Letters
LETTER 1 – Praise for Vegan-Oriented “Movement Watch”
I am writing to tell you how pleased I was to read about your criticism of certain groups supporting "pink" veal and not the equally horrible "white" veal. I am so pleased that Friends of Animals adheres to the abolitionist stance that I do as well. I wrote to Farm Sanctuary criticizing their e-mails claiming victories for both the pigs and calves because of the supposed elimination of stalls. I indicated that this will certainly make the average meat eater feel a lot better about consuming meat and, if anything, encourage them to eat even more meat now that conditions are so much "nicer” for the animals. I do not want "no stalls," bigger stalls, prettier stalls or even grass to stand on for pigs and calves. What I do want is no more tortured animals that suffer horrible deaths in slaughterhouses! I am positive that every creature suffering in factory farms would agree 100%. I explained to FS that their money would be better spent promoting veganism and not sending fliers or e-mails asking activists to thank a list of animal killing facilities or chefs that serve animal cadavers in various restaurants for their "change of heart" stand regarding the issue of stalls (elimination in 2012) for pigs and calves and for having menus consisting only of "humanely" raised animals.
This is so painful for me because even more animals continue to suffer because of these "victories," as these groups call them. The best way to help these ever-suffering animals is by not eating them or wearing them. The Humane Society of the United States, with its wasted efforts of encouraging consumers to eat "humanely" raised animals and buying eggs from "cage-free" chickens, only serves to satisfy consumers' palates by eating even more but feeling good about it. Now the companies involved in the meat and dairy industry can all jump on the bandwagon and tell the consumers what "nice" guys they really are. The animals are happy and some even get to see grass! What a farce. There is nothing humane about how they are slaughtered nor is there any justification for raising animals for the purpose of killing them. Humans are supposed to be moral animals; there is nothing moral about forcing animals into captivity in order to mass produce and kill them for their parts for a lot of profit. It is all about capitalism. Democracy? Where?
I, for one, will continue to support abolitionist organizations like FoA who respect and reflect what I truly want for animals: to be able to live freely and in peace.
Ana A. Garcia Astoria, NY
LETTER 2 - Deceived By Group’s Support of Chimp Sanctuary
Thank you for your article in the Spring ActionLine about the Chimp Act. I was stunned and sickened to realize the continued vulnerability these primates still have to being exploited in research once again, even though on the surface they are purported to be in a wonderful, free environment and in complete safety at Chimp Haven.
What is worse, I learned of the "wonderful sanctuary" through the National Anti-Vivisection Society. I contribute to many animal advocacy groups - NAVS being one of them. They sent me a small flyer describing Chimp Haven, along with their usual solicitation for monies. This was to be the place to SAVE so many wonderful animals and give them back their lives in a natural environment. No mention was made of the fact that a clause in the Chimp Act allowed the government to pull these animals back into the research circuit if necessary. I contributed several hundred dollars to this sanctuary, under false pretenses. And the organization that solicited for the sanctuary is supposed to be fighting against vivisection as well as other research on animals. I intend to write to NAVS and express my distaste for their actions, as they have betrayed the very animals they say they are protecting and have lost my trust as well as financial support. "Mahalo" again, and Aloha,
Anne G. Curtis Lahaina, Hawaii
LETTER 3 - Spay and Neuter, Please
A letter to the editor:
Say No to Shelter Killing (Spring 2007, ActionLine) mentions that government agencies, wildlife agencies, animal control and shelters are the “top killers” of animals.
That is likely a very true statement because most people know that they can take an unwanted animal to any shelter to be taken in.
I wish we were a no-kill shelter and could adopt all the animals, but with the large number of animals coming in daily to our shelter (over 10,000 last year), the adoption rate is less than the number of animals coming in daily.
Animals coming to a shelter are much better off than animals wandering the streets, being run over, sick, shot or poisoned. I believe most of the agencies that endeavor to help animals are great and doing all they can.
The problem lies with the irresponsible pet owner who allows pets to breed, not the animal shelters that do all they can 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Spay/Neuter is the answer.
Margaret Smith
Shelter Director
Lake City Animal Shelter
Lake City, FL
Editor’s note: Shelters should sterilize animals before adoption and embrace the No Kill philosophy which means not ignoring an animal shelter’s role in the killing. Supportive programs include foster care programs, alliances with rescue groups, trap-neuter-release efforts for feral cats, and shelter promotions to allow working families to visit a shelter. Animal breeders should not have the luxury of thinking there are empty cages in a shelter to hold litters of disposable cats and dogs.
