The Humane Advocate

Give Props to Prop 2

So much is happening in the animal welfare world that it can be hard to keep up. One issue that has many animal advocates across the nation down right giddy is the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act or Proposition 2. Prop 2 is a ballot initiative that will appear on the November 2008 election ballot in California that will stop the inhumane practice of confining farm animals into small cages completely inhibiting their ability to turn around, lie down or extend their limbs.

Currently, many farmed animals such as veal calves, pigs and egg-laying hens are confined to tiny cages barely larger than their bodies. Calves are tethered by the neck unable to move, pigs in severe confinement bite the metal bars of their crates and hens get trapped and even impaled in their wire cages.

All animals regardless if they are for food or not, deserve better treatment. These animals have the ability to suffer and feel pain just as other animals do and are being subjected to some of the worst treatment and conditions imaginable.

The term compartmentalized compassion comes to mind regarding farmed animals. It is easy for many to say that abuse of a dog or cat is wrong, but somehow we have compartmentalized our compassion to exclude animals raised for food. Prop 2 will be a monumental win and shift in how we view and treat farmed animals.

Not only will countless animals have their suffering reduced by being given the ability to lay down, turn around, extend their limbs and stand up, but we can count on safer food and an improvement to human health. Factory farms can also have terrible effects on the communities in which they are located, contaminating waterways, soil and the air. Read the facts about Prop 2.

The opposition has been busy at work trying to undermine this simple, sensible reform by attempting to mislead the public and protect their own interests, which most definitely have nothing to do with the humane treatment of the animals. Check out the facts, who the opposition is and their less than stellar track records.

Photo: Farm Sanctuary

Our thoughtful consideration to this issue as a society is necessary and something each one of us should take a moment to really think about. It is a moral and ethical question we shouldn't sweep under the rug or pretend doesn't exist. Compassion and humane treatment must extend to all animals including those raised for food. Visit the Prop 2 website for complete details and be sure to tell any friends or family members you may have in California to vote YES on Prop 2. My family members in California are ready and waiting to cast their yes vote!

No more monkeying around

This week the news of Indiana University President Michael McRobbie halting primate research at IUB made my day to say the least. The Herald-Times ran a three part story about the issue entitled "Flawed Process". I won't disagree with them there.

How disappointing to read a multi-day, front page story about the mismanagement of a primate lab at Indiana University Bloomington with no acknowledgment of how the "mismanagement" would affect the animals themselves.

Inspections by the United States Department of Agriculture in May and July of 2007 turned up dozens of citations regarding animal care and conditions on the Bloomington campus including, but not limited to, Preston McGarraghty’s laboratory in psychology.

In total, there were more than 40 violations of federal standards from the USDA and communications that the lab in the Optometry School fell far short of minimum standards for rhesus macaques to be housed there.

The Optometry lab was the final straw, and rightly so, for McRobbie to pull the plug. The lab in progress had such egregious flaws including, floors inadequate for drainage and a drop ceiling that would be an easy means of escape for a monkey loose from its cage. 

Did I mention that rhesus macaques have a high occurrence of Hepatitis B or the myriad of issues involved with monkeys in research? If these obvious problems existed, we can only imagine what the actual housing for the animals might have looked like.

Now, back to Preston McGarraghty and his view point.  “I feel that I was treated in a very unprofessional manner. It has left me with a very bitter taste in my mouth about the institution,” he said.

It leaves a bitter taste in my mouth that faculty at IU would not only be putting students, staff, other faculty and IU's reputation at risk AND have such little regard for the animals. I can only imagine how Herman B Wells, the father of IU and educational visionary, would feel about such a stance. Surely this is not the vision of enlightenment and progressive higher education that he devoted his life.

Animal use in research poses many moral and ethical questions that an institution of higher education such as IU should be debating, including in their regular dialog, while also researching alternatives to animal research.

Animals used in research is not an issue that can quickly be solved, but have any of the world's offenses  been solved overnight? The great thinkers of our society and universities should see the value of all life and the inherent suffering of animals used in research. We need to do better by actively working toward minimizing suffering and eventually replacing animals used in research. The margin of human error is  monumental.

Wild Bloomington

All of us who live in Bloomington know that there is a certain responsibility, sensibility and pride that our residents take in preserving and maintaining the landscape of our City. On my way to Bryan Park today I drove by house after house with the most beautiful gardens. I couldn't help but be reminded of the uniqueness of our community and how fortunate our wildlife is to have people working to maintain their habitats and improving our environment.

Bryan Park itself is a testament to the conscientiousness our community shares. The park has been spearheading the Bryan Park Creek Naturalization Project with the primary goals of improving water quality, reviving the wildlife habitat and reintroducing native plants into the park. With the reintroduction of native plants, park officials have seen a return and rise in hummingbirds, goldfinches, blue jays and the monarch butterfly.

The Bryan Park project is part of the broader initiative for which all of Bloomington has become a certified Backyard Wildlife Habitat (BWH) through the National Wildlife Federation, spearheaded locally by the Center for Sustainable Living. The CSL has been working with the City and residents for several years to obtain this status by having a certain number of properties, commercial and residential, certified as a BWH. 

CSL deserves a big pat on the back for being the driving force behind making our community all the more beautiful, wildlife-friendly and environmentally conscious. Just because Bloomington is now certified doesn't mean we should stop there.

After my visit to Bryan Park I visited the City of Bloomington's website which had great information about backyard wildlife habitats and natural landscaping. I know my gardening plans for next spring have changed and I can't wait! Get in touch with the CSL or the City of Bloomington and get going planning your wildlife habitat.

The folks at the Center for Sustainable Living can help you plan your landscaping with the basic requirements for your yard to become a CWH including food, water, shelter and places to raise young- all of which are easily attainable with natural landscaping.