I have been thinking about this a lot lately and it occurred to me that one could get hens a better way: from rescues. Many hens are rescued every year by Farm Sanctuary, Animal Place, and many other organizations. There are even some places that specialize in rescuing and then finding new homes. I am now ready to recommend this route to those who feel they must have their eggs. Generally, these organizations have gone to a lot of trouble to save these animals and will also go to some trouble to assure that they are going to the right homes.

The Battery Hen: this one’s in the UK

Chicken Run Rescue: Minnesota! Their motto: don’t breed or buy; adopt!

Rescue Chickens: a lot of info here but probably worth plowing through

Battery Hens: from ckc birds, another UK operation, mostly sells homes for rescued birds

Of course this is hardly a complete list. A good way to begin is to check local rescue operations.

For a related and not altogether the same view from Vegan Soapbox check this out.

As a vegan I can’t make a case for eating eggs, even from rescued hens. But I can see having a hen as a pet, eggs or no, given the right environment. And I can recommend to those who are not vegan that they take this one extra step to reduce cruelty in the world.

The No-Kill Advocacy Center is promoting a new tool to save sheltered animals like cats, dogs and rabbits. They say:

“On behalf of our organization and our Rescue Five-0 partners, No Kill Nation, we are proud to present a step-by-step guide on how to reform an entrenched shelter which refuses to change with the changing times. In too many communities, animal control directors dig in their heels and continue killing in the face of a proven formula for lifesaving success. We want to empower YOU to do something about it. If they want a fight, we’ll help you bring it to them.”

To view and print the FREE guide click here.

Happy Easter. On this holiday, let’s remember the rabbits and chicks who will suffer in animal shelters as discarded pets shortly after this holiday. Rabbits are one of the most common animals euthanized in animal shelters, right along with cats and dogs.

Here is part of an article from Best Friends Animal Society about the Easter Bunny:

Every year around Easter, wherever you turn, live baby rabbits start popping up in pet stores, feed stores and even parking lots. Sad to say, there always seems to be enough demand for all the extra rabbits. Until a few months later, that is, when shelters and rescues are bombarded with holiday castaways.

Accordingly, rabbit rescue groups (including Best Friends) often try to push all sorts of alternatives at Easter time — especially to the gift-giving crowd. There are chocolate rabbits, stuffed animal adoptions, and more. The problem with the gift-giving approach for real rabbits is that most of the time these are unplanned decisions that often end badly. And nothing is more unfair to a rabbit than being whisked off to a new home then discarded months or even weeks later.

How you can help:

ADOPT DON’T SHOP
Adopt or foster a homeless bunny from a local shelter or rescue group. Search petfinder.com for rabbits.

SPONSOR A RABBIT OR CHICK
Animal sanctuaries like Farm Sanctuary, Peaceful Prairie Sanctuary, and Animal Acres welcome animal sponsorships. You can choose an animal to sponsor and then visit your sponsored animal when you visit the sanctuary.

SPREAD THE WORD
Please pass it on. Please share this information with your friends, family, co-workers, neighbors, and others.

“Being vegetarian does not mean compromising on traditional foods, like wings and ribs, during special events such as the Super Bowl. Veggie Brothers offers a variety of traditional finger foods that are perfect for game day.” read more >>

“Compassion in World Farming’s colleagues in South Africa have had an amazing success. After intense lobbying of the South African Pork Producers’ Organisation (SAPPO), the organisation’s Chief Executive has agreed to phase out the use of sow stalls – the narrow concrete-floored stalls in which breeding sows spend their 16 week pregnancies, unable even to turn round.” source >>

“In an open letter sent to Greg Creed, President of Taco Bell, Mercy For Animals’ Executive Director, Nathan Runkle, asks: Why not ‘Think Outside the Bun’ and switch to a healthy and delicious vegan meat substitute and cash in on the growing demand for meatless meal options?” more here >>

Sam Simon, co-creator of The Simpsons, “started a charity called The Sam Simon Foundation, which offers to spay and neuter pets for free, and offers pro bono operations on sick dogs. They also feature an “Assistance Dogs Program,” which rescues dogs from shelters and being euthanized to train them as hearing dogs for the blind and deaf, or place them in retirement homes as pets for the elderly.” details >>

Take a look at the vegan recipe for Roasted Yellow Beet Salad with Warm Maple Mustard Dressing here >>

New veg restaurant: “Imagine grabbing a vegetarian take-out lunch that’s, of course, super healthy and tastes amazing. No, it’s not Chinese or a salad at any of the mainstream fast-food franchises. It could be some chilli sin carne, which is red and black beans in a juicy tomato sauce served with crispy garlic bread or roasted vegetable panini, which is flame-roasted sweet red pepper and zucchini topped with red onion, black olives and mushrooms, toasted to perfection on a wholewheat baguette.” learn more >>

“Stein Mart, a nationwide department store with more than 260 retail locations, was selling a mislabeled fur-trimmed sweater that lab testing revealed to be raccoon dog.” But HSUS stepped in and “Within hours, Stein Mart made the decision to go fur-free.” read the story here >>

Got more veg news to share? Please tell us about it in the comments below!

“We have done everything humanly possible to save Oreo’s life; yet, as a result of the abuse she suffered at the hands of Mr. Henderson, or for other reasons we may never know, she has come to a place where she can no longer be around people or other animals. We make this decision—and others like it– with a heavy heart and a complete understanding that had she been treated with love and respect, Oreo’s fate would be much different.” – The official ASPCA statement about Oreo’s death

I appreciate the ASPCA’s emphasis on how Oreo’s abuser is far more to blame for her death than any other individual or organization, but I think the APSCA made the wrong choice. Here’s why the ASPCA’s decision to kill Oreo bothers me…

We cannot predict the future. So we shouldn’t act like we can.

Even people who disagree about whether there are “fates worse than death” can agree that we cannot predict the future with certainty. We can make reasonable guesses about the future, but we can’t know for certain if a shelter animal is better off being euthanized than being “warehoused.” Even if there are fates worse than death, we can’t always be certain that offering a painless death is truly mercy unless the animal is currently in pain.

The ASPCA “played God” by acting like they knew for certain what Oreo’s future looked like. They chose a course of action based on their limited vantage point. From their view, Oreo’s only options were isolation or death.

The reason so many animal advocates are angry about Oreo’s death is that they see hope where the ASPCA did not.

From the perspective of people who embrace a “no-kill philosophy,” there is hope for the future. Shelters can reduce or eliminate their kill rates. Healthy, adoptable animals don’t need to die. Even aggressive dogs like Oreo have a chance at rehabilitation.

In the world of foster-care for children, it’s said that a child needs twice as long to recover from neglect or abuse as the time the child spent being abused or neglected. Might it be similar with dogs? Might Oreo have required more than a few months to recover from her injuries?

It’s possible, some even argue that it’s likely, Oreo was not destined to isolation. After a year or two at a no-kill shelter with affection and boundaries, who knows what she might have been like?

Shelter killing is an expression of pessimism.

The animal movement is already fraught with so much sadness and grief that we’re desperate for hope. Burn-out in the movement is common. Stagnation and wheel-spinning is even more common. We need extraordinary stories of survival, heroic rescue efforts, and a “never give up” mentality in order to move forward. We need hope and optimism.

But shelter killing is giving up. It’s pessimistic and depressing, stemming from a viewpoint that has no hope in humanity’s ability for redemption. It’s giving up on animals and giving up on people at the same time.

The animal movement requires hope and optimism.

Killing animals will never produce hope and optimism. When animal organizations like the ASPCA, PETA, and the HSUS defend killing animals, it sucks the life out of our movement. Literally.

But the past is in the past. People can change. Animal shelters can change. Animal organizations can change. There is hope. The organizations and people who currently defend shelter killing may one day sing another tune. We shouldn’t lose our hope in their ability to adapt and change.

Let’s not let our hope and optimism die with the animals killed in shelters.

Let’s keep our hope alive by proving that shelter animals have a chance in our homes and our hearts. If you have the room, time, and money, please adopt a shelter animal. If you don’t have the room, the time, or the money, please encourage your friends and family to adopt a shelter animal. Visit Petfinder or AdoptAPet to find a shelter animal near you.

It was the first of its kind, a free event covering purely local campaigns that encourage spay and neuter programs for cats and dogs.

The half-day series of presentations inspired many responses in me. Here are my thoughts in a list:

• It was great to see an organized, free, local event to help local shelter animals and local feral/ free-roaming cats.
• It was great to see so many caring people all in one place.
• From the very beginning I disliked the term “overpopulation” because it focuses on the animals as the problem, not on humans as the problem. The entire issue is framed as though animals must be controlled/ managed by humans, which simply isn’t the case.
• I support spay and neuter programs and I support TNR, but I do so because I see them as an alternative to shelter killing. I don’t believe there is a true “overpopulation” problem. I think that’s a false concept.
• I wanted to speak up and ask why they titled the conference “overpopulation” and ask if it wasn’t time to use more up-to-date terminology, but after hearing other questions from the audience of purportedly “the choir” of “animal rescuers” it became clear to me that my local community IS a bit out of date on these issues. That’s OK, we’ll catch up. Vegas is all about change.
  
• However, I can see how even if cats and dogs are not “overpopulated” and there are enough safe places for them to live (in human homes and in the “wild”), the concept of overpopulation might be useful in persuading people to get more active to save animals lives. That is, for some people it might bridge the gap between a) thinking that animals are a nuisance and if they can’t be adopted then they must be killed and b) thinking that “nuisance” animals can be controlled and managed without being killed.
• The entire conference felt very 1989 to me. The concepts were so old. It makes me sad that we’re still fighting for the rights of shelter animals to be sheltered, not killed. It makes me sad that people still see feral/ free-roaming cats as a “nuisance.” It makes me sad how few people have ever heard of TNR. It makes me sad that so many people still think shelter animals are “damaged goods” and that some people refer to them as “used.”
• I see a clear need for better “marketing” of shelter animals to help them get adopted and overcome common misconceptions. If the shelters won’t do it themselves, it’s time for others to step up and help them.
• It makes me sad that successful campaigns to change people’s perceptions of shelter animals have hinged on a sort of anti-AR view. It makes me sad how many people gleefully subscribe to a true animal welfarist perspective, rather than an animal rights perspective. (Those people are not PETA and the HSUS, by the way. I’m talking about those who wear the “animal welfarist” badge with pride.)

and… most importantly…

• In the US in general, the leading cause of death for animals are slaughterhouses, but in my community, the leading cause of death for animals are shelters. I see the two issues as intrinsically linked because they both stem from the false concept that any trivial human desire trumps the most profound animal need – life.

—

PS – Another conference dedicated to helping shelter animals and free-roaming cats will take place in Las Vegas soon: No More Homeless Pets. That conference is more geared to the national campaigns, however, and not local. And that conference is not free. (For the record, a Soapbox writer will attend that one and will likely post a review.)

* The book was first published in 2007.

* Now the book has been expanded and revised. The new publication date is 2009.

* The No-Kill Center is offering free copies of the 2007 edition to any animal lover who buys a copy of the 2009 edition.

What’s not to love?? A chance to get this amazing book for yourself plus another you can pass on to a friend, a shelter owner, a politician…advocacy at little cost.

Read about the offer on the No Kill page.

Thanks to easyVegan for spotlighting this offer (and including a reference to the review of the book we printed here, too, of course).

“This isn’t about the battle between the No Kill philosophy and its eventual conquest over regressive, kill-oriented approaches. [...]

“This is about a bully who seeks out animals to kill. This is about the creation of death squads that actively go into communities with the specific purpose of finding dogs and cats to kill. And this is about a movement that has utterly failed to defend the innocent animals being slaughtered. This blog is about Ingrid Newkirk, the President of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). This is about an animal killing, arrogant, disturbed person.”

Ingrid took notice of Winograd (or the CCF) because she posted “Why We Euthanize” and explained:

“I always wonder how anyone cannot recognize that there is a world of difference between painlessly euthanizing animals out of compassion—aged, injured, sick, and dying animals whose guardians can’t afford euthanasia, for instance—as PETA does, and causing them to suffer terror, pain, and a prolonged death while struggling to survive on the streets, at the hands of untrained and uncaring ‘technicians,’ or animal abusers. [...]

“at PETA, we will never turn our backs on neglected, unloved, and homeless animals—even if the best we can offer them is a painless release from a world that doesn’t have enough heart or homes with room for them. It makes it easy for people to throw stones at us”

While I think Winograd went way too far overboard in his criticism, making hateful personal attacks, I think it’s strange that Ingrid recognizes that her position is counter-intuitive, unpopular, and damaging to PETA, yet she doesn’t make a more compelling case defending her actions. Sure, she posted a few gruesome pictures of animals in pain, but that’s not a defense.

Neither is the claim that these animals had to die a good defense for killing them. Where is the proof? She showed pictures, but no stories. It’s assumed that these animals, because their wounds look terrible, were hopeless.

It’s that hopelessness that’s most unappealing about the defenses. Animals are not hopeless. Our movement is not hopeless. Those of us who desire a world where animals truly matter MUST rebel against the hopelessness within our movement.

I remember an episode of DogTown where a dog who seemed hopeless survived after optimistic people took good care of him. Here are two examples of that optimistic no-kill mindset:

I’ve experienced such miracles with my own animal family members. As a child we had a long-haired cat named Blackie who was hit by a car and suffered severe injuries. Two of his legs were broken and a third was dislocated. The first vet we went to suggested euthanasia. The second vet agreed to try to save Blackie. It took many months of intense therapy, but Blackie survived for many years after.

Granted, Ingrid has a point that there is a place for true euthanasia, aka “mercy killing.” Some animals cannot be rescued from their tragic fates. It is most kind to offer a painless end to the suffering when the suffering cannot be overcome or avoided. Anyone who has made the choice to euthanize an animal knows what a painful choice that is. In plenty of circumstances, it’s a kind and reasonable choice. Animals with terminal illness or injury deserve comfort and an end to suffering. Likewise, the technicians and veterinarians who perform such work – whether it’s for animals with homes or animals without homes – deserve sympathy and respect. They are not evil people.

Here is one worker’s account of euthanasia in an animal shelter:

But “lack of homes” is one of the reasons Ingrid cites as a reason to kill, which is a claim Nathan Winograd thoroughly debunks in his book, Redemption. There are enough homes for all the homeless cats and dogs; caring humans just need to work harder or more efficiently at finding and keeping those homes. Ingrid’s assumption that what she’s doing is offering a “painless release from a world that doesn’t have enough heart or homes” is off the mark.

An example from my own life: The Animal Care & Control nearest my current home posts adoptable pets online on petharbor.com but not on petfinder.com. As you probably know, petfinder.com is quickly becoming the online resource for shelters and rescues. And if you’ve been to both sites, you know which one is more user-friendly: petfinder.

So, I sent the Animal Care & Control an email (a polite one, I assure you) asking why they don’t use petfinder. They responded that it would be too much work. Meanwhile, they’re killing animals! According to the statistics published on their webpage, they kill at least 4600 animals per year. They likely kill about 80% of the animals they receive! (They receive approximately 7000 each year and adopt out up to 200 per month.)

I investigated and found out petharbor and petfinder can work together so that shelters can upload to one database and get entered into both. So… there’s virtually no additional work required to get their adoptable animals listed in the premier adoptable pet database. A claim that “it takes too much work” is either borne of ignorance (likely) or outright deceit (unlikely, but not impossible). Either way, making such a claim was irresponsible. “It’s too much work” turns out to be untrue.

While puppymills find homes for their “products” in virtually every stripmall in the city, the pound won’t do the tiny bit of work required to submit their adoptable animal list to the most used online database. Moreover, they aren’t open on Sundays and they don’t do regular adoption events in public areas. It’s almost as if they deliberately lower homeless animals’ chances by making adoptions more difficult than need-be.

The point is, the killing has to stop. The excuses don’t cut it.

We can’t let the apathetic people win. When they justify killing cats and dogs because of a wrong assumption that there isn’t “enough heart or homes” for them, it’s not a far leap to justifying killing cows, pigs, and chickens because there isn’t “enough heart or homes” for them either.

I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve heard anti-vegans claim that “if we all went vegan, there’d be a farm animal overpopulation problem.” Where does that ridiculous claim come from? It comes from the wrong assumption that humans must control animal populations even if that means killing animals. It’s the same assumption that Ingrid makes. And it’s the same kind of assumption that funds and maintains “wildlife management programs” aka hunting. It’s the same kind of assumption that justifies poisoning “nuisance” squirrels and pigeons.Ultimately, it’s a human-centric, paternalistic assumption that simply doesn’t make sense.

As animal advocates, we should work to build a better world for all, not to destroy the lives of some.

Other bloggers make good points in this “debate.” Please take a look:

• PETA at Opposing Views
• Change.org’s Animal Rights blog
• Ingrid Newkirk on PETA’s euthanasia policy
• Yet Another Reason Not To Like PETA
• PeTA is a Selfish Pack of Douchebags
• You??? Please leave a comment here with a link!

We can all do something to help shelter animal’s chances.
Some ideas:

1. promote your local shelter on your website, in emails, on web forums, and social networking websites,
2. volunteer at your local shelter and offer to help staff adoption events,
3. enlist as a foster parent for adoptable animals or encourage others to be foster parents,
4. tell people about shelter animals or wear t-shirts that promote rescuing shelter animals.

“Zippy is not a big dog, but she’s a pit bull, one of the Vick pit bulls, and she’s up on her hind legs straining against the collar, her front paws paddling the air like a child’s arms in a swimming pool. The woman holding her back, Berenice Mora-Hernandez, is not big either, and as she digs in her heels, it’s not clear who will win the tug-of-war. ‘Watch it!’ she says to the visitors who stand frozen in her doorway. ‘Be careful. Sometimes she pees when she gets excited, and I don’t want her to get you.’ And just like that Zippy whizzes on the floor. Twice.” [...]

“she leaps onto the couch where Vanessa’s nine-year-old sister, Eliana, is waiting. Vanessa joins them, and over the next 15 minutes the two girls do everything possible to provoke an abused and neglected pit bull who’s been rescued from a dogfighting ring. They grab Zippy’s face, yank her tail, roll on top of her, roll under her, pick her up, swing her around, stick their hands in her mouth. Eliana and Zippy end up nose to nose. The girl kisses the dog. The dog licks the girl’s entire face.”

“Zippy is proof that pit bulls have an image problem.” [emphasis added]

The Sports Illustrated article continues in the story titled What Happened To Michael Vick’s Dogs? >>

But the story isn’t all smiles and roses. For one, it took an opportunity, on the first page of the article, to attack PETA and the Humane Society by making it personal: “PETA wanted Jasmine dead.”  Sports Illustrated explains, but not very well: “The Humane Society of the U.S., agreeing with PETA, took the position that Michael Vick’s pit bulls, like all dogs saved from fight rings, were beyond rehabilitation and that trying to save them was a misappropriation of time and money.”

The same section of the article doesn’t say one word about Best Friends Animal Society, the organization that saved the Vick Dogs. Moreover, Sports Illustrated barely even acknowledged their own complicity in the dogfighting problem:

“The pit bull’s p.r. mess can be likened to a lot of teens driving Porsches — accidents waiting to happen. Too many dogs were irresponsibly bred, encouraged to be aggressive or put in situations in which they could not restrain themselves, and pit-bull maulings became the equivalent of land-based shark attacks, guaranteeing a flush of screaming headlines and urban mythology. Some contend that this hysteria reached its apex with a 1987 Sports Illustrated cover that featured a snarling pit bull below the headline beware of this dog. Despite the more balanced article inside, which was occasioned by a series of attacks by pit bulls, the cover cemented the dogs’ badass cred, and as rappers affected the gangster ethos, pit bulls became cool. Suddenly, any thug or wannabe thug knew what kind of dog to own. Many of these people didn’t know how to train or socialize or control the dogs, and the cycle fed itself.”

They reserved the front page blame for PETA, yet reminded readers of their own accountability on page two, and didn’t mention the good guys by name until the very last page of the article. If that’s not a negative spin on a very positive story, I don’t know what is.

What can we conclude from this? In my opinion, people are more willing to forgive Michael Vick, Sports Illustrated, and vicious dogs than they are willing to forgive misguided PETA spokepeople. Why? I think it has to do with the fact that PETA won’t back down. They are committed to their philosophy of utilitarianism. They continue, even now, to assert that killing the Vick dogs is the right thing to do.

I, and many others, simply can’t agree. I don’t think it’s “in an animal’s best interests” to euthanize them rather than try to save them, even if that means they live their entire lives in a kennel. I’ve seen the Best Friends kennels and they’re pretty nice. They have plenty of room outdoors to run and they have a safe, warm space indoors, too. It’s not even close to what PETA calls “a fate worse than death.”

AND, I think if you asked people in prison if they’d rather be sentenced to death or life in prison with a very slim chance of parole, they would vehemently disagree with PETA that some fates are “worse than death.” Granted, some would choose death, but the majority? NOPE. No way. They’d cling to the slim chance of parole. It’s human nature to want to survive. I think that’s dog nature, too.

Regardless of our position on euthanasia and the Vick Dogs, the euthanasia controversy is diverting attention. The real issue is dogfighting. There we can all agree: NO MORE DOGFIGHTING.

PS – You can send letters to Sports Illustrated here: letters@SI.timeinc.com

PPS – This article has been edited slightly since the original was published: I emboldened the most important points.

The Saturday before Christmas is the biggest puppy buying day of the year. Because there are plenty of wonderful animals available for adoption in animal shelters who may DIE if they are not adopted, caring people all over the US will stand with signs or pass out fliers to encourage people to adopt, don’t shop for an animal companion.

You can join them!

Your local pet store:
When: December 20th, 12-3 pm
Where: Your local pet shop

Contact your local animal rights or animal welfare organization and see if they have anything planned. There are scheduled events in California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
See IDA for more info >>
Or organize your own demonstration. Here’s a guide >>

Direct, person to person: You can go and stand outside on public space (sidewalks or parking areas usually) holding signs and and handing out literature about puppy mills and pet stores. Talk to people and encourage them to go to the animal shelter instead.

Indirect: Park your car in front of the store and put a sign in your window that says, “Adopt, Don’t Shop!” Have another sign that lists the local shelter addresses.

Online:
When: Saturday, December 20, all day
Where: Your blog, your facebook, your myspace, your Twitter

Please encourage people to adopt, don’t shop. Post pictures of adoptable pets from petfinder.com or pets911.com and provide links. Write stories about how wonderful your own adopted family member is. Send an ecard to someone you think might buy a puppy from a petstore. Do whatever you can to encourage people to adopt from an animal shelter instead of buying from a pet store.