Animal Person

Forget About Equal, How About Alive

You may have seen "Dog," posted by Stephanie. If not, here it is . . .

When I saw "From Science, Plenty of Cows but Little Profit" this morning in the New York Times, I immediately thought of "Dog." I thought: What if those were women, ears tagged, imprisoned in some metal contraption that made it easier for the man behind them to inseminate them.

(See the entire slide show, Happy Cows: Behind the Myth, here.)

And the day-old calves . . .

forcibly taken from their mothers, penned . . . what if those were human babies? (The photo is by J. Emilio Flores for the New York Times.)

The article, by the way, touts the technological advancement that allows the sperm of dairy bulls to be "sexed," thereby allowing dairy farmers to choose to "produce" more females, who are more valuable to them. The only problem (for the farmers--I have a many problems with this scenario, beginning with bringing cows into the world) is that the cow milk industry is struggling along with much of the economy, and there is now a glut of cow's milk, which has driven the price down and . . .

"Desperate to drive up prices by stemming the gusher of unwanted milk, a dairy industry group, the National Milk Producers Federation, has been paying farmers to send herds to slaughter. Since January the program has culled about 230,000 cows nationwide."

There's more, and it's no more uplifting, but here's my point: Though I see mothers and babies when I look at the photos above, most people don't even see living, breathing, sentient beings. They see machines. They see things that make--or are turned into--the food they find so delicious. They see units that will somehow enter the marketplace. Their hearts don't ache at the thought of raping cows and ripping their babies from them as soon as they are born. Their minds don't whirl and scream with the injustice of sentient beings enslaved and treated as units of production.

We here in America claim we love dogs. They're our "best friends." But if a video must be made (and I realize this video wasn't made in the US, but we have the same issues here) to get people thinking about stray dogs as deserving of a life free of persecution and suffering at the hands of others, what hope is there for cows and other animals we have deemed "food?"

On "The Age of Stupid"

Did you ever wonder why people become subjects in a documentary when they know that they're going to look like fools?

Or maybe they don't know that, and that's why they participate.

Either way, there are many cringe-worthy moments in "The Age of Stupid," which is sort of "An Inconvenient Truth About Oil, with a Particular Focus on Air Travel."

I liked the way the film connects oil use to an oil company. It's about the people and the land. A young woman in Nigeria (can you say Shell Oil?) and a middle-aged man who lives in New Orleans and lost everything in Hurricane Katrina, and who works/worked for Shell Oil, and an entrepreneur in India who started a low-cost airline for the people of his country (and we see none other than a Shell Oil truck delivering its fuel). Different races/ethnicities, different income levels, but remarkably similar intentions: to help people. I do have to say that Shell has been an easy target for years and I hope that people don't focus on them (yet again) as the real enemy and look at themselves for their own complicity instead.

The true stories are all woven together by a convenient narrator from post-apocalyptic 2055, looking back on our generation, which is in the unique position of being able to save the planet. We know what is happening and we know what to do about it. And if we don't do what we need to do, well, you know what comes next.

Here's what irked me: I saw the pre-show, live from the green carpet in NYC, as well as 25 minutes of the post-show discussion with the filmmakers and several experts (but I didn't see the whole thing so I could have missed something) and, I think you know what's coming . . .

There was no meaningful discussion about our inefficient use of resources (grain and water) in the feeding of animals to kill to feed people. With regard to cruelty and suffering, it's clear from the film that the human animal has been profoundly negatively affected by climate change, but there is no attention given to nonhuman animals.

There is one horrifying scene where the young woman in Nigeria is cleaning several live fish (at first I thought they were dead, but then they started moving) with detergent, because they are too filthy to eat. And there is a family in rural England who charts their energy use and we see that food is the second highest use of energy for them (air travel takes up the most). But they dismiss food. And the wife says that one thing the family does is eat less meat and eggs (and they raise the animals on their land), but even that is glossed over. I think those are the only references to diet.

And in the pre and post show (that I saw), even in the interviews with the celebrities who are known vegetarians (I know, I know, they're not vegans . . .), when asked none of them says that one thing they do to combat climate change is to alter what/whom they eat.

Though I don't want to criticize the filmmakers for not making the film I thought they should have made, I do think that if you're going to tell people in 2009 what they can do to help save the planet, you're not doing your job if you neglect to tell them--in a meaningful way--about how their diet fits into the equation.

There was a focus on Copenhagen, particularly post show, as it is upon us. That angle made a larger political and activist message more prominent. But still . . .

Did anyone else see it? I do recommend it, particularly for the discussion about wind power (which always, as far as I know, comes down to aesthetics and I'm glad to see someone make that point in such an effective way). If you know anyone who doesn't understand the connection between our energy consumption (and consumption, in general) and what has become of the planet, "The Age of Stupid" might be a good place to start.

See "The Age of Stupid" TONIGHT

Tonight's the night! There's a live event in NYC, and the movie will premiere at the same time in 440 theaters across the US, as well as all over the world! Here's an interview with the Director, Franny Armstrong. Interesting story of how the film came to be.

On Being Vegan "Friendly"

The Factual table I posted yesterday annoyed me a bit, and here's why: the categories "vegan," "vegetarian," and "vegan-friendly."

Vegan: Got it. I can order anything on the menu without having to ask any questions.

Vegetarian: At least it doesn't say "vegetarian-friendly," as Ruths Chris Steakhouse is vegetarian-friendly in that you can probably get a baked potato with butter and sour cream, sauteed vegetables drizzled with cheese, and a salad with Ranch dressing at every one of them. Whether or not vegetarians equate that fact with "friendly" is a different story--it's the people at the establishment who think they're being "friendly." Vegetarian, I assume, serves no flesh but does serve other, equally disturbing animal products.

Which brings me to . . .

Vegan-friendly: I remember going to Morton's Steakhouse in Chicago a bunch of years ago with a client of my husband's and ordering a plain baked potato, grilled asparagus with lemon, and a salad with balsamic vinaigrette dressing. It was a fabulous vegan meal. Anyone who goes to Morton's knows that the server brings out a huge tray that includes entire carcasses of smaller animals (I recall a lobster) and large chunks of flesh to choose from. Mind you, that ritual is no different from walking into any restaurant that serves animals, smelling their flesh burn, and then sitting next to friends as they chomp on said flesh. My point is that being surrounded by the sights and smells of death and suffering isn't what I'd call "friendly" to me as a vegan.

And when I go to a vegetarian restaurant and smell cheese and butter--and I do smell those things quite distinctly and have never liked those smells--I don't consider that "friendly."

So what does "vegan-friendly" really mean? That they have items on the menus, or will make items, that contain no animal products? I assume that's what it means. And by that definition, Morton's and Ruths Chris are both "vegan-friendly." Last I checked, they don't market themselves that way, though.

When you search the Factual table for vegan restaurants, you also get "vegan-friendly" restaurants, which is funny as you're essentially getting restaurants for vegans and restaurants for omnivores, which in my mind aren't all that "friendly" to my belief that it's not right to use sentient nonhumans as food (or as covering for chairs, which are likely present at restaurants for omnivores).

This is what happens when you ask someone with a background in linguistics to comment on a project. Headaches ensue.

New Factual Table for Vegans

Check out this new table by Factual that helps you instantly locate vegan restaurants in the US, and includes mapquest links as well as links to reviews. Would you use it? What do you think about the idea and how it is executed? (I am not involved in any way other than I was asked to post it for feedback.)

On Charles and Project Treadstone

Just in case you were wondering what an 85-lb red fawn greyhound looks like from the back with a couple dozen acupuncture needles in him. (And yes, that's Violet Rays taking up most of his acupuncture bed at the homeopath's office.)

The needles between his toes were apparently not of the painless variety. I've had those. There's not much between your fingers and toes to sink the needles into so you feel them there more than anywhere else. He sure was a trooper, though. He stood for the first 10 minutes, then lied down for the remaining 20 and didn't make a peep.

We went this route because he isn't putting weight on his back right leg anymore (you can even see the muscle atrophy--look at the difference--it's not because of the angle). We'll try this, in addition to the supplements, herbs, and minuscule crystals of the homeopathic variety, for a couple of weeks/months to see if we get any progress. I'm sure the specialists in Orlando would gladly take another $8,000 for surgery but . . . been there.

The vet did give me a hard time about the dogs' animal-free diets (my traditional vets don't, ironically), and my response was that unless she could show me some research that his particular type of injury needs animal protein to heal, I wasn't going to change anything.

I then promptly completely caved in and bought Wellness' new large breed, definitely nonvegan dry food (and I always soak kibble) that has 25% protein (Natural Balance Vegetarian has 18%, and all from non-animal sources) and I've started cutting some in just in case (I'll stop at 50%). The only problem now is that a handful of things are different, and if there's progress I won't know why! But I would feel like a terrible caregiver if animal protein was somehow the answer and I refused to try it. (Violet Rays will continue on Natural Balance, by the way.)

Again, Charles' problem is severe nerve root compression at L7/S1. And he already had two inches of his backbone removed so all that's left is scar tissue unless I'm missing something.

My poor boy. Wish him luck!

As for Project Treadstone, there have been three fatalities-by-automobile and one litter of three kittens, two of whom were caught and adopted fairly early. There are now about 10 cats who are unsterilized, and next week the women at the site, with a little help from their friends, will start trapping again.

Finally, I was asked to participate in a new TNR group in my town that started largely because of my oodles of questions and setting of policy for Project Treadstone! It'll be my area's first group dedicated to reducing the feral cat population! I missed the first meeting because I was working, but I am getting the minutes and do plan to get involved and also donate. And of course, I will use the meetings as an opportunity for vegan outreach.

Kudos to the cat people of North County who started this much-needed venture!

On When Dogs Bite Infants

A friend (age 50-loves dogs, has had them forever, only rescues) recently married a woman (much younger, not that interested in dogs) and they had a baby (now about 8-months old). The friend has two dogs, one of whom is 13-years old and is apparently experiencing a bit of mental deterioration.

Without provocation, said dog bit infant in such a way that required stitches on her face and back. Just a handful, but still.

New wife is apoplectic and won't let the dog back in the house (the dog is at a friend's house). There is a good chance that the dog will never, ever be permitted back in the house (lucky they also have a guest house! But actually that's not a viable long-term solution).

I'm just telling the story, here. We cannot change what has occurred and the friend, at least, has learned the lesson that no matter how well you think you know your dog, you always have a grown-up person between the dog and the infant and you also never let your guard down.

This is the only time in the dog's 13 years that anything like this has happened. It's also the only child that has ever been in the dog's home for more than a weekend.

Any advice? My friend isn't one of those "I'm-putting-the-dog-down" people. Oddly, when I called a trainer friend, that was the first thing she suggested, as whatever happens it's not going to be as fantastic as the life the dog used to have, alone with his canine sister and his daddy for nearly 13 years. Interesting point, but death or else a less-fantastic life? I think there might be another option.

Anyone . . . anyone . . .

Thinking Critically About Happy Cows

Check out my guest post at Change.org today called "Thinking Critically About Happy Cows."

Thanks to Stephanie for inviting me to post!

On Blogs, Films and . . .

First the news, in case you haven't heard:

• Animal Acres in Los Angeles now has a blog by Philip called Vegan Sanctuary. Check it out!
• Tribe of Heart's heartbreaking yet inspiring Peaceable Kingdom: The Journey Home is premiering at the Moondance International Film Festival in Boulder, Colorado on September 26-27. For more information and to get the code for a widget to display your support on your Facebook page or blog, go here.

As for "and . . . "

For over two decades I have encountered animals just as they were about to die. Well over a hundred have perished within moments of their unfortunate sighting of Mary Martin. I'm quite the joke among my friends, who worry that their pets are going to drop dead after spending time with my lethal self. But the tide was turning, and a new day was dawning for me--one where I would encounter animals and they would live!

This morning I was running and I made it about two miles from my house when I saw a ringneck dove lying in the middle of the sidewalk of a busy road. The nearest tree was too far for her to have fallen. She looked comfortable and wasn't struggling at all. She was alert.

I could either run home and jump in my car to retrieve her, or carry her. I chose the latter, making a sling out of the bottom half of my T-shirt and holding her in my left hand in the sling while holding the shirt far enough away from my steamy body so she could get plenty of air. I was wearing one of those running shirts with the tiny hole so she probably had a nice breeze. And I never shut her in to her sling so there was plenty of air from above, as well. She moved a bit in my hand as I slowly walked home.

Two miles is very, very far when you're trying not to traumatize an injured creature the size of your hand.

I placed her in one of my injured wildlife boxes and drive the couple of miles to Busch Wildlife Sanctuary. No matter what you think of them and their connection to Jack Hanna and the fact that they use their injured animals for "educational purposes," they have a fantastic facility to rehabilitate and release wildlife. I'm ambivalent every time I bring an animal there and leave a donation. But as I've commented before, they do provide a service for me and are the best, closest place for me to get that service.

I filled out the dove's paperwork as best I could considering I had no idea what happened to her. At first I was told she seemed fine, which I didn't understand. But moments later I was told that her spine was severed and she'd have to be euthanized. I asked to say goodbye to her and as we walked into the examination room she was already dead. "Looks like she did it for us," said the vet.

She picked up the dove and showed me what she did for the brief examination but then she turned the bird over and there was a puncture would in her chest that was bleeding, and there was no sign of struggle or feather-ruffling or feather loss. It wasn't a cat who was the culprit.

"I'm sorry, honey. I'm sorry your little friend died," said my husband when I came home and told him the story. But the jokester that he is, he couldn't resist delivering one of his infamous one-liners.

"At least you've still got your touch."

On the Freezing of Birds

I was watching a news segment on a wildlife rehabilitation center here in Florida. It was time to feed the bird of prey who was about to be released and while the rehabber was speaking with the interviewer someone emerged from a walk-in freezer with a tray of baby chicks. They were each frozen in various states of sheer terror, in positions that clearly indicated attempts to escape to save their lives. No one paid a moment of attention to the tray but I couldn't keep my eyes off of it.

My animal rescue-life has had many phases. From 2002-2005 I was heavily ensconced in a bird and waterfowl phase with sometimes daily drama of the life-and-death variety that led to my unintentional education about all things duck (Muscovies, in particular).

Too Early Charley was a Muscovy who had just busted through his shell with his egg tooth. He and all 14 of his siblings materialized in my dryer vent after having fallen down the chute on the roof, one at a time, over 48 hours. It took a full day to locate the origin of the meeping of the first one (aptly named The Meeper), but after that it was pretty easy to catch them (in a propped up strainer on a cushion of towels) and put them in a safe place until they were all collected and ready to reunite with their mom.

Too Early Charley never made it more than 50% out of his shell and wheezed and whined and squirmed for hours. The rehab people gave me instructions on how to deal with him and said either he'd be out and fine soon, or (and more likely), he wouldn't make it. It was a holiday weekend and the only place I could take him was over an hour away and I was told that wasn't a good idea.

The kind rehabber called every couple of hours for an update. The last time she called she asked me to describe his condition and then she said, “Sometimes the kind thing to do is the hardest thing to do.”

Of course, that did not sound promising.

She told me to wrap him in a paper towel and put him in the freezer and leave my house, preferably for a couple of hours. “Don’t be tempted to stay home; you’ll regret it.”  Hysterical, I tried to say some kind of prayer, as if I believed there’s a god, and I wrapped the little fellow in a paper towel, placed him in the freezer and left the house as instructed. When I asked the rehabber what would happen, she said his system would slow and he would fall asleep. She said freezing to death was actually a very peaceful way to die.

Like she’s ever frozen to death.

Why would I be instructed to leave the house for several hours if Too Early Charley's demise would be so peaceful? Unfortunately I didn't ask myself that question.

Later that evening, I tiptoed into my house, as if not wanting to wake the dead. The following morning I opened the freezer, unwrapped my tiny friend, and found him, mouth wide open, in full Edvard Munch scream. I had an impromptu service for him, buried him, and as cute as ducklings are, hoped that I’d never have to see one again—dead or alive.

I then sat at my trusty computer and checkout out the American Veterinary Medical Association's latest report on euthanasia (they publish one every couple of years), and let’s just say that hypothermia and rapid freezing are on a list that includes: strychnine, which causes violent convulsions and painful muscle contractions; drowning, and burning. In other words, I may as well have doused him in gasoline and set fire to him.

Note to everyone who works with birds and water fowl: Hypothermia and rapid freezing are not appropriate methods of euthanasia and are not considered to be humane unless the animal is anesthetized prior to freezing.

On Why You Should Post Videos Beyond YouTube

I received this from Chris in China, and it underscores the importance of posting videos beyond YouTube.

Dear MFA,

Youtube.com is blocked in China.

Which means, none of MFA's videos are available. Some, on your site, are viewable, but since you're only using Youtube for sharing, we can't embed them on sites here yet.

If Mercy For Animals could also post at Vimeo.com or make a downloadable copy available, it could do a world of good here.

US groups need to make sure they post their videos on multiple sharing sites (at least on Vimeo.com). We need to fight for animals everywhere, and that means being aware of what major online tools are not available to all.

For farm animals, China is America 2.0 in the worst way. Please consider posting your videos on a Vimeo channel as well, so we can embed them on sites in China.

The activists in China need your help.

Thanks for all you do!

Chris

P.s.

Just FYI, sites blocked in China right now:

twitter
facebook
youtube
wordpress.com
blogspot/blogger.com
typepad.com

Pass on this message!

Animal Stories Wanted

Now's your (/my) chance! In my inbox yesterday evening was the following from the Associate Editor of Creative Nonfiction  . . . 

UPCOMING THEME: Animals

For an upcoming issue, we're seeking new essays about the bonds--emotional, ethical, biological, physical, or otherwise--between humans and animals. We're looking for stories that illustrate ways animals (wild and/or domestic) affect, enrich, or otherwise have an impact on our daily lives.

Essays must be vivid and dramatic; they should combine a strong and compelling narrative with a significant element of research or information, and reach for some universal or deeper meaning in personal experiences. We’re looking for well-written prose, rich with detail and a distinctive voice.

Creative Nonfiction editors will award one $1000 prize for Best Essay and one $500 prize for runner-up.

Guidelines: Essays must be: unpublished, 5,000 words or less, postmarked by November 13, 2009, and clearly marked “Animals” on both the essay and the outside of the envelope. There is a $20 reading fee (or send a reading fee of $25 to include a 4-issue CNF subscription); multiple entries are welcome ($20/essay) as are entries from outside the U.S. (though subscription shipping costs do apply). Please send manuscript, accompanied by a cover letter with complete contact information, SASE and payment to:

Creative Nonfiction
Attn: Animals
5501 Walnut Street, Suite 202
Pittsburgh, PA 15232

Good luck!