Kudos to Newkirk for saying this.

Yes, everyone "should" go vegetarian, but wouldn't it be great if by COOPERATING with our "enemies", we could achieve 100 percent humanely raised meat and somewhat eco-friendly farms?

Anyone who thinks the world will stop eating meat tomorrow is dreaming. It will take several years, at least. In the meantime, ending these cruel practices is 100 percent something to celebrate!

Good work, PETA!

Posted by: Maya | August 8, 2007 04:13 PM

2017? This is a step forward? NO...promoting this as a step forward will do two things...it will reenforce the status of animals as products and property. The other tragic consequence of applauding this lame baby step...is that it will WITHOUT A DOUBT help meat eaters feel more comfortable about eating the more and more baby calves. This is a deceptive tactic by the meat industry to have veggie folks come back to eating meat or keep those people from giving up their cruel foods. The whole HAPPY MEAT industry is killing more and more animals not helping them. PETA should be only promoting veganism as the only choice!!! This is kind of phony achievment is like assisting Michael Vick in giving his dogs longer chains and more space before they are forced to fight to the death. It's MORONIC! Would you applaud a victory like that? Would you applaud a chinese butcher because he was going not put the dogs and cats in a cage before he clubbed them to death?

Posted by: Philip S | August 8, 2007 04:38 PM

it's always great to hear news announcing better conditions for animals - anyhow even if i'm not american i think 2017 is far too long! it's barbaric to isolate these sensitive loving creatures from their mothers - who are also our milk giving mothers! it's shameful to treat cows in this way and not being content with all they are giving us: milk, butter, cheese, ghee, labour and for many people around the world their excrements are used for different things: this is panca gavia - the five gifts of the cow - for this they are so much respected in india - but the west has no mercy - this is an attitude i never shall understand; people always wanting more and more....

Posted by: sita jayaram | August 8, 2007 05:30 PM

2017 thats crazy., why does all these reforms take so long.. don't you just get tired of these money driven jerks who run these Bastard Companies.

Posted by: keith | August 8, 2007 05:31 PM

2017 - this is too long! on this blog here should be the same outcry like before on the vick blogs! here i can't understand the animal friends! things moving so slowly are many times the fault of the animal protectors themselves - not the others, those and their micro brains we know!

so - animal protectors - where are you? this is really disappointing!!!!!

Posted by: animalfriend | August 8, 2007 06:26 PM

stop murdering the innocent cow babies - what a criminal act!

Posted by: rat king | August 8, 2007 06:29 PM

Why do the animals have to wait so long before things change? When people were going around saying that violent video games made people murderers, within 6 months it was illegal to sell mature games to minors in California. Why does everything involved with animal welfare take so long? I was watching the Genesis awards a few years back and they said that it would be illegal to use elephants for entertainment in the the year 2012!!! Why not just say "You have to stop torturing animals as of RIGHT NOW!."? I'm pretty sure the world would appreciate it, seeing as MOST people don't approve of torture...

Posted by: Brianna Fritchey | August 8, 2007 06:41 PM

PHILIP S., SITA, and KEITH, I couldn't have said it better myself. 2017, a whole decade away...nothing more than a ridiculous appeasement! Somehow this reminds me of when "Murder King" made a compromise with PETA that they would sell veggie burgers. Then they started and are still advertising their meat sandwiches BIG time!...more than ever before.

Posted by: Ariel | August 8, 2007 07:40 PM

2017? It takes 10 years to unchain some baby cows????

Posted by: Kelley | August 8, 2007 08:01 PM

how can the human race be so cruel. this is just so horribly wrong....who are these people "farming" the poor cows. I just never understand how anyone with a heart could take the calve from his mommy....and so on...so saddened....soymilk is my answer....

Posted by: Valerie Fetterolf | August 8, 2007 08:50 PM

Another way to personally end of barbaric veal crates is to go vegan.

Every year, hundreds of thousands of calves are born on US dairies. Calf dealers, or “calf jockeys,” make daily rounds in their livestock trucks, stopping at dairies to pick up calves born during the past 24 hours. Some are literally minutes old when they are put on the truck. Where these infants go next is something the dairy industry would prefer the public didn’t know about.

Baby calves, both male and female, are taken to calf ranches and relegated to small crates never to see their mothers again. The females, called “replacement heifers,” are raised to replace dairy cows in the milking herd. Because most cows only last about three or four years in production, the industry needs this constant supply of “replacements.” The male calves experience similar crated housing on their way to being raised as “beef”

The fate of the remaining calves, those who are considered too small or sickly to be raised profitably, is even more upsetting. They are taken directly from the dairy to the slaughterhouse, sometimes within hours of birth, to be killed as “bob” veal. Their flesh is used in TV dinners and other inexpensive veal products.

Harsh handling and the ride to the slaughterhouse can be torture for fragile newborns, especially when bad weather compounds their misery. Many become downed animals, too sick and weak even to stand. A 2004 USA Today article describes slaughter workers who routinely receive “veal calves that come in that are one, two or three days old [who] aren’t able to walk due to weakness.” Although USDA regulations technically prohibit the slaughter of non-ambulatory cattle, the agency is not adequately enforcing this provision.

This is just a snap shot of why those who really believe in animal rights should do their best to adopt a vegan diet. Theres plenty of information on the web to make the successful transition.

The above excerpt was from "Secrets of the Dairy Industry revealed" by Farm Sanctuary.

Posted by: LiveVegan | August 9, 2007 12:38 AM

I apologize immensely for my above comment which is the second one from the top and the one with steam coming out of it. I normally do not write with such terrible lame ass sloppy sentence structure and misplaced words as I did above...However, like a school boy with A D D whose told to sit in his chair and read a book about ..well anything ....I was semi losing it mentally to say the least when I wrote the above comment and never even proof read it. So forgive me for that at least yet...and..However.though..I'm still really disgusted by this Happy Meat CRAP. I must tell you that it seems to me that the animals again have been let down. HARD. Like a puppy being gently dropped out of a speeding car on the freeway. Sorry but yeah...that brutal. That sick! That lame! PETA needs to NOT walk away from the humane farming hoax and failed world of animal welfare. But run ...and run fast as if the veal calves lives depended on it. Like for reals!
The solution is not to fight for the phasing out veal crates in slow motion over the next long hideous 10 years...but to fight for no veal ...and to fight NOW!

Posted by: Philip S | August 9, 2007 12:47 AM

why should they have to take cows from there moms and put them in crates to be eaten its cruel and unusual and it should stop!!

Posted by: rat lover | August 9, 2007 12:58 AM

dont let the poor little calfs be made into meat when they have their own life to live for they shouldnt have to be eaten

Posted by: Rat Queen | August 9, 2007 01:02 AM

Ariel,
http://www.farmsanctuary.org/newsletter/burgerking.htm

Is farm sanctuary part of peta?

Posted by: rojo | August 9, 2007 01:02 AM

Yes 1017 is a long way away.. but think about it, this is the association that (and I quote this because it's on their site!) the lives of veal calves "The Good Life" and says that the calves can interact with neighbours, live in nice stalls and can lie down and behave completely naturally.

We know that's not true at all.
So for them to say they'll stop the crates by 2017 is a huge step.

Good on you PETA!

P.S- you can go to the site vealfarm.com and see the ridiculous 'facts' about the great lives the animals live

Posted by: Isabella Marks | August 9, 2007 04:58 AM

To animalfriend:
you are completely right - here the animal protectors have to move! Ten other years is unacceptable! But it seams that also inside the animal friendly circle we got people who just care about cats and dogs and stable animals are not their business! Public protests should be organized - I can't act because it's an american law and I'm living in Europe - but you overthere - it's time to manifest yourself!

Posted by: Sacred Cause | August 9, 2007 05:16 AM

Ten other years of torture - I don't understand the lawmakers! An animal baby has to stay with it's mother! We get enough from the big cows so it's criminal and shameful to abuse their babies - what a rascal attitude and this in a 'christian' state!

Posted by: Sean Miller | August 9, 2007 05:21 AM

until now i was a vegetarian - but considering this new abuse i'm seriously decided to go vegan! anyhow - i shall reduce the milk products to an absolute minimum!

Posted by: claudia marrapodi | August 9, 2007 05:24 AM

This ruthless and cowardly decision to wait another ten years shall provoke very bad reactions from mother earth! You lawmakers - don't think that this planet is dead and has no feelings as you do - you already made a hell of it but your greedy attitude and your anthropocentric stupidity don't allow you to get conscious that you are already on the brink of ruin - you bastards ---

Posted by: Old Spiderwoman | August 9, 2007 08:27 AM

Hi, ROJO, : ) no, Farm Sanctuary is not part of PETA. Someone I know, who is a very strong a/r's activist, visits there occasionally and had told me that it is a really good place.

Posted by: Ariel | August 9, 2007 08:54 AM

i am a western hindu and this is indeed a very sad day for me! just for your information: the word 'cow' comes from the hindu sanskrit word 'go' which means 'earth' or 'cow'! you got the point! shameful, shameful, shameful that in our dark age we are more backminded than other nations six thousand years ago! another hundred years and we shall be cave people again - lovely idea, isn't it - specially in winter - but with the actual global warming not even fur clothes shall be needed - just bikinis and tongas! when i'm joking here don't get me wrong - it's sarcastic - sardonic! i'm not smiling and i wish that every animal abuser goes to hell where he belongs to!

Posted by: mino | August 9, 2007 08:58 AM

While I understand that the many baby cows in single-confinement right now will not be celebrating this announcement – this is, dahh, a step in the right direction. For the veal industry to make such an announcement means that they officially agree that current standards are unethical. If PETA and other animal protection organizations can now prove that, just like in Europe, veal crates can be phases out much faster without overall GDP of the US economy to suffer – there is a good chance that they will disappear even sooner?

As an Animal Rights organization - PETA has never fallen into the trap of being pleased with Animal Welfare successes per se. But food-animals today are not even recognized as slaves or beings – but as mere products and objects instead. Animal welfare announcements such as these from the veal industry, however, start to acknowledge cows as slaves or beings who need respect and not mere machines. This in turn is an Animal Rights success.

Blacks were not given humans rights in the US because they were not recognized as fully human by the constitution until the 1960s. In order to avoid recognizing blacks as fully human and therefore applicable to simple human rights – the term “civil rights” was cleverly coined. Blacks would remain 2nd class beings but the laws would be altered and adopted to guarantee better treatment for blacks.

When the blacks realized that the US was accusing South Africa of apartheid based on human rights violations via the UN while not recognizing their own population as human.. things started to change QUICKLY. The black leaders started talking about going to the UN themselves! Well – they mysteriously “died” and soon after the constitution was magically changed before anybody could reach the UN on that matter.

Point of the story – every time the meat industries officially recognize their slaves for what they are – and not mere objects – the foundation for their liberation is strengthened not weakened. Animal Welfare stops there – because they endorse slavery in principle as long as some virtual level of welfare is promised (Animal Welfare believes in the concept of a good and just dictator – which nature and history has proven to be a fantasy as the unicorn has never been sited. AW needs their own vital lies to justify their existence?). Animal rights and PETA doesn’t. It is fine that men are not allowed to kill women randomly any more (although it might be natural based on strength) – but that is never enough for those compassionate yet professional folks at PETA?

I do not know many vegans who go back once they know the crack – somebody who quits having slaves out of principle would not endorse slavery again because the slaves are treated better (or she was never really against slavery but a social butterfly and nothing else). Same with racism and sexism, etc.? You do not start treating women as 2nd class again only because they are now being respected more by society – quite the contrary. I bet that there will be a female presidential candidate by 2017 in the US? Well – let’s make it 2027 – this is not the UK, Germany, Turkey or India after all?

In other words – I do not see vegans or meat-eaters starting to eat more veal because the crates will disappear. The meat industry will try to promote it that way – but this is damage reduction and nothing else. The fact that milk does more bad than good, that mothers and babies are separated and that dairy products have the biggest CO2 and land-erosion footprints of all things consumed by humans will be pressure enough for the animal slave abusers.

Kudos also for the improvements for chickens and pigs – they too can barely move and are separated from their mothers at birth! Again - these are very important successes with even more important implications! If Burger King thinks that free-range is better - why not 100% free-range instead of 5% if the retail price does not change much anyway and if supply can follow suite very fast (as in Europe)? Next: what is better - slavery or freedom? But the first 5% are the hardest!

Party, party, party… after-party! The slave master is wounded.. the wounds he has never get better but only worse… we will slaughter him humanely one day when he is too fat to move!

Besides – if you have been active in AR for many years – you need to celebrate everything you can get – or run the risk of burn outs. There is so much suffering that it cannot be eliminated over night – but at the same time – every little step towards better treatment of animals lessens more suffering on earth than anything else humans do globally today?!

Posted by: hugo pottisch | August 9, 2007 09:32 AM

Ariel , thanks. It's just they seemed to be claiming the veggie burger idea.

Posted by: rojo | August 9, 2007 09:54 AM

to hugo pottisch:
thanks for the great statement! specially referring to the slave problem we can see that martin luther king - whose family is completely vegetarian - adopted the guidelines of leo tolstoi, also him a vegetarian - and mahatma gandhi, also a great vegetarian and human-, and animalrights activist! all these runners for human's sake were also concerned about animal rights and after the situation became a little bit better for humans they quickly turned to the animal cause like formal runner dick gregory - a real great gentleman and rare in our days! i'm a great admirer of his attitude and his whole universe - a great personality, indeed! with him this planet is richer and a better world!

Posted by: silent tongue | August 9, 2007 10:01 AM

a beautiful cowlicked and obviously overmothered calf was born a few days ago from the small farm next to me. Im glad he will lead a quiet peaceful life with his mother. But a life like this is rare, and it seems like it will be even rarer ---until 2017? how long does it take to realise chaining a child to a fence without the comfort of their mother is WRONG!!

Posted by: stasya berber | August 9, 2007 11:01 AM

to ROJO, I suspected there was an undercurrent to your question, so if you think that I was out to help to prove anything for you, wrong. I simply answered your question that Farm Sanctuary is not part of PETA. However, PETA did indeed have a GREAT part in the veggie burger issue, and a lot of animal-related orgs. are involved in the same issues...and I applaud all of them for their efforts and accomplishments for the sake of the animals.
So which ever way you are going with this, of course each org. will announce their own participation in their achievements...and I guess it will "seem" to the reader that they are taking the total credit. BUT this is about the animals, not about one org. trying to out-do the other.

Posted by: Ariel | August 9, 2007 11:56 AM

By 2017????

Posted by: Jaclyn | August 9, 2007 12:09 PM

Of course we want the world to go vegan NOW, not take a small step toward reducing animcal cruelty 10 years from now. I'm encouraged a bit by the success of Barbara Kingsolver's book "Animal, Vegetable, Miracle" (on the NYT bestseller list for 14 weeks), since it promotes the idea of humane treatment of animals on small family farms instead of factories. I have HUGE issues with her arguments for eating meat, and disagree with her every step of the way on her reasons for abandoning vegetarianism. But until we live in a vegan world, we have to work toward incremental improvements to reduce animal suffering as much as possible. Meanwhile, keep pushing hard for the big changes - they are coming!

Posted by: Steve | August 9, 2007 02:36 PM

Philip S, don't apologize for you post at the top. It's TAME compared to what I would of posted. I, like you am furious that the meat industry thinks that 10 YEARS is an acceptable time frame to eliminate veal crates. I would say 10 MONTHS would be a more realistic goal, the meat and dairy industry DOESN'T want change, they want things to stay the way they are. The human race is still in the STONE AGE in the way we treat animals, it's only been recently (within the last 100 years) that some of us have begun to realize that 'animals' are sentient living beings like us.

Humans have been led to believe that 'animals' are dumb, dimwitted and have no souls (you can thank the dimwits who purposely rewrote the Bible to excuse our current behavior with animals for this). However, it is going to take disease, environmental and finical disaster to get the meat and dairy industry to change their ways. We are stewards of this planet, and we have done FAR more damage than ANY civilization in recorded history. If the human race is ever judged by the way it treats 'animals', then we are ALL doomed to hell.

Posted by: Craig Petersen | August 9, 2007 02:49 PM

People say that we are at the top of the food chain. Such words confuse me, for that term yields some very interesting remarks for me. Such as that term is like saying we are somewhere in the wilderness hunting like it's 4000 B.C. No, we have disturbed nature and this "food chain" as we breed our prey in captivity such as these veal. They have no chance at happiness, families, or living on their own terms as nature should have it. So such things as a food chain do not exist, because we have ruined it. We have ruined nature and created a world only humans can enjoy, but I must say, I am not having fun.

Posted by: Scarlett | August 9, 2007 03:00 PM

Philip S and Ariel

Thanks for your intelligent comments. This is just another way for animal eaters to feel better about eating non-human animal cadavers and for the industries that abuse and slaughter them to appear like the "nice" guys. PETA should only be promoting veganism---that's how you save the lives of animals. Friends of Animals is abolitionist and recognizes what these killing machine industries are about. Don't sleep with the enemy.
This is NOT an animal rights success, this is an animal welfare and a bureaucratic success. "See how nice we treat animals....they will be suffering with crates until 2012 but even without the crates they will be slaughtered"---- violently!!!!

Posted by: Ana | August 9, 2007 03:54 PM

I wonder if I can jump in here. The point is not that we're settling for 10 years, or even that we're settling for veal still being made. Cuz we're not. Our campaigners are working as hard as ever to get this atrocity stopped right now. Frickin' ASAP.

But massive changes almost never happen overnight, especially when you're talking about a huge industry. You don't get from point A to point Z without hitting some of the points in between, and every time you advance a step further towards the goal, you take a minute to say "We're getting there," which is what this post was about. Then you take a deep breath and plunge back in.

Of course 10 years is too long. 10 days is too damn long. But we aren't in charge, we're just the ones fighting for change. It is a good thing that we can see a light at the end of the tunnel, but that doesn't mean we won't fight every day to make that light arrive sooner. How quickly that happens depends on how many people we can get to help us, and how loud they can shout about it.

Posted by: Jack | August 9, 2007 05:16 PM

Jack

I will be shouting loud!! :)

Posted by: Ana | August 9, 2007 06:03 PM

Jack

Make that: I will be shouting loudly!!!! :)

And yes, MANY people need to shout the message.....

Posted by: Anonymous | August 9, 2007 06:10 PM

I agree with Philip s.
All these meat people are trying to do is silence Ingrid for a few years.
And in 2017 they will tell her that they still have not found a good way to stop this horrific cruelty.
They could have this finished within 3 months top.
DO NOT GIVE THESE PEOPLE CREDIT.....THEY DESERVE NONE.
Judith

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | August 9, 2007 07:35 PM

ariel, it's just hard to decipher facts when incorrect claims are made.

Posted by: rojo | August 9, 2007 08:00 PM

Hi, Jack! Good of you to jump in. : )
Granted, we know that PETA isn't in charge of that hell-ish situation, and that we're all fighting for the change...which "yesterday" could not have been soon enough, and that these things take time...step by step...VERY unfortunately for the animals.
The thing is, I'm sure you understand that we are SO passionate and outraged about this, well, as Ana put it best, quoting her in part: "...this is a bureaucratic success." Then her surrounding comments justified that. And as a/r's activists, we ALL know how bureacracies work...and about huge industries. (what I would really like to say about them, wouldn't be acceptable for print!)

But just for the record, the consensus of comments are not expressing outrage about PETA. We are expressing that we are outraged that such an atrocity even exists, and that so-called "civilized human beings" are allowed to drag this out... at their convenience yet!
Jack, with PETA's power, YES, we WILL DO IT much sooner than 2017! And thank you so much for all that you and everyone at PETA does for the animals!

Posted by: Ariel | August 9, 2007 08:05 PM

Some questions and comments...
By being members of PETA, you support animal rights and full animal liberation...then why do so many of you have pets? Surely having a pet signifies that they are not fully equal in status to a human being, right? I do not see how you can have a pet and want animal liberation (or is that narrow-minded???)

Secondly, look at it from a different perspective. 2017 seems a ways a way, but it will probably provide a chance for new, more humane methods to be brought into practice. An immediate and drastic switch, as most of you want I'm sure, would only lead to more cruel, less humane methods of handling animals. You've worked hard to end the use of gestation stalls, but not giving the industry time to adjust will lead to the adoption of even less humane practices. Are you animal welfarists or animal liberationists??? That is the big question. Do you want liberation???

You speak of humans being so cruel...Is it cruel that you think poor people around the world should starve to death in order to meet these ideals?? Is it cruel that you say that these people should be "slaughtered" as you call it? Slaughtering human beings does not ring well...

I don't mean to sound critical, but I think these areas should be addressed before everyone parties to hard...

Posted by: Dan | August 9, 2007 08:09 PM

Finally, there is an end in sight!

Posted by: Aleasha | August 10, 2007 03:56 AM

Dan:
referring to your above statements i can tell you this:
1. concerning pets i can assure you that most animal protectors don't have pets but animals from shelters or found in the street. me, as a vegetarian, would never go to buy a dog or cat from a breeder because these animals also need meat and here in france i can't buy vegetarian animal food but i have a rescued dog and a rescued cat because there was no other solution for these poor animals! it's normal that now they are my pets!

2. yes, at least it's an end in sight - but for me it's too long - for every animal lover every second counts because in this second animals are dying.

3. to the contrary, if we would live in a vegetarian world and instead of feeding the cows and pigs for the steaks of the first world - they could plant potatoes, grains, bananas, rice etc and the whole world would not be hungry anymore - because for example this hunger in africa is wanted! nobody can tell me that it would not be possible to pack 20 big plains and drive down there and bring them all the before mentioned things to survive. it's not because of the vegetarians that these poor people are starving but because of the ruthless meateaters who even accept that the south american rain forest is cut down for to get ground for the cattle - slaughtered for the first world, mainly europe and north america! pls study the peta files - there was much written about this before! i love animals but people also matter to me and i think we can be strong enough to have a heart for the two! ok?

Posted by: shadowfax | August 10, 2007 11:51 AM

Hi Dan, I hope you don't mind if I address your questions!

1. Owning a pet is not treating them as less than us. For example, approximately 10,000 years ago wild cats began coming to human settlements such as agricultural and maritime communities because there was an abundance of rodents to eat. Humans like this because cats controlled the rodent populations. It was a symbiotic relationship.

Eventually cats became dependent on humans. But they still benefit from us; we spend lots of money on them for toys and food; we provide them with good homes; we give them affection; we give them excellent medical care. if you ask me, they enslaved US! (LOL I'm just kidding!!!) So it's still a symbiotic relationship.

2. I tend to avoid the words "Freedom" and "Liberation" of animals. To me liberation makes me think of dancing around in my living room LOL. i prefer the term "Biological Imperative". It's not as poetic as "Freedom" but it's more specific.

In other words, animal rights activists are striving for animals being treated to natural conditions; sunlight, fresh air, correct nutrition, and the ability to exercise and move around. Even cows have a biological need for these things and keeping them in dark, confining spaces is extremely cruel.

Of course ideally everyone would go vegetarian, but in the meantime it's not about "LIBERATION" but about UNDERSTANDING what conditions are natural for each species of animal and simply giving them those conditons for humane reasons.

3. No one should starve to death. In fact if we all lived an eco freindly and animal friendly lifestyle it would benefit every human on the planet. This is complex but I can give you examples if you want.

So there you have it. As far as animal rights activists saying people should be slaughtered, well, Dan, I think you're intelligent enough to know that no matter who says that they must be mentally ill. Ignore them.

99 percent of animal professionals and activists are extremely kind and logical and peaceful. That you should know.

Posted by: Maya | August 10, 2007 12:30 PM

Dan

I share my home with 4 cats, but I never refer to them as pets. They are part of my human family and they are "house cats" because it is infinitely safer for them TO STAY INDOORS. They receive the proper care, love and respect they deserve. Cats do not take orders nor can they be trained and that suits me just fine; they live happily.

2. I have never heard an animal advocate say "slaughter people" so that took me by surprize.

3. People are poor and not eating well/enough because all advanced nations cannot live without their steaks and burgers and all of the numerous other species humans dominate and eat. Instead of feeding grain to the poor animals that will be slaughtered why not feed the many people in need? Much land is used to raise cows, sheep, pigs, chickens, goats for slaughter when that land can be used to grow rice, vegetables, fruit, beans etc. Going vegan allows EVERYONE to live!

3. Liberation to me means being free from human oppression and free to live, without fear, according to the needs of that species. No factory farms, fur farms, aquariums, rodeos, bull fights,dog and cock fights, dog or horse racing, vivisection, fishing, hunting etc that serves only man's desires (most especially for capitalism).

Anyway, it's about respect for all sentient beings. Living off of the backs of animals for profit and greed is cruel and oppressive.

Posted by: Ana | August 10, 2007 04:18 PM

Ted,
You nor Ingrid are Gods.
I remember Ingrid attacking
The President of the Humane
Socity because he was not able to stop the end of animals being killed for their fur, but one designer
stopped selling fur from dogs, a little at a time.
She sent him such a nasty little letter saying it should end now.
How dare she fight with such a nice person.
So it's ok that you are trying to sell us a little at a time? I'm not buying it.
What is Ingid doing lately.
While Mr. Pecelle is in Ill.
trying his damnest to shut down Cavels horse slaughter house. And speaking at the house about farm animals.
I do not except 10 years.
They are just throwing you people a bone to shut you up for awhile.
I will not stay quiet.
I support P.E.T.A.
Ingrid, you are a good person. But not always right.
Judith

Posted by: Judith, Freedom Fighter | August 10, 2007 06:16 PM

Thank you shadowfax, Maya, and Ana for your responses.

My concern in recent times is that these ideals would be forced upon people in unreasonable ways. We happen to live in a country that enjoys a high standard of living (we have high disposable incomes, we don't spend very much of our income on food, etc.) That is not the case in many other countries. As someone who has worked with other organizations that deal with these problems, I can say that there are logistical problems with limiting peoples food choices...I know it sounds like a simple solution but it does not seem to be so.

For example, the rainforest in South America is mostly cut down by the poor people living in the area, trying to make a living.

Posted by: Dan | August 10, 2007 07:39 PM

hello dan and everybody who is interested:

i found a very interesting site called: care2.com

i think for dan it's the right thing for to see that there are millions of people in this world who include humans and animals in their concerns! also ingrid newkirk is mentioned as one of their role models! a really fascinating site!!!

Posted by: gino | August 11, 2007 09:04 AM

Can I post links? Sorry for another long rant!

Stumbled across this on CNN:
Humane Livestock Production Costs Hard to Gauge
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200708091034DOWJONESDJONLINE000605_FORTUNE5.htm

Yes - if you are a "product" your production costs are hard to gauge.. But that is besides the point..

The point is that the livestock industries will argue that they cannot afford a switch to more humane farming methods - plus they will argue that it is questionable if welfare for the animals really improves. And anyway - we cannot "gauge" anything and therefore no action can be taken! The scientists are in disagreement regarding climate change and therefore no CO2 caps are necessary... I liked the Newsweek story on "climate deniers" next to the zoo story: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20122975/site/newsweek/

And they are right - a marginal (half-assed) change would indeed cost more than it would yield both humans and the animals. It would be as successful as declaring a 5% shift to renewable energy by 2075.. not enough.. no spark to set fire.. not worth the paper it is printed on.

But a true paradigm shift to really humane and free-range farming would yield so many environmental and health benefits that they would economically outweigh the investments. (btw - I think that one can recognize a humane farming method when no drugs like antibiotics are necessary during the life span of an animal. Currently - even "organic" farming allows for antibiotics to be used routinely!) Once the citizens and the government could not ignore the link between cancer and smoking anymore – after many decades of distraction from the tobacco industries – meaningful measures were introduced to save our children. Right now – the cigarette, antibiotics and hormone and toxicity industries are allowed to do advertising in schools.

If there were better transparency regarding all the implications – humane livestock (like 2000 years ago) would not be more expensive but less. Yes - there might be less overall consumption (but that is mandatory anyway due sustainability and math and due to health and our children). Most importantly - at some point everybody "who has made it" deserves more quality and less trash here and now! It is 2007 – we want at least the same quality food as people 100 years ago had – or we should never again utter the word progress? When it comes to food I want a Caterpillar, a Leatherman, a Maglight, a KitchenAid and not some crap? I am, as many around the world, too poor to buy crap? I know that modern pop-culture fancies “white trash” to some degree – but not because the toxic burger tastes better than the free-range one – but because they are junkies who would consume anything chemical or self-destructive? What is next – we will allow our kids into StarBucks or what (the average dairy fat cake there is as healthy as 3 BigMac)?

It is not like we are exporting this shit to our worst enemies - we are consuming this ourselves!!

Right now - pricing of agricultural products is not transparent at all and controlled by special interest groups and gov bodies that are oftentimes controlled and policed only by themselves (USDA anybody?) But we do not know where tax $s are pouring (maybe into stuff that is not recommended health wise – the modern equivalent of cigarettes only worse) and what environmental costs there are (animal products have the worst CO2, water and land-erosion footprint imaginable).

The livestock industries argue for example that "more humane pig farming like in Sweden would cost additional $200 million per year in labor costs..."

Do they mean more costs or more jobs? Costs apply when the water gets polluted.. nobody see The Simpsons Movie? When children get strange diseases, etc? When people started talking about restricting cigarettes – the industries argued: think of all the jobs that would be lost.. suddenly they do not see how much labor costs the economy would save but are concerned for the workers.. those hypos… they are like old children who have never grown up and everybody suggests change they see it like a personal attack (from their mothers and fathers)? it takes only a few rotten leaders and many numb sheep to produce a disaster?

The livestock industries should not have to fight those changes but could use them to their advantage. Instead of prolonging the inevitable and make it even more expensive - ask your government for help financially. From a ROI point of view those would be the best $200 million the Gov has invested since Arnie’s solar initiative – make it $50 billion and it would still be the best ROI the US has ever seen (not like now where factory farmers get ca $ 20 billion in tax $ subsidies and organics virtually NOTHING compared to the concentration camps)? but this time in good conscious. no more subsidies of products that are unhealthy, environmentally damaging or over-consumed, etc. They could look themselves in the mirror again.

It is also a real pity for EVERY leader who misses such a unique opportunity to build the best legacy since Washington, Lincoln, etc. No 20th century president has done anything that would have so many long-lasting positive implications for America and the world. The US could be a superpower again and not a corrupt cop. We know the legacy of Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. it sucks! But imagine: He/She saved the country – literally the country – and its people. He/She was not afraid of tough decisions (bomb this football field over there is NOT a tough or IMPORTANT decision!)

One stumbling block will be that the few large factory farmers would lose market-share compared to the status quo. They do not care if the new cake is healthy compared to the old one or even better tasting - they just want the biggest possible piece – and so do politicians when they want to fill up their campaign war chest? And since the few do most of the lobbying and bribing...

And I suspect there is no money left in the US budget anyway to clean and save Americas land, rivers, water and forests.. to keep us save from mad diseases and from hormones and antibiotics? Our life expectancy has decreased for the first time in decades, the climate is going down the drain and our phones are being bugged to protect us from terrorists? WHAT?

Clint Eastwood (vegan) for president – pronto? Get rid of those sick, fat, apathic and numb factory farmers.. tear those walls down Mr President. Liberate us from poor quality, poor life, poor self-responsibility.

Anyway – going vegan has much more positive impact on the world than going 100% organic. Best is both – but if you have to chose out of concern for your children – go vegan!

Posted by: hugo pottisch | August 11, 2007 12:22 PM

Hi Dan!

Great point. What is important to understand is that we as consumers decide what makes a profit and what does not.

Right now what we are spending our money on are completely unsustainable practices. After all, if we keep having to cut down forests to harvest coffee, there will be more ecological disasters and we will run out of land and valuable trees and natural resources like wood.

If, on the other hand, we as consumers purchase eco-friendly and sustainable products, we can give poor people money to make products that do not harm the ecosystem.

Also, ecotourism, when done correctly, hinges upon a country protecting its natural resources. Costa Rica is a great example of this. People there were brilliant in figuring out that they can save their country's natural resouces yet still earn great money by attracting tourists and students studying science who will indeed demand that the country protect its land and wildlife.

These practices, by their very nature, give native people a chance to earn more money with progressive practices, work jobs that are less dangerous and keep their local food supply abundant and protected so that local people can still eat and afford it.

What we must understand is that this is a transitionary period; it won't happen overnight and it takes creativity; but slowly poachers and farmers will hopefully make much more money and live a better life with consumers asking for better practices.

Posted by: Maya | August 11, 2007 03:02 PM

While veal crates being "phased out" in ten freaking years sounds great to the public, just as "cage free", "free range", "cruelty free" and "humanely raised", it's all pardon the pun, bull****. I frankly can't believe the FTC lets these murderers falsely advertise like this!!!! All it does is make the public feel better about the animals they pay to have murdered for their greedy taste buds, and speaking of greed, more money for the murderers. Animal "welfare" is only a tiny, tiny bit less suffering, and usually stops there. I am frankly very disappointed in PeTA for joining and settling with the "welfare" movement and calling it victory. To me, it's a total sellout. I expect this from HSUS, but not PeTA. I joined PeTA because I am an abolitionist, not an activist that claims "victory" over a decade to go to reduce slightly the suffering of any animals. It's purely propaganda and PR, greedy agribusinesses realizing more profit and jumping on the "welfare" bandwagon. When will people realize that "welfare" only HURTS the animals and our movement?????

Posted by: Shannon | August 11, 2007 03:40 PM

the truth is, this world will not quit eating meat and accept the truth until every animal that exist is excinct. and at the rate the human race is going its not impossible. we need to end all cruelty to every animal and realize what is going on in this world . otherwise its just ourselves we're killing in the end..

Posted by: jason | August 11, 2007 04:14 PM

A bunch of me and my friends could go around and undo the chains in a hell of a lot quicker time than TEN YEARS!!! Of course, we'd undo the chains and let them all run away but still...TEN YEARS to undo chains?!?! C'mon...

Posted by: Larry Sullivan | August 11, 2007 06:21 PM

this video is horrific!!! i cannot believe that people are still ordering veal and i just heard that they have put in "upper class" resturants something called suckling pig. i was like does that mean baby pigs?? that made me literally dry heave and throw up in my mouth!!! it is great that improvemnts are underway, that is all we can hope for!!

Posted by: Kris Shulfer | August 12, 2007 02:54 PM

Thank you Larry Sullivan and Shannon for your very honest comments. I agree.

Being an abolitionist I see this as good PR for the animal abusers/killers. Big/small cages they still get slaughtered and they still suffered from birth to death.

I have traveled throughout latin america and the major problems there are government corruption and illiteracy. Hello Maya---yes, Costa Rica does put money into its environment because it does not have a standing military but it also does kill animals for food. In all of latin america they kill animals for food in some very brutal and horrible ways since laws concerning animals are very rare and too few. I moved about very easily in these countries because being latina I speak the language and know the customs. One of the best customs are rice and beans (perfect protein meal) with plaintains and avocados. Mangos are rich in vitamin C. But the meal of rice and beans is seen as a poor man's meal; you made it big when you can eat a "steak". It is the advanced wealthier nations (particularly the USA) that have promoted the excessive eating of animals much to the detriment of both animals and people. The people who ate this simple but "poor man's meal" tended to live longer and maintain a good weight;being poor they could not afford to eat flesh. Witness the many overweight latinos in the USA eating so many fast foods (cheap flesh); many I know have developed diabetes or have had heart attacks. Very sad for both humans and animals. This is something to think about.

Posted by: Ana | August 12, 2007 03:48 PM

Any progress is preferable to no progress. This step may seem "small", and it is absurd that it will take ten more years to make these changes happen, but the fact is that before this change, there was no end in sight, and now there is one. A crack has been made in the walls of "Eternal Treblinka", as Isaac Bashevis Singer called the plight of farm animals, and its the kind of crack that is structural and will lead to other cracks until the walls ultimately fall down.
I wish there were simpler solutions, that all humans would just stop eating animals, for instance, or that agribusiness would suddenly come to its senses about how to raise animals humanely, but that is the realm of dreamland, where it all sounds good but nothing gets done. Here, at least, something will get done, even if it is ten years later than it has to be.

Posted by: Susannah | August 13, 2007 09:06 AM

Ana - Hi!!

Yes I agree with you, Costa Rica does still have problems, and since you've been there I'm sure you know much more than I. We have three friends who live there and they, like me are optimists and see things getting better, while also acknoledging that the 25 percent of rainforest that Costa Rica is quoted as having preserved is declining rapidly.

I guess what I mean is that Costa Rica is a good theoretical model for all countries, and if consumers would support the eco friendly tourism we could see improvement.

The big question is, how do we attract consumers?

Thank you by the way for visiting my blog, that means a lot to me and my strays!! Poe and Hugo say hi!

And yes, INDOOR CATS all the way! ;)

Posted by: Maya | August 13, 2007 11:18 AM

Hi Susannah, I think you summed it up perfectly for me. It is not ideal that we may have to wait for 10 years for these veal crates to be phased out completely (though I believe others above have already suggested that continued pressure from animal rights activists may force the industry to make the changes even sooner), however it is still a major change for the factory farming industry to make (don't worry, I am not singing their praises - I'm just glad they are starting to cave a little). Every little change is a step toward a huge victory. Some people still do not have a clue what happens to the animals that end up on the grocery shelves, so this kind of change will educate those individuals, and the more people who become aware of the reality for these animals, the more pressure the industry will face. The ultimate victory will of course be when everyone stops eating meat completely, but until that happens, any victory, however small, is a step in the right direction.

Posted by: Michele | August 13, 2007 02:37 PM