Bills seek end to farm animal abuse videos - FaunaClassifieds
FaunaClassifieds  
  Tired of those Google and InfoLink ads? Upgrade Your Membership!
  Inside FaunaClassifieds » Photo Gallery  
 

Go Back   FaunaClassifieds > General Interest Forums > General BS forum

Notices

General BS forum I guess anything is fair game in here. Just watch the subject matter doesn't get carried away too much.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-18-2013, 06:52 PM   #1
AbsoluteApril
Bills seek end to farm animal abuse videos




SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — An undercover video that showed California cows struggling to stand as they were prodded to slaughter by forklifts led to the largest meat recall in U.S. history. In Vermont, a video of veal calves skinned alive and tossed like sacks of potatoes ended with the plant's closure and criminal convictions.

Now in a pushback led by the meat and poultry industries, state legislators across the country are introducing laws making it harder for animal welfare advocates to investigate cruelty and food safety cases.

Some bills make it illegal to take photographs at a farming operation. Others make it a crime for someone such as an animal welfare advocate to lie on an application to get a job at a plant.

Bills pending in California, Nebraska and Tennessee require that anyone collecting evidence of abuse turn it over to law enforcement within 24 to 48 hours — which advocates say does not allow enough time to document illegal activity under federal humane handling and food safety laws.

"We believe that folks in the agriculture community and folks from some of the humane organizations share the same concerns about animal cruelty," said Mike Zimmerman, chief of staff for Assembly Member Jim Patterson, R-Fresno, whose bill was unveiled this week. "If there's abuse taking place, there is no sense in letting it continue so you can make a video."

Patterson's bill, sponsored by the California Cattlemen's Association, would make failing to turn over video of abuse to law enforcement within 48 hours an infraction punishable by a fine.

Critics say the bills are an effort to deny consumers the ability to know how their food is produced.

"The meat industry's mantra is always that these are isolated cases, but the purpose of these bills is to prevent any pattern of abuse from being documented," said Paul Shapiro, vice president of farm animal protection for the Humane Society of the United States, which conducted the California and Vermont investigations.

In Indiana, Arkansas and Pennsylvania it would be a crime to make videos at agricultural operations.

The goal of the proposed California law, industry representatives say, is to halt any abuses quickly and get video evidence to government regulators within two days, not to impede undercover investigations by animal welfare groups.

"The people doing this aren't cops so I wouldn't think it's their job to build a case. The goal for all of us is to reduce instances of animal abuse," said David Daley, a Cattlemen vice president and professor of agricultural science at California State University-Chico.

Formal opposition to the California bill comes from the ASPCA, the Teamsters, the HSUS and dozens of others. They say these attempts by the agriculture industry to stop investigations are a part of a nationwide agenda set by the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative think tank backed by business interests.

ALEC has labeled those who interfere with animal operations "terrorists," though a spokesman said he wishes now that the organization had called its legislation the "Freedom to Farm Act" rather than the "Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act."

"At the end of the day it's about personal property rights or the individual right to privacy," said spokesman Bill Meierling. "You wouldn't want me coming into your home with a hidden camera."

Animal welfare advocates say all of the focus on secrecy is energy misspent.

"I wish the cattlemen actually wanted to stop cruelty, not the documenting of cruelty," said HSUS California director Jennifer Fearing. "One could think of a thousand ways for them to actually stop cruelty rather than waiting for people to make videos and turn them over."

Animal welfare advocates say law enforcement agencies do not have the time or inclination to work complex animal abuse and food safety cases, and that federal USDA inspectors in slaughter plants have turned a blind eye to abuse.

When a USDA inspector at the Vermont plant was heard in 2009 coaching a plant worker on how to avoid being shut down, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack weighed in, calling the conduct "inexcusable."

In reaction to concerns, the USDA has been working to improve enforcement of its humane handling regulations over the past two years, including establishing an ombudsman position that accepts reports of violations. Last year 24 new positions in the Food Safety Inspection Service were dedicated to humane handling, said a high-ranking food safety official not authorized to speak publicly.

That hasn't slowed investigations or the bills designed to stop them. The Arkansas bill goes further than the others and would prohibit anyone other than law enforcement from investigating animal cases.

Last year Iowa, a major egg-producing state, passed a bill making it illegal to deny being a member of an animal welfare organization on a farm job application. Utah passed one that outlaws photography.

Most of the sensational videos of abuse in recent years are shot by undercover operatives who surreptitiously apply and are hired by the meat processors for jobs within the facilities. One recorded last year by Compassion over Killing at Central Valley Meats in Hanford, Calif. showed a worker standing on a downed dairy cow's nostrils to suffocate it and others repeatedly shot in the head, prompting several fast-food hamburger to cancel contracts, at least temporarily.

Animal welfare groups say investigations take weeks because the operatives nose around only when they aren't performing the duties for which they were hired.

An HSUS investigator was in the Hallmark plant in Southern California for six weeks between October and November 2007, when the nonprofit turned over to the local district attorney evidence that included fraud in the federal school lunch program because animals too sick to walk were being slaughtered. In January 2008, HSUS released the video to force the DA to act. Two employees were convicted of cruelty charges.

Late last year, nine workers at a Wyoming pork processing facility were charged with animal cruelty after an HSUS video showed them kicking and tossing piglets and failing to euthanize a sow gravely injured by a worker while giving birth.

In 2009, HSUS spent 21 days in the Vermont slaughterhouse where male calves born to dairy cows were killed for veal.

"Believe me our investigators would like to be out of there as soon as possible. They're stoic, they're courageous, but they are not enjoying their work at all," said Mary Beth Sweetland, director of investigations for HSUS.
 
Old 03-18-2013, 07:43 PM   #2
Shadera
I'm not a fan of the animal rights groups, but I think I'm on their side on this one. If nothing bad is going on in those production facilities and slaughterhouses, what's to hide? I've been in ethical slaughterhouses, and the videos I've seen are anything but. It's easy to twist words, not so much when you're seeing it with your own eyes.

So glad to finally be out of that loop.
 
Old 03-18-2013, 10:57 PM   #3
E.Shell
From a civil rights point of view, anyone trespassing and/or entering the property of another on false pretenses is violating the property owner's (very basic) right to privacy.

If the cable guy came to your house to install your cable service and took pics within your home, would it not clearly be a violation of your space?

The pics could reveal private things whether you are guilty of wrongdoing or not. Pics could include layout, security measures (or lack thereof), valuables and their locations, firearms (or lack thereof), your children, etc., and could compromise both privacy and security at the same time. If laws do not prevent this, you have no recourse or legal protections at all.

From a human decency point of view, mistreatment of animals cannot be tolerated and the treatment we sometimes see is inexcusable. Some of the things I've seen on these videos is indeed appalling and completely unacceptable for any reason.

From a production point of view, it is impractical to lead animals from one place to the other at their own pace with carrots and sugar cubes, and most have never had close contact with humans anyway.

I live on one large cattle farm and use the fields of another, but I am not a farmer. Many animals beyond their years are sent "to market" by farmers and these animals are typically in varying stages of failure. If they were still happy, healthy and productive, they would still be with the herd. Farming is a hard life and pay is not generous. Amazing how someone with three tractors and 200 acres doesn't have two nickels to rub together, but that's not far from reality for most of them. Worth money "on paper", but it's all locked up in dirt and equipment. You make a million dollars, and spend $999,999.00 on overhead. If you can get an animal on the trailer and sell it for even $100, that's $100 you didn't have, and maybe the $100 you need to survive the month. If money were no object, failing cattle would be humanely killed on the spot and dragged away to waste on a carcass pile. Of course, the carcass dump is not pretty sight either, but every big operation has one...

If taken to market, they should be handled humanely. In my opinion, these failing animals should be put down prior to being unable to willingly walk on their own and I do not know why this does not seem to happen in all cases.

From a business point of view, having pictures taken of your operation can limit your ability to compete. When a competitor sees a portion of your process more efficient than his, your ability to compete with him just diminished. To allow amateur surveillance at the whim of the photographer would change the dynamic. Today, we think in context of suffering animals, tomorrow we see unintended consequences when legalized industrial espionage steals your company's proprietary secrets and costs you your job.

If the practice of trespassing and taking freelance 'surveillance' videos is allowed in this context, where is the line drawn between taking pictures of suffering animals at a slaughterhouse, Colonial Sanders secret recipe and pictures of your daughter's window locks?

Do the "ends justify the means" in the context of the rights to property and privacy vs preventing possible crimes? Be careful what you wish for, this actually affects us all and it could be you....

IMHO, we need two kinds of action here, neither violating the rights of people or animals.

First is the respect for our own rights to privacy, property and due process. Just because you have nothing to hide does not mean you would welcome intrusion, such as routine police searches or amateur surveillance of your property or behavior. We all (USA) have Constitutional protections that assure us the government cannot overstep their authority, and they must be prevented from allowing others the same trespass.

Then, we need more supervision by authorities already charged with governing meat production practices and extremely harsh penalties for animal cruelty. If this behavior/mistreatment is indeed rampant, then routine inspections and surprise visits should limit these practices. If harsh penalties (actual jail time) were imposed for both personnel and owners of these operations, many of these practices would immediately stop. There are "whistle blowers" in many industries and given suitable incentive, it would seem the meat industry would have their own.

While I feel like I could, on one hand, commend the people exposing this mistreatment and cruelty, on the other hand I must recognize them as criminals in their own way.
 
Old 03-19-2013, 06:34 PM   #4
JColt
Too many Lobbyist's in bed with politicians on food industry. The penalties are easier to pay than cleaning up there act. Make the fine hurt like hell and you'll see changes. The only time maximum fines are enforced is after one of these hidden videos are shown.
 

Join now to reply to this thread or open new ones for your questions & comments! FaunaClassifieds.com is the largest online community about Reptile & Amphibians, Snakes, Lizards and number one classifieds service with thousands of ads to look for. Registration is open to everyone and FREE. Click Here to Register!

 
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I forgot that animal abuse was legal Lyion General Discussions 6 02-01-2013 06:16 PM
Local animal abuse headline.... garweft SOUND OFF!!! 11 03-27-2011 02:03 AM
JimO Animal abuse, that poor pug Wilomn Just For Laughs 14 11-16-2007 05:26 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:02 PM.







Fauna Top Sites


Powered by vBulletin® Version
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.11379194 seconds with 10 queries
Content copyrighted ©2002-2022, FaunaClassifieds, LLC