transported humanely, and she said she knows of no instances of calves or pigs in New Jersey being crated. In its ruling, the panel stated that, while both sides had support for their arguments, “"We are obliged to avoid encroaching on the Department's exercise of its expertise" (see PDF file: http://tinyurl.com/3eyaeu). A Farm Sanctuary spokesperson said the coalition members were primarily concerned with the matter because of the precedent it sets.


APPELLATE COURT UPHOLDS STANDARDS FOR HUMANE LIVESTOCK CARE
AM New York, Linda A. Johnson, February 16, 2007
http://tinyurl.com/3dg2lh


2. ANIMAL ADVOCATES MAY IMPACT FARM BILL DEBATES

Among the measures Congress is likely to consider in formulating the “farm bill” this year are: welfare standards for the slaughter of chickens and turkeys, a permanent ban on slaughtering nonambulatory animals, and a requirement that the federal government buy meat or dairy products only from producers that meet certain animal-welfare standards. Legislation that sets animal-welfare standards for federal suppliers is viewed as the initial step to setting nationwide standards for farmed animal care. “Flush with cash,” animal protection organizations will be working to have the bill prevent practices they consider inhumane. "The animal-rights movement has changed since 2002," said Kelli Ludlum, with the American Farm Bureau Federation, "You have your head in the sand if you think they are not more organized than they were five years ago." The Humane Society of the U.S., for example, has formed a new political arm that targeted campaign spending against several key lawmakers in last fall's election. Democrats now have control of both houses of Congress, and several of industry's staunchest allies are no longer in office.


ANIMAL-RIGHTS GROUPS COULD IMPACT UPCOMING DEBATES
Clarion Ledger, Philip Brasher, February 11, 2007
http://tinyurl.com/32tv6y



3. AUCTION YARD CONVICTED OF ANIMAL CRUELTY

For the last decade, accusations of animal abuse have been made against New Holland Sales Stable, one of the largest farmed-animal auctions on the East Coast. On February 15th, the Pennsylvania company was convicted of three counts of animal cruelty for failing to provide veterinary care or euthanasia to three nonambulatory sheep. Left without appropriate food or water, the sheep were found on September 3rd by a member of Animals Angels (see: http://tinyurl.com/2ruzn4) and were later euthanized by Keith Mohler, a humane enforcement officer with Farm Sanctuary (see: http://tinyurl.com/yrx2nj), who then filed charges. “All three sheep were in terrible condition, and one was missing hunks of skin all over her body," Mohler said. The sheep are thought to have arrived on a truck from Nebraska that also contained 16 to 18 dead sheep. New Holland has been ordered to pay $500 for each count.

The article notes numerous previous cruelty cases against the company, including one in 2001 in which it was found guilty of 31 counts of animal cruelty (see also the 2nd part in #5 of: http://tinyurl.com/39dbs8). "Attaining animal cruelty convictions at stockyards and farms -- even when the cruelties are blatant and horrifying to most people -- are extremely difficult because of broad agricultural exemptions in state anti-cruelty codes," said Gene Baur, president of Farm Sanctuary. New Holland recently enclosed the walkway above its pens, obstructing the view of animal treatment below.


NEW HOLLAND SALES STABLE CONVICTED OF ANIMAL CRUELTY
Solanco News, February 16, 2007
http://www.solanconews.com/Farm/070216_newhollandsales.htm



4. (G)RAZING THE WEST

In an essay entitled “How the West was Eaten,” author Jeffrey St. Clair tells us that most of the water in the West goes not to satiate the thirst of people but that of cows. The primary source of the pollution of that water is from the thousand tons of cow manure released into it every day. Grazing allotments cover 82% of the 320 million acres the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) control in the Western U.S. More than 250,000 miles of ranching roads crisscross these public lands, along with an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 miles of fencing which obstructs wildlife migration routes. Wildlife Services (formerly called Animal Damage Control, see: http://tinyurl.com/yom3uo), a program of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, tracks, traps, poisons, gases or shoots more than two million birds and 135,000 mammals every year, including more than 80,000 coyotes last year (see also: http://tinyurl.com/3bl2el). Native species are also at risk from lethal diseases transmitted by cattle and sheep. "The livestock industry is the last wildlife-genocide program in the United States," states St. Clair (see also #7 below and http://tinyurl.com/3dwwwx).

Only about one-half of 1% of people living in the West hold permits to Forest Service and BLM lands. Ranching on federal lands provides about one dollar of every $2,500 of income received by Westerners. St. Clair explains: “…the vast majority of grazing allotments reside with a small fraction of permittees, including some of the richest families in America, multinational corporations, regional utilities, media celebrities (such as Sam Donaldson), and several politicians.” He contends that grazing subsidies may exceed a billion dollars annually, and refers to ranching subsidies as “an untouchable form of [social] welfare.” St. Clair states: “…take away the subsidies, the nearly free forage, the roads, the even cheaper water that magically appears from nowhere in the middle of the high desert, the tax breaks, predator control, abeyances from environmental standards and disproportionate political clout when any thing else goes against him, such as drought, rangefires, bad investments. Then charge them for the gruesome externalities of their "avocation" and then see how many stick around for the hardscrabble lifestyle that remains. Federal subsidies and political protection are the velcro for most of these guys.” The essay details political machinations that have shaped public lands policy since the Clinton administration, and introduces the Larkspur Rebellion: “a growing contingent of hardcore environmentalists…calling for radical changes in federal rangeland policy.” See also: http://tinyurl.com/2awxq2

The Bush administration has announced it is lowering the monthly cost of grazing cattle on federal land from $1.56 to $1.35 per cow/calf, effective March 1st. This is the lowest allowable fee, and is based on the value of public lands grazing in 1966. According to the Center for Biological Diversity, the federal government loses an estimated $123 million to over $500 million per year on its grazing program (see: http://tinyurl.com/yunbjk).

HOW THE WEST WAS EATEN
Counterpunch, Jeffrey St. Clair, February 10/11, 2007
http://www.counterpunch.org/stclair02102007.html

FOREST SERVICE AND BLM ANNOUNCE 2007 FEDERAL GRAZING FEE
USDA Forest Service news release, Feb. 2, 2007
http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2007/releases/02/grazing-fee.shtml


5. USDA DENIES COLORADO DISASTER AID

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has turned down Governor Bill Ritter’s request for aid to Colorado farmers and ranchers who lost cattle to blizzards this winter (see: http://tinyurl.com/2qlx2t). The Colorado Department of Agriculture estimates 10,000 cattle died after a second blizzard, about 3% of the 345,000 cattle in southeastern Colorado. However, the USDA requires production losses (versus economic) losses of 30% before declaring a disaster, which could then make applicants eligible for low-interest operating loans. Some areas have been affected more than others, with reported losses of 75-80%. Calving season is also underway, and more losses are anticipated (see: http://tinyurl.com/2rcjcx). "I do know that there are some producers, especially in the south part of the county, that began the calving process, and they are having catastrophes, very, very high losses, much higher than 30 percent," said the commissioner of Bent County. The Baca County commissioner said he knows of cattle who are losing weight because ranchers can’t afford feed for them. Colorado’s agriculture commissioner is attempting to get the USDA to reconsider, and pressure is increasing for Congressional bills promoting disaster aid (see: http://tinyurl.com/334dc5).

DENIAL OF BLIZZARD AID BLASTED
Denver Post, Erin Emery , Feb. 13, 2007
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_5214973


6. COLLAPSED ROOFS KILL 20,000 TURKEYS

Wintery weather led to the collapse of the roofs of 25 barns housing turkeys near Jefferson City, Mo., on December 1st. The young birds were being raised by contract for Cargill, Inc. Some 22 or 23 “contract growers” were affected, with one family pulling 5,000 turkeys out prior to the collapse of their building. Many others in central Missouri prepared in advance for the storm by fortifying buildings and stocking water and feed.

FRIGID FARMS
The St. Louis Post Dispatch, Repps Hudson, Dec. 5, 2006
(The article is available on-line for a fee: http://www.stltoday.com )


7. UPCOMING EVENTS

THINKING ABOUT ANIMALS: DOMINATION, CAPTIVITY, LIBERATION
As part of its “commitment to engaged scholarship directed towards social justice,” the Department of Sociology at Brock University will co-sponsor, with Niagara Action for Animals, a conference entitled “Thinking About Animals: Domination, Captivity, Liberation,” to be held on Brock campus (Ontario, Canada), March 15-16th. Topics specifically regarding farmed animal issues include:
“Cows, Profits and Genocide: The Oppressive Side of ‘Beef’ Consumption”
“Examining the Dynamic Between the Animal Industry and the Animal Movement”
“Factory Farming: Past, Present and Future”
“Slaughterhouses and Crime Rates”
and “Vegetarianism, Activism and the Media.”
More info at: http://www.brocku.ca/sociology/conference

REMINDER: INADMISSIBLE COMPARISONS
United Poultry Concerns’ 7th Annual Conference, co-hosted by the Student Animal Legal Defense Fund and Lantern Books, is to be held at the NYU Law School in New York City, March 24-25th. See: faw/faw7-2.htm#5






In This Issue








Our Sponsors

The information in this news digest does not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors nor is anything in it meant as an endorsement by them.


Masthead

Compiled and edited by Cat Carroll and Mary Finelli, Farmed Animal Watch is a free weekly electronic news digest of information concerning farmed animal issues gleaned from an array of academic, industry, advocacy and mainstream media sources.