DawnWatch.com

LOS ANGELES TIMES ARTICLE AND EDITORIAL ON COMPANION ANIMALS

The Wednesday, July 28, Los Angeles Times carried an editorial, headed 'Blind Puppy Love.' It made many of the points from Monday's front page story on Mexican Puppy Mills. It questioned how anybody could be naive enough to buy a dog on the street from somebody from whom they wouldn't buy a Rolex. It recommended breed rescue groups. Then it included this line, "Those willing to pay hefty money can, with a little research, locate good breeders whose reputations can be checked out — usually through breed clubs." It did not question the idea of a "good" breeder, or the ethics of buying a dog at all, in a city where we kill 60,000 per year for lack of homes.

The Thursday, July 29, Los Angeles Times also included a story on companion animal population. It is by Jessica Garrison and headed, "Audit Faults Animal Services." (Page B3.) It opens, "Saying that the city's Animal Services Department is "stuck in a time warp," City Controller Laura Chick charged Wednesday that the department could be losing nearly $11 million a year by not enforcing penalties against people who fail to license their animals."

It is an important issue in Los Angeles where it costs $100 to register an animal that is not spay/neutered and only $10 to register a fixed animal. That scale could have a fabulous effect on overpopulation if the government made any effort to make sure that people had their companions registered. You can read the article on line at: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-animals29jul29,1,5050935.story. It provides an opportunity for letters to the editor on spay/neuter.

Having had a letter and an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times in the last month I won't get published there for a while -- I urge others to please respond to those pieces. And please be careful not to use any of my exact wording from this alert as letters that share phrases won't get published and could mean that none on the topic do.

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

And now let me also share great news from the Los Angeles Times, a superb letter in today's paper:

--------------------------------------

The Compassionate Choice: Vegetarianism

Re "Echoes of Abu Ghraib in Chicken Slaughterhouse," Commentary, July 25: Peter Singer and Karen Dawn have adroitly compared the abuses at Pilgrim's Pride slaughterhouse with those at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

One difference between the two is that the driving force behind the suffering that takes place in slaughterhouses rests on the shoulders of U.S. consumers who eat meat.

Consumers can eliminate this misery from their plates by choosing a vegetarian diet.

And with today's ever-growing selection of delicious, cruelty-free alternatives to meat, eggs and dairy products, it has never been easier to make the compassionate choice.

Cheryl Kucsera

Silver Spring, Md.

Wayne Pacelle, CEO of the Humane Society of the United States, has a superb op-ed in the Wednesday, July 28, Chicago Tribune. It deals with the Pilgrim's Pride horror and the exemption of poultry from the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act.

You'll find it on line at http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/oped/chi-0407280256jul28,1,6384536.story It provides a great opportunity for appreciative letters to the editor. Letters can use an article as a jump-off point for any argument. I hope activists will widen the discussion, using Pacelle's excellent op-ed on slaughter as a piece on which to base letters to the editor that question the eating of chicken.

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

There is a superb story on the cover of the Health section of the Monday, July 26, Los Angeles Times. (Page F1)

It is headed "Obesity fuels their fervor; Three well-known nutrition activists take business, science, the government and us to task."

The three well-known nutritionists profiled by Johanna Neuman are Michael Jacobson, who is one of the founders of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Dr Neal Barnard, who heads up the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine ( http://www.PCRM.org ) and Marion Nestle, whose book 'Food Politics,' looks at industry influence on government food guidelines.

Jacobson, when asked about the culprits behind obesity, named many factors including "scientists who would rather win a Nobel Prize finding a medication for obesity than warn against overeating." I particularly loved that comment since one of the sad ironies I have noted is the use of animals in obesity drug tests; if people would just stop eating them and their products most people would be a lot slimmer.

Barnard talks about the addictive quality of cheese, draws links between meat eating and diabetes, notes that animal protein is bad for the kidneys and bones, and saturated fat and cholesterol are bad for the heart, and says that researchers have made it "abundantly clear" that red meat leads to a higher risk of colon cancer and breast cancer.

From Nestle's interview we learn "the federal government, kowtowing to industry pressure, regularly recommends foods not because they are healthy but because they are abundant." She tells of serving as editor for the Surgeon General's Report on Nutrition and Health:

"On my first day on the job, I was told that no matter what the research showed, we should never say 'Eat less meat' or 'Eat less sugar' but to use euphemisms like 'Choose lean meat.' I was pretty shocked."

It presents a superb opportunity for veg-friendly letters to the editor, which might argue for a plant based diet from a health, a taste, or an animal cruelty standpoint.

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

Monday, July 26 -- Two huge papers have lead stories on companion animal issues. The largest paper in the United States, USA Today, has a story on the cover of the "Life" section, headed, "Kinder, gentler animal shelters Movement works to end euthanasia." The Los Angeles Times has a front page story headed, "Mexican Puppy Mills Breed Grief in Southland; Owners learn too late that their new pets are diseased or too young to survive on their own."

The USA Today piece (Life section, page 1D) by Liz Stabo, deals in depth with the issue of companion animal over-population. It speaks highly of no-kill shelters without pretending that they are a simple solution:

"Critics note that few shelters have those kinds of resources, and that centers may wind up 'warehousing' pets in cramped quarters for years. They also note that some no-kill shelters accept only the most adoptable dogs and cats, leaving the unenviable task of euthanasia to city or county animal-control centers that do not turn animals away."

"Euthanasia of animals is down 70%, from 17 million in the 1980s to fewer than 5 million today..."

"The first critical step, experts say, is birth control. With a smaller animal population, fewer pets need to be put down."

The article notes the immense positive difference that low cost spay-neuter and aggressive outreach programs have made to the kill rates in various cities.

And you can help keep the story alive with appreciative letters to the editor. USA Today takes letters at:

"Smugglers are flooding the Southern California pet market with disease-ridden puppies from Mexico, prompting law enforcement crackdowns, raising public health concerns and breaking the hearts of owners who watch their dogs die, often within hours of buying them."

"The puppy pipeline from Mexico is apparently filling a tremendous demand in a long-maligned industry. Animal control experts discourage people from buying puppies in pet stores because they say many of the animals come from poorly run puppy mills in the Midwest.

"Reputable breeders are recommended, but those puppies often cost more than the Mexican puppies, which cost from $300 to $700. Also, small breeds are sometimes hard to find in animal rescue shelters. For the puppy brokers, showing off a fluffy coat seals the deal."

It is heartening to see readers warned against pet store puppies. But I just did a search on Petfinder.com for small breed puppies in California and came up with 176 hits, and then got 54 hits near Los Angeles on 1-800-save-a-pet.com. So I am sorry to see an article tell us that small breeds are hard to find at shelters without making it clear that there is no shortage of unwanted small breed dogs at rescue groups. And the article, while discussing the plight of the unfortunate puppies and the people who buy them, says nothing about the companion animal overpopulation problem in Los Angeles -- it does not question the choice to buy rather than adopt a dog.

Letters to the editor, however, can do that. I encourage everybody, but particularly Californians, to write.

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

On Sunday, July 25, CNN aired a terrific 3 minute piece on the myth of free-range chicken production. It included an interview with the founder of Compassion Over Killing, Paul Shapiro, and more than 20 seconds of footage from COK's documentary "45 Days: The Life and Death of a Broiler Chicken." And it included footage from PETA's undercover video from the Pilgrim's Pride slaughter plant.

I will paste a transcript of the piece below. Please send CNN a big thank you for airing it. We must do everything we can to encourage mainstream media coverage of farmed animal suffering. CNN takes comments at: http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form1.html?39

You can learn more about the issue, order the COK documentary, and view photos and video footage at the COK site, http://www.ChickenIndustry.com

We want to shift now to a follow-up story, one that we told you about this past week. You may remember seeing an animal rights' group's undercover pictures of workers stomping on chickens at a Country Pride processing plant, but what about those chickens labeled free range at the super market? Well it turns out some of them may not have been exactly free to roam. CNN's Sean Callebs reports.

SEAN CALLEBS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Free range chicken, an enticing name for consumers with an appetite for humane treatment for animals, but what does it truly mean?

CALLEBS: Not really. According to the USDA, producers simply need to provide birds access to go outdoors. That can mean one small door in a crowded coop. The industry admits most free-range chickens don't stretch their legs.

RICHARD LOBB, NATIONAL CHICKEN COUNCIL: Even in a free-range type of style of production, you're basically going to find most of them inside the grow out facility where the food and water is located.

CALLEBS: Once again, the question of animal cruelty is creeping into our collective consciousness, due in large part to a disturbing video of poultry workers abusing chickens at a Pilgrim's Pride facility in West Virginia that is not free range. The company fired 11 workers for their actions. The fast-food company KFC says it won't buy birds from this plant until it's assured it has cleaned up its act.

PAUL SHAPIRO, COMPASSION OVER KILLING: Most people have no idea how abused farmed animals really are.

CALLEBS: But the poultry industry says there is a reason mainstream commercial growers resist free-range chickens.

LOBB: When you let chickens outdoors, they can mix with wild birds and possibly pick up certain disease problems from wild birds. Ducks and geese, for example are known to be carriers of avian influenza.

CALLEBS: Under government guidelines, just because they are free range, that doesn't mean they aren't getting growth hormones. The animals rights group, Compassion Over Killing, says keeping birds in cramped coops leads to this: tiny legs overburdened by bodies swollen by hormones to the point chickens die because they can't reach the water source.

SHAPIRO: Improved animal welfare generally will mean increased cost. However, it's a small price to pay to ensure that animal cruelty ceases.

CALLEBS: The poultry industry denies its birds are stressed or abused, saying if that was the case, the product wouldn't be healthy.

CALLEBS: But critics are vowing to continue to raise their voices, saying right now, free range sounds much kinder than it actually is. Sean Callebs, CNN, Washington.

DawnWatch is heavy on the chicken issue this week. I have never seen cruelty to farmed animals make the kind of news this is making. Chickens, in particular, tend to be neglected by the press and by the general public -- some people will even call themselves vegetarian if they eat only "white meat." In America, chickens, as sentient as mammals, are the most eaten and least protected land animals, making up 98% of those living on factory farms and dying in slaughterhouses, with no federal regulations to protect them from suffering.

The Sunday, July 25, New York Times has a terrific article, by Donald G. McNeil, headed "At last, a company takes PETA seriously." (Week in Review, Section 4, page 4)

Besides discussing the particular abuse at Pilgrim's Pride, the piece goes into some of the everyday suffering of chickens:

"The group, known as PETA, has fought a long legal battle with Kentucky Fried Chicken, trying to push it to give its chickens larger cages, stop forcing the birds to grow so fast that their legs collapse and to gas them so they die painlessly before their throats are slit.

"PETA released videotapes from a hidden camera planted by a member who worked undercover in a West Virginia slaughterhouse for eight months. Instead of recording the normal unpleasantries of factory farming, like chickens with their beaks burned off or unwanted male chicks ground up alive into fertilizer, it recorded wanton cruelty: workers stomping on live chickens, and flinging dozens into a wall. The investigator said his co-workers tore the head off a chicken to write graffiti, strangled a chicken with a latex glove, squeezed birds till they exploded and committed ''hundreds'' of other acts of cruelty."

(If and ad comes up, click the 'skip this ad' link in the top right hand corner.)

It provides a superb opportunity for veg-friendly letters to the editor. The New York Times takes letters at: letters@nytimes.com

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

Peter Singer and I have an op-ed in the Sunday, July 25, Los Angeles Times. You'll find it on line at:

Or on this site by clicking here. The piece deals with the similarities between Abu Ghraib and Pilgrim's Pride. We managed to include some information on the horror that is standard practice at chicken slaughterhouses and a wish that "in countries where alternative foods are easily available, animals will no longer be mass produced to be killed and eaten." But I would be thrilled to see some stronger pro-veggie messages in the paper in response to the piece, so I hope you will write.

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

KFC CRUELTY ON ALL THREE MAJOR MAINSTREAM EVENING NEWS SHOWS AND CHIMP RETIREMENT ALSO ON ABC

NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, CBS Evening News and ABC World News Tonight alll covered KFC cruelty on Tuesday July 20 and deserve big thank yous.

The story covers the KFC issue well and offers this priceless bit of information:

"These groups say that public pressure is needed because most state codes exempt commercial farmers from animal cruelty laws."

The NBC coverage was much shorter but a thank you for airing some of the footage is definitely called for. NBC Nightly News takes comments at: Nightly@NBC.com

ABC also covered the fate of performing Chimps. Unfortunately the segment did not mention what the animals actually go through during their training but it is wonderful to have the issue, the sometimes horrendous fate of the Chimps, raised at all on a national network prime time news show. And positive feedback will encourage more covereage of the issue.

The following is from ABC World News Tonight's plug for its Tuesday July 20 show:

"Hidden camera video appearing today on an animal rights Web site purports to show a severe example of animal cruelty by employees of the poultry processor that supplies chickens to KFC. The video, shot at a Pilgrim's Pride slaughterhouse, is described as showing workers jumping on, kicking, and slamming chickens into walls. Ned Potter reports tonight on the abuses discovered by an investigator working undercover at the slaughterhouse.

"Chimpanzees and orangutans appear in films, on television shows and perform in the circus at a very early age, but what happens to them when they grow too powerful for trainers to handle? Barbara Pinto has the story of a Florida woman who has created a sanctuary where these great apes can be cared for."

There is news from the UK today that is both good and bad. The good news is that Montpellier, the construction group that had planned to build the new Oxford vivisection lab, has pulled out of the project. The article on the front page of the Tuesday, July 20, Daily Telegraph tells us, "Montpellier Group has seen its shares drop from 22 3/4 p to a low of 17 1/2 p since activists wrote to shareholders threatening them with exposure on the internet unless they sold their stakes."

The bad news is the way the development is being portrayed in the press. The media, more than anything else in modern society, influences public opinion. And the media in the UK appears to be turning against the cause of anti-vivisection. Today's articles, talking of wins for "animal rights terrorism" are consistent with a new theme -- The front page of the Sunday, July 18, Independent (London) carried an article that read like a love letter to Huntingdon Life Sciences, even daring to focus on the love and care the beagles receive. That article discredited not only SHAC, but more mainstream groups, such as the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV), for its stance against Huntingdon Life Sciences.

Unless we hope to have an animal rights dictatorship one day, public opinion matters. But is not helpful to the animals if the public feels that our cause is worthy and decent but believes that animal experimentation is unavoidable, ethical, and conducted with little cruelty. The public must be educated with regard to vivisection. It is important that the cause makes the front pages and the TV news so that public can learn more about it. It is unfortunate that threatening activity has been the most likely to achieve that goal. But we must seize every opportunity we are given to speak for the animals and must do what we can to shape the coverage.

When animal rights activists trashed a foie gras restaurant in California last August, the ensuing front page stories focused on the victimization of the store owner rather than the suffering of the ducks. However many letters to the editor were published following that article, which detailed foie gras cruelty. The letters to the editor section is not as well read as the front page, but still, it is one of the best read sections of major newspapers. Also, the story's appearance on the front page garnered the attention of television news networks. In order to put the story in context, one reporter dug up and aired horrifying foie gras footage. The outcome has been a bill to ban foie gras in California that has already passed through the Senate and is expected to pass the Assembly and (after being signed by the Governor) to become law in the next few weeks.

Now, with animal rights activism making the front pages, it is crucial for UK activists to be providing news stations with vivisection footage, such as the footage of the beagle at HLS being punched in the face for shrieking in pain and refusing to cooperate with his vivisectors. And it is time activists to write letters to the editor which may or may not condemn the economic sabotage tactics but should condemn the loose use of the word 'terrorist' and must condemn the horrendous practices that inspire the controversial tactics.

I will paste, below, links to some of the lead articles from the July 20 UK papers, about the withdrawal of Montpellier, and also links for letters to the editor.

"Animal lab firm quits after threats by extremists" by Rosie Murray-West and David Derbyshire

Financial Times, Page 2: "Builder pulls out of animal research deal" by Clive Cookson

The Independent: "Construction group pulls out of vivisection laboratory contract" by Stephen Foley

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

LOS ANGELES TIMES ON RUBY'S RETURN TO LA ZOO

In Los Angeles, ever since plans were made to remove an elephant named Ruby from the LA Zoo and send her to Knoxville Tennessee, there has been a battle fought by animal rights activists, at first to stop the transport, and then, since she was removed a year ago, to have her returned. Those fighting for her return have said that taking her from her companion of 18 years, Gita, was cruel, and that she had not fared well in her new home. That is hardly surprising. Elephants do not fare well in zoos.

"The move marks the latest event in a rethinking of elephant exhibits in zoos across the country. The San Francisco Zoo decided last month to retire two elephants to a sanctuary when their companions died. In May, the Detroit Zoo also decided to send its elephants to a sanctuary, because the director believed that the elephants shouldn't live in small groups without many acres to roam."

Indeed, the better zoos are rethinking elephant exhibits, so I find it hard to get really excited about Ruby being brought all the way back to Los Angeles when she is currently in a state, Tennessee, that has a glorious sanctuary for rescued elephants where it would be beautiful to see her roam on hundreds of acres, as part of a herd. (See http://www.elephants.com/ )

The horrendous way chickens are treated by KFC suppliers is featured in today's New York Times, in an article, by Donald G. McNeil Jr, headed, "KFC Supplier Accused of Animal Cruelty." (Section C, Page 2.)

"An animal rights group involved in a long legal dispute with Kentucky Fried Chicken about the treatment of the 700 million chickens it buys each year is to release a videotape today showing slaughterhouse workers for one supplier jumping up and down on live chickens, drop-kicking them like footballs and slamming them into walls, apparently for fun.

"After officials of the KFC Corporation saw the videotape yesterday, they said they would seek dismissal of the workers, inspect the slaughterhouse more often and end their relationship if the cruelty was repeated. The company that owns the slaughterhouse, the Pilgrim's Pride Corporation, the country's second-largest poultry processor, said it was 'appalled' by the tape.

"Animal rights groups have long complained that sheer malicious behavior -- on top of the expected confinement and bloodletting -- goes on in slaughter plants, but this is the first time such graphic proof has been produced. The tape was taken surreptitiously by an investigator for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals who worked from October 2003 to May 2004 at a Pilgrim's Pride plant in Moorefield, W.Va., that won KFC's 'Supplier of the Year' award in 1997."

"The tape includes loud music the workers listen to, the screeching of the birds and the sound of each hitting the wall. When released, it will be on a Web site of the animal-rights group, which is known as PETA, at kentuckyfriedcruelty.com.

"The undercover investigator, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he feared retaliation and still does undercover work for the group, said in a telephone interview that he saw 'hundreds' of acts of cruelty, including workers tearing beaks off, ripping a bird's head off to write graffiti in blood, spitting tobacco juice into birds' mouths, plucking feathers to 'make it snow,' suffocating a chicken by tying a latex glove over its head, and squeezing birds like water balloons to spray feces over other birds.

"He said the behavior was 'to alleviate boredom or vent frustrations,' especially when so many birds were coming in that they would have to work late.

"On April 6, one day he filmed, workers made a game of throwing chickens against a wall; 114 were thrown in seven minutes. A supervisor walking past the pile of birds on the floor said, 'Hold your fire,' and, once out of the way, told the crew to 'carry on.'"

The article gives us a great opportunity for letters appreciative of the coverage, which question the consumption of chicken at all, given what we know about the health benefits of vegetarian diets and about the way animals are treated in our modern food systems.

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

The New York Times, on Friday, July 16, has an article that is "the last in a series of articles looking at the experience of summer through the lives of people who create its traditions." It is headed "The County Fair: Life, Death and Really Good Pie." It focuses mostly on the 4H club -- children personally raising calves, pigs, and lambs for slaughter. It is heartbreaking and, I think, a little chilling, as we see how their protective instincts are overcome.

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

Thursday, July 15, The Washington DC ABC affiliate (WJLA) ran an expose headed, "The investigation the egg industry doesn't want you to see." The program used footage provided by the superb DC animal advocacy and open rescue group, Compassion Over Killing (http://www.COK.net ). The footage is of a so-called "Animal Care Certified" egg farm in Millington, Maryland.

The reporter also described her own visit to the egg farm: "In every row we walked, we found dead birds and piles of feces. And at the end, a heap of carcasses."

Positive feedback for animal friendly coverage is invaluable, so please take a moment to go to the WJLA website and thank the station for covering the issue. The station takes comments at:

And you can thank the reporter directly by going to the bottom of the following page:

On Tuesday, July 13, the National Public Radio show 'Day to Day' covered the foie gras issue and the bills that would ban the product in California and New York. Reporter Molly Peterson's story was balanced. She included a foie gras producer's claim that the production does not hurt the ducks. But she gave a graphic description of the production, which would make many listeners doubt that:

"Next to him is a rolling steel tank of water and corn feed. It is connected to a pressurized trigger feeder ending in a metal tube a foot long and three quarters of an inch wide. A feeder places that tube down a duck's throat and a cup and half of mush is pushed down bulging in the throat like a stuck avocado."

"It is absolutely unnecessary. The fact that people will defend and justify a food that requires the suffering of an animal is unbelievable. They are basically saying it is OK to put an animal through this kind of pain and suffering just because I like the way that it tastes."

Please send a big thank you to Day to Day for covering the issue. Positive feedback will encourage more coverage of animal issues.

Here's some good news: Peterson says the anti foie gras bill is expected to pass in California. You can find out more about it, and how you can help it pass on Viva's website at: http://www.vivausa.org/urgentactions/sb1520.html

You'll find extensive information about foie gras, including a photo gallery and video, at http://www.gourmetcruelty.com/

Thanks to Paul Shapiro of Compassion Over Killing for making sure we knew about this story.

There is an eye-opening article about elephants in zoos in the Monday, July 12, Los Angeles Times. The article, by Tony Perry is headed, "Elephant Behavior Studied in Hands-Off Training; Wild Animal Park hopes to show that positive, 'protected contact' can get the animals to cooperate voluntarily, rather than through fear or coercion." (Page B5)

"For a hundred years, the accepted way to manage elephants in zoos was through close contact and dominance, including whacking the mammoth mammals with sticks or ax handles when they were balky or cantankerous.

"Conventional wisdom, derived from elephant handlers in Africa and Asia, held that to spare the rod was to endanger the keeper and that, as wild beasts, elephants need to be intimidated into submission.

"Now, officials at the San Diego Zoo's Wild Animal Park hope to help dispel that notion by training eight African elephants who have never been exposed to those traditional methods.

"Seven of the animals -- Litsemba, Lungile, Mabhulane, Ndlulamitsi, Swazi, Umgani and Umoya -- were brought to San Diego in August from the African nation of Swaziland, over strenuous opposition from animal rights advocates, who warned that the elephants would be beaten to make them more manageable. The eighth elephant, Vus'musi, was born at the park in February."

I referred to the article as eye-opening. That's because I knew elephants in zoos, deprived of their families and the ability to roam, fared badly, but I had thought beatings were only in the realm of the circus. (If you have never seen footage of what elephants go through in circus training please visit http://www.Circuses.com ) Apparently the animal rights advocates had good cause to warn that the elephants would be beaten to make them more manageable; later in the article Perry tells us:

"Although today it may be a leader in the hands-off, protected contact method, the San Diego Zoo has had scandal and tragedy with its elephants in the past. In 1988, the zoo was fined and reprimanded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture after five elephant keepers chained an elephant, brought it to its knees and beat it severely with ax handles over two days. A criminal investigation by the city attorney declared that the treatment, while seemingly cruel, was an accepted practice at zoos and circuses. Still, the state Legislature passed a law making it a crime to discipline an elephant in a manner that left a scar on its hide."

In other words, they can still be beaten, as long as no scars are left -- trainers have to choose their implements more carefully.

According to the article, the Swaziland elephants will be trained using protected contact, which Perry describes:

"Under protected contact, the keeper and the elephants never share the same space. The keeper is on one side of the bars of a metal cage or barrier, the elephant on the other. The elephant is trained to cooperate voluntarily, rather than through fear or coercion."

So deep is the suspicion between animal rights advocates and zoos that advocates believe the elephants at the Wild Animal Park may be being beaten when the public isn't looking."

It presents a good opportunity for letters to the editor against keeping wild animals in captivity for human entertainment. The Los Angeles Times takes letters at: letters@latimes.com

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

I am sorry to report that ABC World News Tonight, historically the most animal friendly of the national evening news shows, tonight (July 7) ran a fluff piece on rodeo.

It started with a brief cheery little piece on the running of the bulls in Spain, showing thousands of shrieking "thrill-seekers" swarming around and running from terrified bulls who were on their way to death in Spanish bull rings.

"Then there is bull-riding. It has been an established part of rodeo forever. But these days the bulls are as much the stars as the riders."

The piece, reported by Erin Hayes, tried to give the impression that the bulls, the stars, really enjoy the show.

She opens: "This is a sport in which a great performance looks positively awful."

We see a frantic bull jumping many feet into the air, bucking, with a rope tight around the tender part of his abdomen and a man sitting on his back.

Hayes: "That was a winning ride. He is a happy man . And this is a wild sport with hundreds of thousands of loyal fans."

Bull-rider Justin McBride: "I think that people are drawn to watch it for some of the same reasons I do it. It is man vs. beast. A guy, 140-160 lbs trying to stay on something that ways up to 2000 lbs."

Hayes: "And those bulls, thanks to savvy marketing, are drawing in fans too, who buy action figures of their favorite bulls."

Fan holding up a little stuffed figure of a bull: "This is little yellow jacket we've been watching him."

Hayes: "Little Yellow Jacket is a national champion worth over $100,000, known to stop in the arena to listen to the applause."

How sad to see a major news show indulge in ridiculous anthropomorphism, in a way that is so harmful to the animals.

Hayes: "Tony Sharpe and Cody King raise the animals and look for bulls with personality, like the notorious hammer."

Sharpe and King: "Hammer has always been one, when he throws 'em off, he is going to make a complete loop around the ring. He is going to make his victory circle."

Hayes: "But this is serious business with bulls today scientifically bred to be tough athletic and cunning."

Sharpe and King: "I had a bull rider tell me that some of these bulls think like a human. They do eventually, like a good football player."

Bull-rider BJ Kramps: "When the whistle blows in hockey, play stops, and in basketball, play stops, but when the whistle goes in my sport the bull doesn't stop."

And indeed, in what I found to be the most upsetting part of the piece, we see a rider thrown from a bull, and then the bull continuing to buck and buck. It is clear that the rider had nothing to do with the bull's bucking. We see a rope around the bull's flank.

The story ends with a rider saying, "It's not a really great bull-riding unless somebody just barely gets away with it."

The SHARK website explains the bucking, though in this case it refers to horse bucking:

"At the contestant's nod, the chute gate is opened. At the same time a person behind the chute pulls on the buck strap, tightening it around the horse's very sensitive flank area. This is similar to grabbing a very sensitive nerve area of a human being. Just as a person would instinctively fight to escape the tormenting grip, so does the horse fight and buck in a futile attempt to escape the buck strap...As the video clips show, a horse does not stop bucking when a contestant is thrown."

The comment above refers to the video on the SHARK website, which apparently shows just what we saw on ABC news. But ABC News was happy to include, unchallenged, the breeder's description of it as a "victory loop."

Please send a note to ABC World News Tonight expressing your disappointment with Wednesday night's rodeo coverage.

I strongly recommend that notes be polite since the show has been a great friend to the animals in the past and we would like to keep it that way. It is likely that the producers have no idea about the truth behind the rodeo.

(A one or two line note is plenty. You are welcome to forward DawnWatch alerts but please do not attach sample letters -- they are not helpful for media feedback.)

I send a big thank you to Teresa D'amico for making sure we knew about the story.

Please note that I am on Pacific Time and much appreciate being notified about anything East Coasters see on television that I should try to catch.

Two major publications have stories on pig farm pollution. They provide excellent opportunities for letters on pig farm cruelty.

The July 12 edition of Newsweek, page 40, has a story headed, "The Smell of Success. Hog farms stink. But the neighbors are rising up." (Thanks to Paul Shapiro, from Compassion Over Killing, for sending it our way.)

Writers Dirk Johnson and Vince Kuppig discuss the horrible stench that can make it unbearable for people living near hog farms to go outside

We learn that courts in some states are starting to side with residents, giving them the right to sue livestock producers.

"Pig and cow manure has always been part of country life. But the huge livestock operations, with manure lagoons the size of football fields, are a bit more rank than Old MacDonald's farm.

"The confinement method now produces 43 percent of livestock in the nation, according to the Sierra Club."

The July 7 New York Times has a story concentrating on the efforts to eliminate pollution from hog farms. It is headed, "A Search for Pearls of Wisdom in the Matter of Swine." (Page A12.)

"The taut concentration on the face of C.M. Williams as he sifts through charts in his office at North Carolina State University makes it clear that he is acutely aware of the environmental and economic conundrum posed by the state's 10 million pigs."

"The past system's failings have been minutely chronicled. During the 1990's the number of hogs being grown for slaughter at any given time went from perhaps three million to more than nine million. The animals are concentrated in east-central North Carolina, where the ground is flat and the water table high. They are warehoused in barns with slatted floors, with 880 to 1,220 to a barn.

"Water flushes their wastes into lagoons, where anaerobic bacteria break down pollutants biologically. Then the mixture, rich in phosphorus and nitrogen, the ingredients of fertilizer, is sprayed on the fields.

"But not all lagoons are well made; sometimes excess nutrients have flooded into neighboring rivers, causing at least one massive fish kill. The odors, which cling to clothes and hair, are fetid and overwhelming. In 1997, after a proposal for a farm near golf courses in a powerful assemblyman's home district, the assemblyman pushed through a legislative moratorium on new hog farms.

"After September 1999, when Hurricane Floyd swirled hog waste into waters throughout the eastern part of the state, pressure to solve the problems grew intense."

Unfortunately, the cruelty of the farms is not addressed in the article. But we can address it with letters to the editor.

On factory farms pigs are closely confined, indoors, on concrete, never seeing sunlight. Breeding sows live the majority of their lives in "gestation crates" too small for the animals to turn around or even lie down with limbs outstretched. A good resource for information on pig farming is: http://www.factoryfarming.com/pork.htm

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published. And please, never use any of my exact language when writing, and do not attach sample letters to the editor. A paper will publish letters on a topic which has generated much response, but not if the responses are similarly worded and therefore appear to be part of a campaign.

There is a lead story in the Wednesday, July 7, Los Angeles Times, about the bill that would ban foie gras in California. The piece, by Gabrielle Banks, is headed, "Duck Farm Is on Capitol Agenda; The owner's production of foie gras is the focus of legislation that would ban force-feeding of the birds, decried as cruel." It is on the front page of the Metro section --page B1.

It appears somewhat balanced, giving some information about the cruelty behind foie gras. But unfortunately that information is sandwiched between an opening that discusses the "nightmare" through which activists have put a foie gras farm owner, and a closing suggesting that animal advocates have a Disney view of animals. Reporters know that the opening and closing points are the ones that readers are most likely to digest.

The article begins with a nod to the power of illegal and often unpopular direct action:

"His wife calls it a 'nightmare.' But Guillermo Gonzalez is undeterred by a year that began with protesters trashing their new restaurant and may end with a state law banning the signature item on their menu."

"Gonzalez makes and markets foie gras, an expensive delicacy made from duck or goose liver. He does it at his farm in this Central Valley town, one of three places in the country -- and the only one in California -- that produce the luxury item.

And we receive the encouraging news that the Assembly is expected to approve the bill that would ban force-feeding. (It has already gone though the Senate.)

"A sticking point in the California debate was lawmakers' concern that a ban would drive Gonzalez out of business. That persuaded the bill's author, outgoing Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco), to accept an amended proposal.... It would allow Gonzalez 7 1/2 years to retool his business and would indemnify him against several lawsuits brought by animal rights groups." We learn, "Rather than use his farm for another purpose, as animal protectionists envisioned in agreeing to the delay, Gonzalez, 52, hopes to use the reprieve to prove the ducks do not suffer. Otherwise, he may alter the feeding process so his opponents accept it as sufficiently humane."

There is a quote from veterinarian Laurie Siperstein-Cook "In my opinion, there's no way to produce the same product in a humane way, but I'm willing to be surprised. No matter how the livers are fattened, the animals still suffer from liver disease. If you had a companion animal that you treated this way, you could be arrested for animal cruelty."

However, a poultry specialist at UC Davis who "has worked with Gonzalez's farms for 18 years" (and will presumably lose business if the farm closes) has "denied that the birds' livers were diseased."

Kath Rogers of the Animal Protection and Rescue League lamented Burton's leniency because during the grace period, ducks 'will still be tortured.'

The article discusses the $50,000 damage done to Gonzalez's foie gras restaurant, which led to the publicity that got the ball rolling. And it tells us that the bill has "generated more letters, pro and con, to the Senate Business and Professions Committee than any other issue this year."

Tacitly suggesting that this is a battle about the right to eat animals, rather than about one particularly heinous practice, Banks writes, "Gonzalez said fatty liver is a cultural staple in France and other European countries, but he said he and his two French American partners respect people who prefer not to eat meat."

"Urbanization has left most people out of touch with farming practices, and Disney films have only exacerbated the problem, he said. 'People have been raised in this country to think all ducks are Donald, all mice are Mickey, all deer are Bambi."'

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-duck7jul07,1,2658162.story?coll=la-headlines-california

The article presents a great opportunity for letters appreciative of the coverage (studies have shown that papers are more likely to publish laudatory rather than critical letters) and in support of the bill.

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

The following websites have excellent information, including distressing photographs, about foie gras and the legislation aimed at banning it: