Plea to Help Downed Farm Animals

Hard to read emotionally, but short and informative. Written by Gene Bauer and appearing in the Huffington Post.

University of Texas May Receive Surprise USDA Inspection

PETA has complained to the USDA that the University of Texas has been severely mistreating its lab animals. There may be a surprise inspection, but I don't really understand how effective a "surprise" inspection is when the facility is notified in advance!!

Lots of Deaths in Animal Research Facilities

Even I didn't realize how bad it was until I read this article from the Associated Press. The spotlight is on Charles River Laboratories.

This article lists some of the universities and private corporations with violations.

University of Washington Allows Primate to Starve to Death

I went to graduate school at the University of Washington here in Seattle. I've been hearing nightmare stories about the Primate Center for years. The ineptness and cruelty continues, but all in the name of "putting people first."

Eff that. This is why I avoid Games Night at some acquaintances.' They have a friend that works at this vile place.

From the student newspaper The Daily.

A monkey allowed to starve to death was just one of the complaints noted in a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) report on the UW National Primate Research Center in September.

The primate, a 3-and-a-half-year-old pig-tailed macaque, “had been found dead due to malnutrition resulting in a loss of 25 percent of its body weight,” the report said. The death occurred last April.

This incident can be traced to a failure to weigh the animal at regular intervals. The facility requires that primates be weighed at least monthly, but in this case, the macaque hadn’t been weighed for about two months prior to its death, according to the report.

...In addition to the macaque, the USDA took issue with the unsanitary conditions of the animals’ food storage and with the discovery of expired and unlabeled drugs in the facility. They also found two baboons enclosed in a cage that did not allow them to sit upright, due to 2-inch-high implants in their heads.

Settlement Forces Animal Research Facilities to Disclose More

This would be awesome. Now, I know it doesn't solve everything, but it's another chink in the armor. I worry it won't pass the DC district court for some wacky reason. I don't like to celebrate until I'm sure of something.

From the LA Times....

Animal research facilities will be required to disclosee more information online about their experiments under a court settlement signed Wednesday by the Humane Society of the United States and the Agriculture Department.

According to the Humane Society, the settlement will require the Agriculture Department to post annual reports from those facilities, including what they call "pain and distress information," on its Web site. The two parties settled in a lawsuit filed by the advocacy group four years ago after the group were unable to obtain information they requested.

The settlement will now be submitted to the federal district court for the District of Columbia for final approval.

Clemson Researcher Investigates Impacts of Cages on Laying Hens

It's a study funded by the US Department of Agriculture.

One would think it would be elementary. Crowded and filthy conditions mean suffering for hens. But it's not just about the hens....it's about the money. How much suffering can and should they endure without significantly affecting the human pocketbook. Or corporate net income.

From the Clemson press release....

More is at stake than just the comfort of chickens, though the well-being of 284 million U.S. laying hens is no small matter. Nearly 95 percent of the 90 billion table eggs produced in the United States come from high-density cage systems. The value of all egg production in 2007 was $6.68 billion. In South Carolina egg sales tally about $90 million annually. Changing production conditions are bound to affect the bottom the line.

Breeders Also Supply Universities with Research Animals

I guess I'm living in a cave. I didn't know that there were specific breeders out there producing animal subjects for medical research. According to this article, some are so bad that the University of California and the University of Cincinnati have actually decided to end their relationships with them and stop purchasing animals bred for research use.

So, does this mean they are getting animals from shelters instead? I didn't really understand the second half of the article.....

USDA Investigating Clemson University

The investigation is related to the Animal Welfare Act and Clemson's research activities, but no details are available at this time.

US Government Continues Subsidizing Meat Industry

Hard to wean people off animals when the US government is propping up the industries, and especially when so much of it ends up on school lunch trays (laying the foundation for this nation's obesity problem in my opinion.)

I also have problems with subsidies to big agribusiness. It's just another bailout, but nothing new. We've been propping these guys up for decades. Too bad it continues under Vilsack and Obama.

The federal government continued its effort to boost agricultural commodity prices today by announcing it will purchase an additional $25 million worth of pork.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture also said it will buy $60 million of turkey, $2 million of lamb and $29.7 million of walnuts.

Last week, the USDA bought approximately 200 million pounds of nonfat dry milk to help the dairy industry.

The purchases are in addition to the ones the USDA makes annually for federal food programs.

The food will go to federal food nutrition assistance programs, such as school lunches.

Pork farmers have been losing an average of $20 on each hog marketed since October 2007, according to the U.S. Pork Producers. And economists have said dairy producers are losing an average of $3 per cow per day.

USDA Has Meat Animal Research Center

Here it is...the US Meat Animal Research Center. Good site to visit to see what they're up to. Obviously, all the pictures will probably be nice and clean.

Horse Slaughterhouses Face Hurdles in Montana

Looks like Montana's state government is heading towards the approval of horse slaughterhouses, but there are hurdles at the federal level. The only real markets for horsemeat are overseas and product must be inspected by the USDA before it can be shipped outside the US. However, the USDA is currently barred from such inspections.

Here's an article on the situation.

FL Animal Control Conducts Bizarre Experiment

News of the Weird

Owners claim dog died from being in non-ventilated Animal Control vehicle. How should Animal Control evaluate their claim? Stick another dog in the same situation and see if it dies too!

It was an "experiment" you see, even though they are just Animal Control, not a research facility.

Clay County violated five federal animal welfare regulations in a in September 2008 experiment that involved putting a dog in a non-air-conditioned truck for an hour at midday, according to a U.S. Department of Agriculture investigative report. The incident prompted complaints to be filed with the Clay County Sheriff's Office and State Attorney's Office, both of which declined to file any charges. In addition, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals filed a complaint with the USDA.

....The dog’s owners said the dog was in the truck too long; a necropsy was inconclusive, but one pathologist said heat and dehydration were likely contributing factors.

To re-create and measure the environmental conditions, Animal Control staff put a dog from the pound, of similar size and weight to the dead dog, in the same holding cage for an hour. Weather conditions were also similar. The temperature did not exceed 86 degrees, the dog was closely monitored and suffered no ill affects, they said.

Environmental Groups Call For End To USDA Wildlife Killing

Environmental groups have called on Obama to get rid of the USDA's Dept. of Wildlife Services, which is involved in mainly predator control programs (coyotes are a big target). Ranchers oppose the move.

From WildEarth Guardians:

WildEarth Guardians’ research reveals this agency is:

• Biologically Unsound - Wildlife Services uses a “sledgehammer approach” to wildlife management, meaning over one million animals are killed each year using non-selective killing controls such as poisons, traps, and aerial gunning. Animals killed also include threatened and endangered species, a number which has steadily increased since 2005. The number of carnivores killed has also increased since 2005, which is of particular concern to conservation biologists, since these animals play vital roles in ecosystems;

• Dangerous - Between 2002 and 2006, Wildlife Services failed several federal audits to safely inventory, store, and control access to chemical weapons, and in 2007 the agency itself admitted that it had experienced a “wake of accidents.” The aerial gunning program has killed at least 10 agents and injured 28 more. In 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency charged Wildlife Services for its illegal placement of a sodium cyanide M-44 (a highly lethal booby trap) on public land, which harmed a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist and killed his dog. Additionally, Wildlife Services puts little emphasis on using non-lethal methods, and puts few resources towards developing new, ethical non-lethal research;

• Unnecessary and Fiscally Unsound - Taxpayers are paying the bill for these activities, and Wildlife Services fails to protect the businesses it supposedly helps. The USDA National Agricultural Statistics Services shows that most livestock losses come from weather, disease, illness, and birthing problems, and not predation. Carnivores killed less than 1% of cattle (0.18%) and approximately 3% of sheep produced in the U.S.;

• Out of Step with American Values - Americans value wildlife and abhor animal cruelty. Yet, Wildlife Services not only kills tens of thousands of targeted wild animals annually, their activities also result in the unintentional deaths of many others, including pets, using indiscriminate and agonizing poisons, torturous traps, and even dynamite.

This is what the USDA APHIS website has on the program:

The goal of the WS program is to manage the damage caused by wildlife, not to eradicate wildlife populations. Upon request, WS wildlife professionals implement or recommend effective management methods to alleviate or minimize predation. WS employees strive to remove only the predators that are causing the damage. To accomplish this goal, they direct control methods at only the specific animal or local wildlife populations in the area where damage has occurred. The WS program operates in accordance with its program wide Environmental Impact Statement, local environmental assessments and workplans, and Federal, State, and local laws and regulations, including the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Estimates of predator populations by State fish and game officials indicate that the number of predators removed by WS is small compared with overall predator numbers. Lethal control efforts of WS professionals typically remove less than 5 percent of a species' overall population. In many situations, the number of animals removed amounts to less than 1 percent of their total population. This amount is considerably less than the number of animals taken by hunters and trappers annually. The USDA's extension service, APHIS' National Wildlife Research Center, and the Federal Government's General Accounting Office confirm that lethal controls used by WS do not unduly threaten the well-being of Statewide predator populations.

Farm Sanctuary Wary about Tom Vilsack for USDA

While the Humane Society was pretty happy with Vilsack as Obama's pick for the Department of Agriculture, the Farm Sanctuary is wary.

This is a December 18 post from Gene Bauer's blog pointing out some concerns about Vilsack. Bauer is the president and co-founder of the Farm Sanctuary.

Barack Obama has picked Tom Vilsack, former Governor of Iowa, to be the next Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). He’s certainly not the best choice; however, I think Vilsack may be a choice holding forth a reasonable hope of significant change. I’m glad that Obama didn’t select Charles Stenholm, a former Texas congressman with a long history of defending animal abuse, who had sought the position with support from the factory farming industry.

As Iowa’s Governor, Tom Vilsack took steps to protect animals, including vetoing a bill that allowed dove hunting. He has a mixed record on policies affecting industrialized agriculture. He vetoed a bill, which would have prevented Iowa from establishing stronger environmental standards for factory farms than the federal government, but he has also compromised with big agriculture, supporting weak environmental protections and genetically modified foods.

Humane Society Likes Obama's Animal Welfare Picks

I bet you didn't realize that Obama had any animal welfare picks, but he did. And, in general, the Humane Society and its Legislative Fund likes them.

They are very enthusiastic about Tom Vilsack, the proposed Secretary of Agriculture. In fact, he was their top choice. They're not so sure about Ken Salazar as Secretary of the Interior, but they see some promise. He has a strong environmental record and he has supported some animal issues in the past. (Here's some information on his financial contributors. Not sure whether it's enough to worry about yet. He does get money from alternative energy people too.)

HSUS is also happy about Lisa Jackson heading the EPA.

Humane Society Sues USDA Over Eating Downed Cows

The Humane Society is suing the USDA over downed cows.

The Humane Society sued the federal government Wednesday over what it said is a legal loophole that allows sick or crippled cattle, called "downers," into the food supply.

A U.S. Department of Agriculture rule change made in July allows some downer cows into the food supply, the Humane Society of the United States alleges in its lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.

In 2004, the USDA tightened regulations to prohibit the slaughter of all "downer" cows — animals that cannot stand — after a case of mad cow disease was discovered in Washington state. The lawsuit alleges that under last year's change, cows that fell down after an initial veterinarian inspection but appeared otherwise healthy were allowed to be slaughtered.