-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Personally, i might expect a group like the RSPCA to engage in the killing of unwanted cats and dogs, but i don't think it is something Peta should be doing, they should be focussing wholly on the root cause of the problem.
But then it's hard to tell what Peta really are? Sometimes i like what they do and sometimes i don't. They certainly seem to lack a consistent approach excepting of course the maximum publicity one.
'Fishing Lines: This Robocarp ruse isn't much cop
By Keith Elliott
Published: 16 April 2006
It's been a bad week for the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta). The vegan animal rights group saw four of their staunch supporters facing lengthy jail sentences for conspiring to blackmail the owners of a guinea- pig farm. And their latest anti-angling campaign, scheduled for the Easter weekend and codenamed Robocarp, has attracted more laughs than outrage.
For those who don't know, Peta are nothing like as altruistic as their title suggests. The US-based group's goal, according to their president, Ingrid Newkirk, is "total animal liberation": no meat, milk, wool, leather and pets (even guide dogs). But they are not as caring as they like to make out. Peta's own figures filed with the State of Virginia show that they killed more than 10,000 animals between 1998 and 2003. They have complained that actually taking care of animals costs more than killing them. Hmm. [...]'
http://sport.independent.co.uk/gener...icle357954.ece
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
So The Independent's no better than the Guardian then. All papers must play to the status quo rather than challenge it (Give or take centre left/right swaying) I suppose.
I suppose the RSPCA don't have enough finance to offer the thousands of condemned animals injected euthanasia. Besides this is a US story, bottomline is they offer a more "Humane" death to animals that will die anyway.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
The_Lincoln_Imp
bottomline is they offer a more "Humane" death to animals that will die anyway.
The bottom line is people brought them animals believing PETA would make an effort to rehome them and they were instead just killed.
PETA should have said they simply operate a kill no-shelter policy, which they didn't.
Had the animals been given to a hard-working no-kill shelter they would not have "died anyway". Other people work damn hard so that animals don't have to die, not just through rehoming but also through sanctuaries.
PETA are not dedicated to that work. Indeed, they have ridiculed people who are in defence of their own hypocritical actions.
PETA have not fought for this. They prefer to thrust the violence in other people's faces, using the dead animals for polemical purposes rather than putting energy into saving them.
Mike
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
The_Lincoln_Imp
So The Independent's no better than the Guardian then.
Maybe, but i reckon the comment seems fair. I don't think you can free animals by being complicit in killing them, because it seems marginally better than the other ways of killing. This is my opinion, but if you want the liberation of animals then you don't need to dilute your position.
I don't look after any animals at present, and in part this is a bit cr*p, because plenty of animals die because people won't agree to take a degree of responsibility.
Here's an interesting article:
'Must Love Dogs … to Death
By Jeff Perz
The Abolitionist Online asked Jeff Perz to comment on PeTA’s killing policy. This is his response. [...]'
http://www.abolitionist-online.com/a...eff.perz.shtml
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Wikipedia has quite a comprehensive entry on Peta and the 'killing animals' issue doesn't seem as black and white as some have portrayed it. Having been on the end of media misreporting myself, I think that its really a case of 'you had to be there.'
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
I strongly support Geoff's viewpoints. Well put, Geoff.:)
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
Geoff
I repeat - what would you and Green Envy do with the 10,000 unwanted cats that RSPCA Qld. euthanases each year?
IE, if you were put in charge of RSPCA Queensland, what would you do with just under 200 cats brought to the shelters every week of the year?
It's very easy to sit at a computer and criticise others but a very different matter when you're confronted with the situation in reality.
I was in the lunch room at the RSPCA HQ in Brisbane a few years back, on a killing day, when one of the vets came in and said: " I'm sick of all this killing" The room fell silent for quite a while. That's the reality.
You're not asking me but I'll tell you what I would do.
I would STOP taking new admissions in rather than DESTROY the guests I was already caring for. Plenty of cats would rather take their chances on the streets than be KILLED because there's no room. I know a lady who left the RSPCA because she was routinely asked to KILL patients to make room for new ones. The charity I work for does not KILL those who it cannot home - it keeps on trying until it can home them - only then it takes in newcomers. We never kill a healthy animal. I don't and will not give my money to charities that operate a KILL who you cannot home policy.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
I found the articles archaeopteryx and Kevster linked to very ineresting and I agree with both of them. Kevster's article in particular expresess what I feel about this whole issue apart from spraying and neutering. (the only reason I'm not sprayed is my doctor wouldn't agree to it).
I have just taken in 4 rescue rats from a no kill centre. They came with chest infections (which have cleared up). Sky and Poppy seeds are delightful companions. The other 2 have their problems. In a kill shelter all 4 of them would have been killed. Even Sky and Poppy's loveable nature wouldn't have saved them.
I think it's over syplifyig the issue to say that killing is the best option. Something very few people would advocate for humans and those who would tend to be of a very facist perswasion and not humanitarian in the least.
Maybe being disabled also makes me feel strongly on this issue. As well as Jews the Nazi's killed a lot of disabled people only they did it to be 'kind'. Well I must say, I'd rather be alive and disabled, then dead. So I wouldn't turn a stray in if I thought it was likely to get killed.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Ridiculous?
Is the RSPCA of Queenslands method working? Obviously not!
Where else are the 10,000 extra feral cats coming from?
They need to work at the root cause of this problem. It wouldn't be easy and it would have to be a long term plan but in the long run it would provide a more humane and effective method.
Trap, neuter, return.
Do the public know they are handing their unwanted cats in to be killed?
Do you think the public would hand so many cats in if they were aware of this policy? Are effective neutering campaigns in place in poor areas?
As long as people are prepared to take care of problems like the feral and unwanted cat population by slaughtering them (whatever their methods) then nothing will change. Slaughtering the healthy and unwanted is not a solution - it's just another problem. As long as the RSPCA keeps an open door policy and keeps killing unwanted animals then society will NEVER have to deal with this problem.
Try reading the information from the link I posted. This is not just my opinion. This opinion is shared by many humane organisations.
http://www.alleycat.org/visitor.html
"Myth: Feral cats lead short, miserable lives so it’s best to trap and euthanize them. Reality: Studies show that feral cats have about the same lifespan as pet cats. And they contract diseases at about the same rate. It is simply not humane or prudent to kill a healthy feral cat, and this practice does not reduce their populations over the long-term because other cats move in and start breeding."
"Myth: Feral cats are predators that deplete wildlife. Reality: Studies show that the overwhelming cause of wildlife depletion is destruction of natural habitat due to man-made structures, chemical pollution, pesticides, and drought — not feral cats."
"Don’t buy into the cruel myths about feral cats and kittens. Discover the compassionate solution that really works..."
Trap, neuter, return.
"Cat populations are gradually reduced. Nuisance behaviors associated with breeding, such as the yowling of females or the spraying of toms, are virtually eliminated. Disease and malnutrition are greatly reduced. The cats live healthy, safe, and peaceful lives in their territories."
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Excellent post there from the prehistoric bird!
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
I also agree with archaeopteryx.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
It's sad and unsurprising that at the root of this problem is a lack of care on the part of the public.
When feral cats are removed from the wild, there is evidence to suggest, that a vacuum is created that is simply filled by more craftier and fitter feral cats.
There are also suggestions that cats are being used in Australia as a convenient scapegoat for human destruction of wildlife habitats.
There's a lot more good information on the subject here -
http://messybeast.com/eradicat.htm
Some quotes:
"In parts of Australia and America there is talk of exterminating stray/feral cats to protect wildlife species from an 'introduced predator', 'non-native animal' or 'an invasive species'. Though wholesale extermination appeals to those who oversimplify the problem and view cats as the agents of wildlife depopulation, extermination just isn't that simple and is ultimately counter-productive."
"Those opposed to seeing tatty, scrawny strays (on either aesthetic or welfare grounds) are often surprised to find that neutered ferals are healthier and have less impact on wildlife due to the cessation of breeding.."
"The cat is a convenient target for hatred since it is an obvious hunter. Factors such as overclearing and overstocking of land, clearing of land for development and the deliberate introduction of other alien species are rarely considered. Studies indicate that the cats prefer to hunt introduced "pest" species (pigeons, rabbits, mice etc) and in Tasmania the feral cat co-exists with the marsupial "Native Cat".
"Eradication methods, even if implemented in the most humane manner possible, cannot solve the feral cat problem. They are frequently unpopular with the public and at best they are only temporary fix. Trap-neuter-return programmes may be time-consuming and seem like a drop in the ocean, but offer the best hope of a long-term solution to the cat population problem, giving healthy ferals the chance of a decent life and freedom from the otherwise endless cycle of breeding while those which cannot be re-released should at least be given a humane and painless escape from their predicament."
"C.A.T.S. is currently the only organisation in Australia involved in long term studies of the "Sterilise and Return to Home" (Trap-Neuter-Return) method of controlling feral colonies. Trap-neuter-return is the only long-term effective method of controlling feral populations."
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
This is no judgment of PETA in general. But I read a site called "PETA kills animals" or something. It too accused PETA of being hasty in euthanizing animals. But the website went on and on and began to sound like some redneck propaganda to justify eating animals.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
Alvin Carrier
This is no judgment of PETA in general. But I read a site called "PETA kills animals" or something. It too accused PETA of being hasty in euthanizing animals. But the website went on and on and began to sound like some redneck propaganda to justify eating animals.
Yes that's a Consumer Freedom Group offshoot. They lobby for meat industries, cigarette companies and so on. Rightwing libertarian market driven rhetoric.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
archaeopteryx
It's sad and unsurprising that at the root of this problem is a lack of care on the part of the public.
When feral cats are removed from the wild, there is evidence to suggest, that a vacuum is created that is simply filled by more craftier and fitter feral cats.
This would be an accurate assessment. Feral cats have large ranges and are decimating the native life. In the long term the population will decline once all the small bird populations have been wiped out; the marsupials, the skinks and frogs - even the insects.
The delicate balance here is already falling - but it is not only the cats; remember that there are also a green snake plague in the Northern Territory along with the cane toads that eat anything that they can put in their mouths. There are camels, goats, pigs, buffalo, wild horses, foxes, wild dogs, rabbits, rats, and mice.
Cats may have an affection rating that is very high and makes people horrified to hear that population control includes (humanely) ending their lives in an effort to save the lives of the animals that exist in the habitat natively.
Who is going to trap / neuter and return the other species? How many cane toads can be re-homed? What are they going to be fed? Slaugherhouse products, just like the rehomed cats?
Quote:
Studies indicate that the cats prefer to hunt introduced "pest" species (pigeons, rabbits, mice etc) and in Tasmania the feral cat co-exists with the marsupial "Native Cat".
"Eradication methods, even if implemented in the most humane manner possible, cannot solve the feral cat problem. They are frequently unpopular with the public and at best they are only temporary fix. Trap-neuter-return programmes may be time-consuming and seem like a drop in the ocean, but offer the best hope of a long-term solution to the cat population problem, giving healthy ferals the chance of a decent life and freedom from the otherwise endless cycle of breeding while those which cannot be re-released should at least be given a humane and painless escape from their predicament."
And how many are sacrificed to be the next meal or plaything of these neutered cats?
Quote:
"C.A.T.S. is currently the only organisation in Australia involved in long term studies of the "Sterilise and Return to Home" (Trap-Neuter-Return) method of controlling feral colonies. Trap-neuter-return is the only long-term effective method of controlling feral populations."
Their efforts are to be applauded, but their assessment, I fear, is lacking.
Cats are a carrier for the Toxoplasmosis pathogen. I doubt that there is a equitable co-habitation situation between marsupial cats and the feral population - just natural competition. One will outlast the other if their niches overlap and they can't adapt to alternate food sources.
Quote:
Although habitat change is putting pressure on several marsupial species, the fox is not established there. Cats are present, however, and are causing problems for native mammals through predation and the transmission of diseases such as toxoplasmosis.
Ref.
It is a tricky topic - but difficult to look at just one species like cats - especially a carnivore that is definitely going to kill or be fed the by-catch of the oceans, the waste from the broiler sheds and slaughterhouses.
Can you apply the neuter and release technique to only one species and not afford to think of the implications for the other species?
No. You can't.
There is always a bigger picture.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
Geoff
Archaeopteryx, the theory sounds good but it is theory. You don't live here and you don't know.
I spend an hour a day, looking at the mangled face of a baby possum, when I'm bottlefeeding him and it sometimes makes me cry. That's my reality. The vet told me that his injuries are typical of those she's seen many times, inflicted by cats.
Over 90% of land clearing in Qld. is for grazing animals, which is why I don't buy meat or dairy products.
I don't want to spend any more time arguing with an anonymous person who chooses not to disclose any information about themselves.
BTW - there were no cats here 200 years ago, which is comparatively recent history.
Yes, Geoff, I live in the UK and you are in Australia. I was unaware of the Australian problem until I started looking into it recently. I'm not claiming to be an authority on the subject but just because you are there on the ground doesn't mean that you see and know all either. It is a dreadful state of affairs that cats are injuring and endangering native animals. I do empathise with your situation. I'm looking after sick animals here myself. It seems that eradication is impossible though so what are you going to do? Keep treading water and mowing down the cat population only to have it increase further or try to stabilize it and reduce the death toll for both native animals and cats? Trap, neuter, return, seems to me, to be the way to do this. That's my opinion.
BTW - I have been on forums before where I disclosed my name and location etc. and this time I have chosen anonymity for my own reasons. Of course that does not invalidate my viewpoints in any way but I will respect your wish not to communicate with me in the future if that's what you really want.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
veganblue
There is always a bigger picture.
Veganblue, I appreciate that there is a complex web of interactions suffering serious damage and that this issue cannot be dealt with effectively in isolation. It would seem though that eradication of cats in Australia (as elsewhere) is impossible so the best course of action, it seems to me, is to try and stabilise and reduce the population to reduce the impact on the native wildlife. Trap, neuter, return seems to be the most effective way to do this, other methods seeming to produce a counterproductive effect. Of course the will and resources to do this are obviously lacking as I imagine are the will and resources to deal with the other problems you mention.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
veganblue
And how many are sacrificed to be the next meal or plaything of these neutered cats?
Apparently less than if these cats were unneutered. That's why I support TNR both for cat welfare and in order to have a positive impact on native wildlife.
Again, I don't claim to be an all knowing, all seeing expert on this subject. Some believe that attempting to exterminate the cat population is the way to go whilst others are arguing that this is actually counterproductive and TNR would be a more effective method resulting in fewer cats occupying territories and therefore less impact on wildlife. The former method seems the more simplistic of the two to me. I support the latter both for cats and for wildlife.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
"I have referred it to a few AR people and they say yes, it's true.
I don't blame Ingrid for not liking dogs if she was bitten by one, and that doesn't make her a bad person. If PETA elects to commit euthanasia on healthy animals that is their choice. But I won't endorse them any more."
I don't think i could disagree more. That is no reason to MURDER the animal! just because A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT dog bit her she murders them..... Also, if they elect to commit euthanasia then it must be stopped!
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
Kevster
Personally, i might expect a group like the RSPCA to engage in the killing of unwanted cats and dogs, but i don't think it is something Peta should be doing, they should be focussing wholly on the root cause of the problem.
I completely agree with that! It's making bad press for Peta as well... That has actually to be done, hope it won't be done anymore in a couple of decades... but actually we can't let forsaken pets in the street and causing problems like in some islands over the great ocean where dogs are too much in the street, attacking people, and then getting killed or used for fishing by the population...
Quote:
Geoff
In 2004 someone dumped a box of kittens over my front fence. My daughter and I found homes for them, with considerable difficulty. Some time later my neighbours and I started finding the remains of wildlife in our yards and it was obvious that we had a feral cat around so I set a trap and caught it. From its markings it appeared to be one of the dumped litter that I'd missed and had been surviving off the wildlife. I knew that it would be euthanased if I took it to the RSPCA so I took the responsibility on myself and got my vet to do it. I brought it home and buried it here.
By all means have a go at me if you think I did the wrong thing and do let me know if I'm a hypocrite.
I wouldn't say you're hypocrite but I find it quite tough to do that... It's quite inhumane to end a life, who gave you the right to do that?
Well, just to fuel the conversation, I don't condemn you, I do understand the situation and I wouldn't be able to kill an animal, but I understand. (at least I wouldn't be able to kill a mammal, and very likely not other vertebrates)
Quote:
archaeopteryx
You're not asking me but I'll tell you what I would do.
I would STOP taking new admissions in rather than DESTROY the guests I was already caring for. Plenty of cats would rather take their chances on the streets than be KILLED because there's no room. I know a lady who left the RSPCA because she was routinely asked to KILL patients to make room for new ones. The charity I work for does not KILL those who it cannot home - it keeps on trying until it can home them - only then it takes in newcomers. We never kill a healthy animal. I don't and will not give my money to charities that operate a KILL who you cannot home policy.
I completely agree mate :) You can't support the whole suffering of the world, you can just do what you can, and then for the others, you just have to leave them and carry for some, but in no way it would be compationate to kill innocent animals. Is there any AR movement who have beseted the RSPCA centers or sabotage them? Just wondering... I've heard of a Body Shop beeing target of attacks because of its arrangements with L'Oréal.
Remember a sentence of Mahatma Gandhi which can be use to talk about AR in that case): "The end is in the means like the tree is in the seed."
All the best,
Christophe (who wouldn't commit to kill innocents: animals, unborn humans, human victims, etc.)
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
archaeopteryx
You're not asking me but I'll tell you what I would do.
I would STOP taking new admissions in rather than DESTROY the guests I was already caring for. Plenty of cats would rather take their chances on the streets than be KILLED because there's no room. I know a lady who left the RSPCA because she was routinely asked to KILL patients to make room for new ones. The charity I work for does not KILL those who it cannot home - it keeps on trying until it can home them - only then it takes in newcomers. We never kill a healthy animal. I don't and will not give my money to charities that operate a KILL who you cannot home policy.
Quote:
geysir111
I completely agree with that! It's making bad press for Peta as well... That has actually to be done, hope it won't be done anymore in a couple of decades... but actually we can't let forsaken pets in the street and causing problems like in some islands over the great ocean where dogs are too much in the street, attacking people, and then getting killed or used for fishing by the population...
What would you do? Are you condoning PETA's actions?
- Have either of you no concern for the fate of the animals that you turn away? There are some ugly things that happen in shelters and some more than others.
I am just trying to say - it's not as easy as saying - ''I can't take them in - send them to some other (probably inhumane) shelter." PETA found themselves faced with this distressing problem which is why they have neutering programs - but the ongoing problem is bigger than them. Just imagine what would happen to the animals that PETA currently deals with if everyone stopped supporting them?!
The image is too distressing. :(
Quote:
I wouldn't say you're hypocrite but I find it quite tough to do that... It's quite inhumane to end a life, who gave you the right to do that?
Well, just to fuel the conversation, I don't condemn you, I do understand the situation and I wouldn't be able to kill an animal, but I understand. (at least I wouldn't be able to kill a mammal, and very likely not other vertebrates)
What would you do?
Your use of the word inhumane in referrence to ending a life seems inappropriate in this context. I would suggest that the ''humane-ness'' of something referred to the condition of living or dying - but not to the fact of living or dying or being deceased. :confused:
- When releasing the cats - neutered or otherwise - are you being humane to the native animals by placing an exotic killer in their midst?
- If you keep the neutered animals - do you cause the slaughter of thousands of other species to feed this carnivore? or do you fund vegan replacement foods?
- If you choose the last option and can afford it, how many are you going to take in?
- Where do you house the ones that you cannot take in? Can you offer them a lifetime of contentment?
- And lastly - does not the AR position consider the neutering of an animal the removal of its procreative rights?
Remember a sentence of Mahatma Gandhi which can be use to talk about AR in that case): "The end is in the means like the tree is in the seed."
I fear that the means of the AR movement - if they condone attacking those that are actually doing something good - will either produce a stunted ugly tree, or dying before reaching maturity. Gary Francione is the most guilty of stirring in-fighting. It seems that he has forgotten where the real crimes lie - in the sheds housing the hapless millions. :(
Quote:
Christophe (who wouldn't commit to kill innocents: animals, unborn humans, human victims, etc.)
... but would release an exotic killer onto a unsuitable environment and it's inhabitants? If you are opposing one thing it is reasonable to ask; ''What would you do instead?''...
Please take your argument to the conclusion. What would you do?
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
I don't have much time now, I'll answer longer later but I wouldn't place myself in that situation or I wouldn't be able to do these killings... I would have left the job to be honest, call me a coward maybe but I couldn't do that
But as I said, I do understand that some people might need to do it, in order to prevent much further suffering to theses animals, or to the wilderness. But Peta shouldn't have done it, another organisation should have been doing this job. And if Peta want to improve the conditions of the pets who are beings killed, then they might have fund and give money (maybe not officialy) to an organisation who would have been officially independent but controlled and regulated by Peta or by some of the more compationate people. Just to do not let people associate Peta with these actions. And if people would have called Peta for forsaken pets problems, then peta would have advise them the second organisation who would take care only of these shelters.
I hope that I'm better understood now... :)
But I don't condemn Peta for these actions... I just think they should have fund a new AR-radical shelter organisation to do this job for them...
All the best,
Christophe
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Thank you. I understand your position better.
I would not like to create a situation where PETA is doing anything that is not completely clear on this matter. Creating an organisation as a front for PETA being the ones stepping up to the mark and dealing with this distressing but urgent problem cannot ever be the answer. It is like hiding from the reality of the situation for the sake of PR.
What kind of PR? PETA is doing the horrible ''dirty work'' that none of it's other detractors are doing.
Why should it no be known that PETA is preventing the suffering of discarded and unwanted animals that would otherwise multiply and compound the problem while suffering in limbo in a pound facility or be killed at the hands of people that probably *can't* care anymore - because it is too hard.
They have my respect for having the bravery for doing something about a bad situation - instead of sitting back and hoping that someone else will step up to the mark.
*No Kill* is an ideological position that currently cannot be upheld because of the magnitude of the problem. :(
Given a choice between a peaceful end or abandonment to the current systems - I would want the peaceful death too. Re-homing is still only feasible for a few. :( Distressing - but it is reality.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
It indicates an organisation that is willing to encourage the development of humane alternatives.
Henry Spiro started pressuring Revlon and created over many years a situation where money was put into developing a non-animal alternative to the Draise Eye test that was feasible.
He wanted and end to it - yesterday - but knew that a simple call to end it would be a waste of time and energy; without an alternative.
PETA is encouraging the developments of alternatives. People are still going to use spring traps. If there is a humane alternative available for those that choose to kill then I would say that that is preferable to the status quo.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
It also indicates that 'ethical treatment of animals' (the E, T and A in PETA)goes along with killing animals. And it means that a lot of people are not going to support them.
If an organization is against eating meat, it'll shouldn't declare that 'The Man Of They Year' is a guy who is cooking better/healthier meals based on animal ingredients. IMO they should rather give the prize to someone who makes better/healthier meals without meat, and in this way support veggie chefs and sending out a signal to the world about what they are focusing on.
If people in PETA want to support 'humane slaughtering', they could have done it under another name, ie. by creating a new organization that was independent of PETA. Many people may now think that PETA thinks it's OK to kill animals if they only do it in a 'humane' way.
Now a lot of supporters/potential supporters will call them stupid instead. It has already started on other vegan sites..
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
I've read alot about this recently and I have to say that until I read that article I had thought that Peta was a good organisation.
Now a) They are promoting a company that in my books are the bad guys that also use very cruel ways of trapping and vermin.
b) How do they actually know whether or not the animals actually suffer? To me it sounds like an animal concentration camp. I certainly wouldn't like to be gassed to death and I would imagine it to be very frightening to any creature, no matter how small.
c) It is mankind that has brought on alot of the influx in rodent population. Eg with all the takeaways and rubbish left around the streets and not disposed of, it is no wonder that it has become a breeding ground as there is so much food for them. If people looked after their neighbourhoods correctly in the first place then there wouldn't have this problem. People have themselves to blame.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Killing is wrong. If I announced that I had taken a tramp to have him PTS because I didn't think the life of a tramp was very good I don't think I would have very much support from human rights groups and I may quite rightly be convicted of murder.
However it seems people are actually supporting an 'animal rights' group that does presicly that.
I've read about them giving that award to Rentokill on a rat forum. It seems CO isn't that humane after all.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
I can’t always believe in the Media 100% and it seem that almost every big orginization has some sort of corruption or scandal. I just hope that’s not true and there’s no such thing as eating animals in this world. :)
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
The info about the PETA 'gas chambers' for mice isn't from media - it is from PETA.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Kinda looks to me like the "problems" caused by mouse plagues may actually be attempts at solutions to the greatest plague the world has ever been burdened with.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
veganblue
*No Kill* is an ideological position that currently cannot be upheld because of the magnitude of the problem. :(
Given a choice between a peaceful end or abandonment to the current systems - I would want the peaceful death too. Re-homing is still only feasible for a few. :( Distressing - but it is reality.
Well, *No Kill* is indeed an ideological position, an utopy for now, but we should keep that in mind, because if you arrive to consider killing as a banal thing to do, you would loose your humanity.
I would prefer to be abandoned rather than having a "peacefull" end and if loads of people would prefer the opposite, I'm pretty sure than there is so few animals that would prefer to die than surviving in even ghastly conditions. Suicide is mostly a human behaviour, I just know about scorpions who can do so, but even if there's other species ready to die to not suffer, they are certainly very few.
Quote:
Korn
It also indicates that 'ethical treatment of animals' (the E, T and A in PETA)goes along with killing animals. And it means that a lot of people are not going to support them.
Well I think now that Peta "enfeoff" itself to the position of Peter Singer, including his position about killing. As far as I know, P.Singer is strongly against the suffering of animals but not specially against their killings. If it cause suffer to another being, then Singerists would consider it wrong (i.e.: if a cow is killed in front of her calf) in itself, but it's moreless on that position the suffering generated but the killings which is wrong... So in that way their position is much more understandable.
BUT who can say that killing a rat by gasins is painless?:confused: Assuredly it would cause less pain than other methods of rat slaughtering but still, I strongly believe that it cause pain to the rat, who feel stress by being confined and by dreading its imminent end.
But what do we want? Do we want to soften the whip of animal exploitation? Or do we want to take it out, total animal liberation?
Peta itself said they were for total animal liberation so what should we thing? I'm asking you that... I have friends in Peta staff and I have supported them long ago... But still, if this thing is right, then I would still support Peta, they are doing more better things after all.
Quote:
Korn
If an organization is against eating meat, it'll shouldn't declare that 'The Man Of They Year' is a guy who is cooking better/healthier meals based on animal ingredients. IMO they should rather give the prize to someone who makes better/healthier meals without meat, and in this way support veggie chefs and sending out a signal to the world about what they are focusing on.
If people in PETA want to support 'humane slaughtering', they could have done it under another name, ie. by creating a new organization that was independent of PETA. Many people may now think that PETA thinks it's OK to kill animals if they only do it in a 'humane' way.
Now a lot of supporters/potential supporters will call them stupid instead. It has already started on other vegan sites..
That's making really bad ad for Peta indeed, don't they have a PR practitionner? That would be a good idea :)
Quote:
Geoff
I wonder what you would do if confronted by thousands of mice coming into your home. Gently catch each female, anaesthetise, desex and release it?
Mice cause severe economic, social and environmental damage during plagues - damaging crops, stored products and equipment. The Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) estimates that between 100,000 and 500,000 hectares of grain crops are affected each year. The major plague in South Australia and Victoria in 1993 was estimated to cost at least $55 million in grain losses. A major plague now may cost over $150 million in lost production.
The problems of mouse plagues are not simply economic. Swarms of mice can invade households, hospitals, livestock pens, food storage and other facilities causing significant damage to infrastructure. They also pose a major threat to health and welfare, inflicting stress on humans and livestock. Mice also carry a number of diseases which affect humans and livestock including Salmonella and swine encephalomyocarditis.
Humans should use methods to prevent the incoming of rats, or confining them in the sewers or outside the human cities, village andhamlets. But killing is not a good way. I think that money should be use for ethical R&D in new methods of sterilizing rats and mice.
Christophe
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
Geoff
I wonder what you would do if confronted by thousands of mice coming into your home. Gently catch each female, anaesthetise, desex and release it?
Mice cause severe economic, social and environmental damage during plagues - damaging crops, stored products and equipment. The Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) estimates that between 100,000 and 500,000 hectares of grain crops are affected each year. The major plague in South Australia and Victoria in 1993 was estimated to cost at least $55 million in grain losses. A major plague now may cost over $150 million in lost production.
The problems of mouse plagues are not simply economic. Swarms of mice can invade households, hospitals, livestock pens, food storage and other facilities causing significant damage to infrastructure. They also pose a major threat to health and welfare, inflicting stress on humans and livestock. Mice also carry a number of diseases which affect humans and livestock including Salmonella and swine encephalomyocarditis.
Please don't give me any of that nonsense. My dad had wild mice and also wild rats at some stage. He catches the mice in a humane trap and takes them to the park. Unfortunately he used differant methods with the rats which I didn't aprove of.
The point is CO gas isn't really that humane. Well maybe in compairison to glue traps and slow acting poisons but they are so inhumane that it is practically impossible to beat them for cruelty.
By the way I didn't aprove of you murdering that cat.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
To me that is what living as a vegan is all about. We may all find ourselves faced with being forced by circumstances to make an unvegan decision, and choose the lesser of two evils. What we must remember is that when this happens, we've got to try to do as much good as we can elsewhere to restore the harmony we have disrupted.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
dreama
Please don't give me any of that nonsense. My dad had wild mice and also wild rats at some stage. He catches the mice in a humane trap and takes them to the park. Unfortunately he used differant methods with the rats which I didn't aprove of.
I am sorry that I could not find you any footage, dreama, but the description in the news report below might give you an indication of the severity of the situation when mice have a population explosion.
Quote:
ABC Regional News
Mouse plague wreaks havoc in South Australia
Wednesday, 24 February 1999
Mice are in plague numbers on farms around Ceduna, on South Australia's west coast.
They are believed to have bred up over the past year, aided by the mild winter and feed left on the ground after grain crops were hit by a hail storm.
Barry Beattie, from a property north of Ceduna, says it is the worst plague since the early 1980s.
"Particularly around the house and the sheds they seem to have moved in in the last feew weeks," Mr Beattie said.
"They've eaten all our garden and Lyn's pot plants and even attacking small shrubs like lantanas and eaten all the leaves off the grapevines, things like that.
"And weeks ago, they ate all the grain out of the wheat stubbles and oat stubbles."
Quote:
dreama
The point is CO gas isn't really that humane. Well maybe in compairison to glue traps and slow acting poisons but they are so inhumane that it is practically impossible to beat them for cruelty.
Actually, CO gas would be quiet a simple and painless death - this is why people do it with car exhausts in the old days. The problem with it now is that new cars have much cleaner exhausts with less carbon monoxide so that the other fumes tend to lead to an unpleasant and much slower death (in suicide).
The device that was described in the article does not use carbon monoxide (CO) however but carbon dioxide (CO2) which would replace the oxygen being consumed. Carbon monoxide is far too dangerous. From physiology, the breathing and heart rate would be temporarily elevated as a response to the increased carbon dioxide changing the blood pH. The mouse would rapidly fall unconscious and soon after brain death would occur. It is much faster than simply letting the animal exhaust the available oxygen supply.
This technique is used in slaughter houses also where the animals descend into a pit via a lift and lose consciousness. It is considered a *more humane* method and replaces pre-stunning or other revolting methods like captive-bolts and electric stunning clamps which can inflict pain, injury and terror on the animal.
I find learning about all this terribly distressing - but I won't be accused of sticking my head in the sand. It's all very well me being vegan and creating my own vegan world but horrible things are being done out there and if we are to try and do anything about them - at the very least, make a small difference - then we have to know.
Meanwhile we continue to work towards the end of it all.
Quote:
dreama
By the way I didn't aprove of you murdering that cat.
It is very easy to judge others; but maybe you should spend some time in their shoes first - or at the very least, offer assistance. It would seem that Geoff is a braver and ultimately kinder person in a painful situation.
Please, be gentle with your vegan compatriots.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Quote:
Seaside
To me that is what living as a vegan is all about. We may all find ourselves faced with being forced by circumstances to make an unvegan decision, and choose the lesser of two evils. What we must remember is that when this happens, we've got to try to do as much good as we can elsewhere to restore the harmony we have disrupted.
I have to agree wholeheartedly. Some of the decisions are very hard to make. But that does not mean that they should not be made.
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
Thanks veganblue. We must also remember that we are all on the same side, and all in this together. :o
-
Re: PETA killing animals?
How about a plague of humans? Should we be gassing the surplas numbers?
After all there are too many humans around at the moment. Especially with the human desire to cause so much damage to the environment.
No sorry but CO gas is NOT painless. Got a link about that I'll just have to find it.
Reading about PETA's activites is like something out of animal farm. "4 legs good, 2 legs better". After all murdering a lot of humans is called genicide. But it's perfectly ok to murder a lot of animals. Even by PETA who are supposed to be for Animal Rights.
Geoff: I'm sorry about your health condition but couldn't you have simply Sprayed/Neutered and then released the cat. That would have been much more ethnical.