This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The latest edition of the AVMA Guidelines for the HumaneSlaughter of Animals builds on the original 2016 version, with sections on fur-bearing species and marine animals.
I came across this strange article about German research on which slaughter method creates more pain for the animal: the Western method of stunning or the Islamic method of a cut to the neck. According to the researchers, the Islamic method wins. You can read all about the results in the article. What an utterly grotesque project.
Bea sent me a link to an article in Gourmet called " Humane Slaughterhouses ," by Rebecca Marx, that is absurd. They believe you can take a life that doesn't want to be taken in a humane way, and I don't agree. And perhaps that "better" will distract the reader from the undeniable fact of the unjust slaughter. It is murder.
The “Crow Down” is a “hunting contest” where both adults and children slaughter as many crows as they possibly can in two days. On the website he reminisces fondly about his “best hunt,” where he killed 3,125 crows in 9 days, bringing to mind the days when people slaughtered seemingly endless flocks of passenger pigeons and herds of buffalo.
They would be made up of people who are sick and tired of government-protected species being slaughtered by domestic cats. There would then be three options: 1) re-home them to people who will keep them inside; 2) drop them off at an animal shelter as far away as possible; or 3) humanely euthanize them. How can we get this idea going?
horses destined to die and be butchered in one of Canada’s equine slaughterhouses for human consumption abroad.” The story, by author and animal rights activist Ernest Dempsey calls Stanwood, Washington “Death Row for horses” because of the location not far away of a “major buying station, collection point and feedlot for U.S.
Like cats, the rat was introduced over much of the world by humans. As for the former, diseases are spread by fleas, which also plague rats, which makes rats as much a victim as humans, and as for the latter, rats are clearly wildlife and how can wildlife be blamed for hurting wildlife? Rats are cute! Imagine a world without rats!
The Port Authority’s goal is to strike a balance in humanely controlling bird populations at and around the agency’s airports to safeguard passengers on thousands of aircrafts each day. And, while you’re here, why not sign the petition to stop the senseless slaughter of Snowy Owls at JFK ? 1 Commerce Plaza. 99 Washington Ave.
Well, she apparently did such a great job convincing the folks at the Minnesota Book Awards that you can claim to love animals and then send them to slaughter, that not only was she a finalist for their award, but she won it. ( Here 's my commentary on it, and here 's my commentary about what compassionate carnivore means--and doesn't mean.)
I realize that the most humane method of treating chickens is to not kill them for food.BUT, as long as there is still a demand for their meat, PETA is advocating "Controlled-Atmosphere Killing" as an improvement over current methods of electric immobilization. Controlled-atmosphere killing is a U.S.
He asked whether cows, chickens, sheep and some of the other animals that we eat are usually treated and killed in a humane manner. The meat industry will say yes, of course, all animals are treated and killed humanely. In my opinion, the crux of the question touches on what is “humane.” It's not conducive to humane anything.).
Not approving the institutionalized slaughter of the horses we claim to hold so dear lowers that value. And it’s much more humane than leaving them there to starve to death.”. There are entire countries filled with starving people--do we think killing them is a "humane" idea? Financially). Do we recommend killing those children?
Shrikes were practicing their own form of butchery – that is, their particular practice of impaling their kills from thorns and barbed wire for later eating – long before we began domesticating and slaughtering livestock on our own.
The piece describes why this corner of the world often has an attitude toward indiscriminate hunting that ranges from laissez-faire to Wild West, and also the toll that the ensuing slaughter takes on populations of birds that are protected in their northern European summer homes. Photo by David Guttenfelder, courtesy of National Geographic ).
Thankfully the days of visiting Africa purely for slaughtering its wildlife have mostly come to a merciful end, and safari operators have adopted the Big Five term to market tours that offer sightings of the fortunate remanants of Africa’s once teeming great herds. to the far reaches of freezing Siberia.
We are not people who are interested in discussing animal rights, as in, the right of sentient nonhumans to not be used by humans for potential profit, for sport or for lunch. Maybe "humane" is already on its way out for the folks trying to convince themselves and others that humane killing isn't an oxymoron. That's respect.
More barbarous, or less barbarous, such slaughtering may undoubtedly be, according to the methods employed, but the "humane" slaughtering, so much bepraised of the sophist, is an impossibility in fact and a contradiction in terms. Henry S.
The problem with that statement is it's not as if farmers are searching "the wild" for cows, pigs, chicken and fish, plucking them from their homes, and plopping them on a farm to live out their (shortened) lives prior to slaughter. The animals on farms are created for the sole purpose of human consumption. It's not pretty.
But the message remains the same, and it's the only such message available in film to my knowledge (and please let me know of any others): there's simply no way to kindly, politely, "humanely" take someone's life when you don't need to. Perhaps the best feature of the film is the various voices telling a similar story. For all of us.
6598) is a bill that criminalizes the sale and transportation of horses for slaughter. According to a statement from the AQHA, “The majority of horses processed for slaughter in the United States [prior to slaughterhouse closures in this country] were no longer viable for their intended use, unmanageable or simply unwanted by their owners.
But no one who has ever cared for another creature – be it bird, animal, or human – can comprehend, much less cope with, this kind of brutal, pointless killing. People who work with wildlife understand that death is a part of life. People do not work with wildlife for fame and fortune. If they are strong and wily enough, men.
Their claim is that what has become the customary way to take sentient nonhumans from babyhood to untimely death is not humane. Yes, I do think it's better to have lived a comfortable life and then be slaughtered than to have been tortured the entire time and then be slaughtered. It's cruel. No argument here.
The marketing of an operation of breeding and slaughtering sentient nonhumans as a family farm (here, Bell straddles the line) is supposed to trigger some kind of compassion for the humans. It's the one that matters most to beings who simply want to live their lives without betrayal, disrespect, enslavement and slaughter.
My self-appointed job in this blog is to think critically about how our human lives intersect with those of sentient nonhumans, in action and thought. The message I hear is: tormenting animals before you brutally torture and slaughter them is wrong, but brutally torturing and slaughtering them without the preceding torment is okay.
However, the age of the Golden Gooney was to come to a brutal end; beginning in the late 1800′s, they were being slaughtered by the millions for their feathers at their breeding colonies. But within a couple of decades, it’s effects on both wildlife and humanity became apparent. Somebody won a Nobel Prize.
People in South Florida are still in an uproar over the mutilation and slaughter of 19 house cats (allegedly) by 18-year old Tyler Weinman, who was declared mentally competent and not a danger to himself or others (!). We humans have decided that, for a combination of reasons that are important to us, cats are worthy of our respect.
Here is the letter: I’ve just received an urgent report that another city in China is planning a mass cull to slaughter any unregistered dogs, strays, and even registered family dogs that are over 14 inches (35cm) tall. Can you imagine being forced to kill your own dog to save it from a more brutal slaughter?
citizens have been struggling to bring an end to the inhumane practice of slaughtering horses for human consumption. For previous posts on the ethical issues surrounding the slaughtering of horses for human consumption, see here , here , and here. For several years, conscientious U.S.
"environmentalists" would have to value the life of an Atlantic salmon more than the life of a human because, in environmental terms, there are too few Atlantic salmons and far too many humans. To old-speciesists, nonhumans must justify their existence by proving useful to humans; in contrast, some or all humans have inherent value.
Why choose enslavement, rape, domination and slaughter? Here's an interesting combination of great sentiment and horrible sentiment that involves two responses from the above list: "Online critics said it was hypocritical to protect only dogs and cats, and that the government should focus on human welfare before protecting animals."
But though the pigs weren't originally destined for a mass grave, weren't they destined for slaughter nonetheless? CIWF wants to "halt the brutal killing of these animals, and to ensure that they can be assured of a humane future." Here's my question: What is "a humane future?"
Minus that role, the term implies, such an animal has no place; if they aren't some human's companion, or their companionship fails to please, they can be abandoned or killed" (8). With equal validity, we could say that a human locked inside a room has 'freedom' from muggers" (75). I could go on and on.
In 2008, over nine billion chickens were slaughtered for Americans to eat. An exotic species (see Glossary) may appear in Florida because of deliberate transport and release by humans, or because of inadvertent escape from captivity. This post will get a bit into that for which I apologize, but it seems someone needs to do this.
Humane treatment runs counter to the entire industry when the point is to make money by processing these animals as fast as possible. Unfortunately, this goal tends to run counter to humane goals.” Baur believes that slaughterhouse cruelty can be reduced by simple operational changes, such as slowing down the slaughter lines.
Like when they're about to be, say, slaughtered? Here's what I see: Once again, as with attempts to convince the public that animal farming could ever be humane , humans are desperate to provide alternatives to consuming animals that don't include not consuming animals. This is where I'm confused. What about being raped?
His passion and compassion for humans is immense, but he appears to have some kind of mental block with nonhuman animals. I suppose speciesism/human exceptionalism is at the heart of the matter. He just doesn't believe that other beings lives might have a purpose all their own that is entirely unrelated to humans.
The University of Puerto Rico, an "1862" LGU founded in 1900, operates a slaughter facility killing small ruminants -- typically goats and sheep, cattle being large ruminants. We humans, herbivores like ruminants, are fine with one stomach -- we don't eat the really tough stuff like grass. Let me know if you hear the show!
Here's today's question: When a group of omnivores begins the inevitable round of jokes about veganism and even about slaughter ("I love turkeys--with sweet potatoes," or my cousin this week on Facebook, "I love the cow, therefore I eat her cheese," or something equally insensitive and ignorant), what do you do? Not humans, not animals."
that slaughters horses for human consumption. Since it is illegal to sell horse meat for human consumption in the U.S., you might wonder how it is that Cavel has been able to brutally slaughter horses for human consumption right here in the U.S. One can't kill horses for human consumption within the U.S.,
The film Partitions (running time: 14 min) by Audrey Kali gives an intimate glimpse of the ethical struggles that five small-scale meat farmers face when their animals are slaughtered. This is as humane as "humane farming" gets. This film provides an accurate portrayal of small-scale, non-intensive animal farming.
There is a profound difference between what Sea Shepherd does and what the Animal Liberation Front does, but there are also similarities, and those similarities increase in number if a direct action by the ALF (or anyone else) is an open rescue and therefore a direct defense of sentient nonhumans being attacked by humans. Animal Testing ").
The Humane Society of the United States is the big bully on this strange playground. Often confused with American Humane Association, they raise tens of millions, not to ‘save the animals’ as most people assume but to further the causes of vegetarianism and ending animal agriculture." The HSUS isn't even anti-hunting !
If you believe your dog has a right to a life free of torture and slaughter for no reason, then you really ought to think about extending that right to mice, rats, chickens and fish. So there are more vegans and fewer animals used by humans, right? Weighing the Impact At some level, PETA’s tactics have worked.
We immediately get a sense of the pigeons’ abundance, beauty, and danger to human activity. She portrays humans merged with Passenger Pigeons; the images are then framed to look like 19th century calling cards. It’s an effective introduction. This is not that kind of book, as Fuller makes clear from the beginning.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 30+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content