A Strategic Review of International 1CHAPTER Animal Protection

Paul G. Irwin

Introduction he level of animal protection Prior to the modern period of ani- activity varies substantially Early Activities mal protection (starting after World Taround the world. To some War II), international animal protec- extent, the variation parallels the in International tion involved mostly uncoordinated level of economic development, as support from the larger societies and countries with high per capita Animal certain wealthy individuals and a vari- incomes and democratic political Protection ety of international meetings where structures have better financed and Organized animal protection began in animal protection advocates gathered better developed animal protection England in the early 1800s and together to exchange news and ideas. organizations. However there is not spread from there to the rest of the One of the earliest such meetings a one-to-one correlation between world. Henry Bergh (who founded the occurred in Paris in June 1900 economic development and animal American Society for the Prevention although, by this time, there was protection activity. Japan and Saudi of Cruelty to Animals, or ASPCA, in already a steady exchange of informa- Arabia, for example, have high per 1865) and George Angell (who found- tion among animal protection organi- capita incomes but low or nonexis- ed the Massachusetts Society for the zations around the world. These tent levels of animal protection activ- Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, or exchanges were encouraged further ity, while India has a relatively low per MSPCA, in 1868) both looked to by the organization of a number of capita income but a fairly large num- England and the Royal Society for the international animal protection con- ber of animal protection groups. Prevention of Cruelty to Animals gresses, including one in Philadel- The level of animal protection (RSPCA) as a role model for their own phia, Pennsylvania, in 1908, followed activity appears to be influenced not efforts, as did the founders of many by another in London in 1909. only by the wealth of a country but other societies for the prevention of In 1910 an International Humane also by its sociopolitical background cruelty to animals (SPCAs) in the Congress covering both child and ani- and its dominant religious traditions. British Empire and elsewhere. In mal protection was organized in Wildlife and food animal issues pre- 1877 a group of American organiza- Washington, D.C., under the auspices dominate in developing nations, tions established the International of AHA. The report of this meeting whereas companion animal issues Humane Society—the first to carry (American Humane Association have been the driving force behind the adjective “international”—although 1910) is 228 pages long and includes the development of animal protection the name later changed to the Ameri- a list of SPCAs outside the United in most of the developed nations. can Humane Association (AHA).

1 Table 1 Animal Protection Organizations Represented at the 1910 International Congress in Washington, D.C.

Country Country Country

United Kingdom* 200 Austria-Hungary 110 Argentina 3

Belgium 20 Brazil 2

Australia 8 Crete 1 Mexico 5

Burma 2 Denmark 140 Nicaragua 1

Canada 40 France 16 Panama 1

Caribbean 9 Germany 500 Surinam 1

Ceylon 1 Italy 20 Uruguay 1

Cyprus 5 Monaco 1 Venezuela 1

Egypt 8 Netherlands 35

India 23 Norway 12 Algiers 5

New Zealand 3 Portugal 2

Singapore 3 Roumania 2 China 2

South Africa 12 Russia 180 Japan 3

Spain 4

Sweden 120 United States 300

Switzerland 40

* RSPCA branches Source: American Humane Association 1910

States as an appendix. Table 1 identi- societies throughout the world, to the fies the approximate number of soci- president of the Conference for the Modern eties (or organizations with either a Reduction and Limitation of Arma- president or secretary) identified in ments in 1932. International the printed report of the meeting as The records of the 1910 Washington being active in particular countries. meeting indicate that many of the Animal Other international congresses societies outside Europe, the United Protection were organized in 1911 and 1927 States, and the British Common- After World War II the level of orga- (London), and five more were held in wealth were represented by expatri- nized international animal protec- Helsingborg, Copenhagen, Philadel- ates (American Humane Association tion expanded as national move- phia, Brussels, and Vienna between 1910). One example of a foreigner ments grew and flourished. Today 1911 and 1947 (Anonymous ca. setting up an organization is the there are four major international 1947). The Animal Defense and Anti- American Fondouk. This entity was entities and a number of internation- Vivisection Society’s International established in 1920 in Morocco by al activities sponsored by a variety of Humanitarian Bureau was established American traveler Amy Bend Bishop organizations. The four major enti- in Geneva (the home of the League of to take care of the needs of animals. ties (listed in descending size) are Nations) in September of 1928 She asked the MSPCA to oversee the the International Fund for Animal (Anonymous ca. 1947). The bureau program, and today the Fondouk Welfare (IFAW), the World Society for organized a deputation, supported by treats 15,000 animals annually. the Protection of Animals (WSPA), more than 1,400 animal protection the international program of the

2 The State of the Animals II: 2003 RSPCA, and Humane Society Inter- interests and was headquartered for The International Department can national (HSI), the international most of its existence in Geneva. It call on any of the professional staff in affiliate of The Humane Society of tended to draw most of its support the RSPCA’s U.K. headquarters to the United States. from animal groups in Europe, assist with international projects. although The HSUS became involved The RSPCA was a key supporter of IFAW in WFPA’s governing body in the the establishment of ISPA and, more IFAW was founded by Brian Davies. 1970s. Another organization, the recently, was the initiator of Euro- (The actual incorporation of IFAW in International Society for the Protec- group for Animal Welfare (see below). Massachusetts was in 1975.) Davies’s tion of Animals (ISPA), was estab- The RSPCA works proactively in East initial focus was the Canadian seal lished in 1959 with the support of the Asia and in Southern, Central, and pup cull and, as a result of his cam- RSPCA and the MSPCA. It had its Eastern Europe. It uses a variety of paigns, the Canadian seal issue is now headquarters in London but it had an tools to improve animal welfare, well known around the world. Davies office in Boston as well. ISPA became including training courses for govern- slowly built IFAW into the largest known for its disaster and emergency ment officials, nonprofit groups, and international animal protection orga- relief work—John C. Walsh, currently others. It gives out grants and has an nization, with an annual budget of WSPA International Projects director, association scheme to link with more than $60 million per annum in particular, was involved in a num- groups worldwide. It has run more (the largest amount being raised in ber of dramatic rescue operations— than a hundred training courses in the the United Kingdom) contributed by while WFPA was recognized for its past few years and in 2002 funded more than 2 million donors around work on the development and eventu- projects in more than forty countries. the world. Its expansion in the 1990s al passage of several animal protec- was particularly impressive, as its tion conventions at the Council of HSI budget increased from $30 million in Europe. HSI was established in 1991 to provide 1994 to $62 million in 1998; the The 1960s was marked by signifi- coordination for the international number of donors grew from 750,000 cant competition between WFPA and efforts of The HSUS. It has some sim- to 1.8 million over the same period. ISPA. During the 1970s, however, the ilarities to the RSPCA international IFAW employs more than two hun- leaders of both organizations recog- program in that it is able to draw on dred staff persons in its Massachu- nized that there would be consider- the program experts of The HSUS to setts headquarters and in offices in able benefits from a merger, and they provide expertise as needed. However, another thirteen areas around the began to work toward this end. In unlike the RSPCA, HSI has offices world (Asia/Pacific, Canada, China, 1981 the two organizations formally overseas. As of 2003 it had major pro- East Africa, the European Union, merged to become the World Society grams in Costa Rica, Australia, and France, Germany, India, Latin Ameri- for the Protection of Animals (WSPA), Europe, and new offices had been ca, the Netherlands, Russia, Southern with offices in the United States, the established in Asia, the United King- Africa, and the United Kingdom). United Kingdom, and Switzerland. In dom, France, and Germany. Other A few years ago, IFAW divided its the 1980s the Swiss office was closed, affiliates of The HSUS, including programs into three broad areas— but WSPA established new field EarthVoice and the Center for the reducing commercial exploitation offices in Costa Rica, Colombia, and Respect of Life and the Environment, and trade, saving animals in distress, Canada. Today the organization has also support international activities and preserving habitat for animals. offices in thirteen countries; 400 on the environment and animals. These programs include working on animal protection organizations from trade through the Convention on 91 countries as members; more than Other Groups 400,000 individual supporters; and International Trade in Endangered The RSPCA and various groups in Species of Wild Fauna and Flora an annual budget of approximately $15 million. Europe formed Eurogroup for Animal (known as CITES), elephant protec- Welfare in 1980. Eurogroup now is tion, seal protection, opposition to supported by leading animal welfare bushmeat (usually understood to RSPCA organizations in all fifteen member refer to the meat of terrestrial wild The RSPCA has been the model states of the European Union. Head- animals consumed for food), provid- that organizations have followed quartered in Brussels, Eurogroup's ing emergency relief, and working when establishing animal protection role is to present a united animal to establish marine reserves. groups in countries outside the United welfare voice and to lobby for new Kingdom. It also has supported ani- or improved European legislation to WSPA mal protection overseas for much of provide greater protection of animals. The World Federation for the Protec- its more than 175-year existence. It is recognized as an influential and tion of Animals (WFPA) was founded Currently its international programs powerful lobby with many achieve- in 1953 by Dutch animal protection are overseen by an internal division. ments to its credit.

A Strategic Review of International Animal Protection 3 For many decades the MSPCA has The country populations were South America (in Group C) have overseen animal protection programs obtained from the U.S. Central Intel- weak animal protection activities but in North Africa and Turkey. Various ligence Agency’s World Factbook on exhibit signs of a growing interest and organizations in the United Kingdom the Worldwide Web (www.cia.gov/ some hope for the future. These have raised money to support animal cia.publications/factbook). The ap- regions have reasonably high stan- protection activities in Japan, proximate per capita income in Pur- dards of living, but cultural factors Greece, and North Africa—the Soci- chasing Power Parity (PPP) also was (including possibly their strong ety for the Protection of Animals in obtained from the Worldwide Web. Roman Catholic religious traditions) North Africa (SPANA) is a particularly (PPP incorporates differences in cul- seem to work against the develop- successful example—also for decades. tural demand to provide a picture of ment of a healthy animal protection The North Shore Animal League comparative standards of living that capacity. Some attitude surveys in (Long Island, New York) and the is more accurate than a simple com- Central America (see Drews, in this National Canine Defense League parison of annual per capita incomes volume) show that the public appears (United Kingdom) teamed up in the in local currencies.) The analysis to have the same strength of humane mid-1990s to organize a series of could have been refined further to sentiment as that seen in the United capacity-building conferences in East- attempt to incorporate broad cultural States. However without the tradition ern Europe focused around the idea factors (e.g., dominant religions) but of animal protection activity, those of no- or limited-euthanasia pro- that would have produced a level of attitudes are not yet being translated grams. The U.S.-based People for the detail and fragmentation not neces- into behaviors that support animal Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) sarily helpful for the level of analysis protection. recently has established offices over- discussed here. Group D includes most of Asia, seas and is becoming more engaged Briefly, there are three regions in most of Africa, and most of the for- in international activities. A consor- the world (North America, Northern mer Soviet countries. In Asia animal tium of animal protection groups has Europe, and Australia/New Zealand, protection is mostly weak to nonexis- come together to represent animal or Group A) where support for animal tent. Japan has a very high standard protection interests on alternatives to welfare is very strong and where there of living, which usually is equated animal testing at meetings of the is a robust and well-funded animal with concern for animals, but perhaps OECD Chemicals Directorate. As of protection presence. All three regions the religious and cultural traditions 2003 the Hong Kong SPCA was orga- tend to be characterized by high stan- discount moral concern for animals nizing a capacity-development and dards of living and Protestant reli- (e.g., see Kellert 1993). Nonetheless training conference for Asian and gious traditions. there are some signs of an interest in other groups to follow up on an earli- In four regions of the world (South- developing an effective animal protec- er conference in the Philippines. ern Africa, the Caribbean Islands, tion capacity in Japan, and recently a Southern Europe, and Eastern group of Japanese animal groups Europe, or Group B) animal protec- came together to try to develop a Current State tion activity is reasonably healthy, more robust political presence. although all four regions could use In India the standard of living is rel- of Animal help to bolster their programs and atively low but the religious traditions the level of animal protection exper- tend to support moral concern for Protection tise available to them. The activity in animals. India has a relatively large International animal protection is Southern Africa and the Caribbean is number of animal protection organi- healthy and expanding in both influ- almost certainly a legacy of British zations, but they tend to be financial- ence and sophistication. Table 2 pro- colonial traditions and/or proximity ly weak. Maneka Gandhi has provided vides some indication of the level of to the United States (producing a strong leadership to help develop animal protection activity in different supply of expatriates to staff animal improved animal welfare standards, regions around the world. This table protection programs and some funds but economic barriers and the sheer is compiled from a variety of sources. to support projects and organiza- size of the country make her task for- The number of animal protection tions). Southern and Eastern Europe midable indeed. She was removed organizations in each country was are upgrading their animal protec- from her position as a minister in the obtained from the International tion activities because of parity Indian government in 2002 and, Directory of World Animal Protection; demands within the EU (in the case of therefore, no longer has the political wildlife conservation groups were not countries in the EU) or in hopes of power that she used quite effectively included in the tally. (The directory being able to join the EU sometime in to challenge such activities as animal does not include a complete tally of the future. However, none of the orga- research oversight. organizations, but the numbers prob- nizations in these countries is well- In the rest of Asia (including ably are accurate enough for the funded. Indonesia, the Philippines, China, and rough analysis provided in the table.) Of the other regions, Central and the Koreas) animal protection is con-

4 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Table 2 Animal Protection Activity Around the World

# of Approx. per Animal Capita Exemplar Total Protection # APOs/mIncome Region Countries Population Orgs. (APOs)1 people (000s) (PPP$)2 Group

Europe— United Kingdom, 211 million 1,865 8.840 22.5 A Western and Germany, Northern Scandinavia

Europe— Spain, 178 million 348 1.960 18.0 B Southern France, Greece

Europe— Poland, 194 million 158 0.820 4.5 B Eastern Hungary, Ukraine

Middle East Turkey, Iran, 239 million 46 0.190 5.4 C Israel

Russia and Russia, 219 million 22 0.100 3.6 D Central Asia Kazakhstan, Georgia

Asia— Afghanistan, 1,367 million 128 0.094 1.5 D India and Bangladesh neighbors

Asia— Thailand, Malaysia, 229 million 16 0.070 3.5 D Southeast Laos

Asia— New Caledonia 217 million 3 0.014 3.3 D Indonesia and Islands

Australasia Australia 23 million 220 9.690 19.0 A and New Zealand

Asia— Philippines, 78 million 5 0.060 3.6 D Philippines Tonga, Guam and Islands

Asia— China, 1,358 million8 0.006 3.3 D China North and and Korea South Korea

Asia— Japan 127 million 30 0.240 23.4 C Japan

(continued on next page)

A Strategic Review of International Animal Protection 5 (continued from previous page) Table 2 Animal Protection Activity Around the World

# of Approx. per Animal Capita Exemplar Total Protection # APOs/mIncome Region Countries Population Orgs. (APOs)1 people (000s) (PPP$)2 Group

America— U.S.A. and 310 million 6,400 20.675 27.0 A North Canada

America— Mexico, 135 million27 0.200 5.5 C Central Panama

America— Bahamas, 38 million 44 1.157 3.5 B Caribbean Cuba

America— Chile, Brazil, 346 million 112 0.324 6.3 C South Columbia

Africa— Morocco, 292 million 7 0.024 1.0 D North Egypt, Ethiopia

Africa— Guinea, Nigeria, 186 million 5 0.027 1.5 D West Ghana

Africa— Congo, Cameroon 74 million 0 0.000 1.2 D Western/ Central

Africa— Uganda, Burundi, 102 million 10 0.098 1.0 D Eastern/Central Tanzania

Africa— Angola, South 126 million 115 0.913 3.0 B Southern Africa, Mozambique

Total 6,049 million 9,569 1.580 6.0

1Taken from World Animal Protection Directory 2PPP stands for Purchasing Power Parity and is used by the World Bank to compare countries. fined to a few pockets of effective to adopt more animal-friendly poli- activism or to leftovers from colonial Types of cies. In terms of hands-on animal pro- times (e.g., the Hong Kong and Sin- tection activities, the programs can gapore SPCAs). Africa north of the International be divided into those that address dog Zambesi River is mostly lacking in any and cat issues, those that address significant animal protection activity Activities farm and draft animal issues, and International animal protection activ- (with a few noteworthy exceptions in those that address wildlife issues. ities can be segmented into several East and North Africa), as is the Mid- Some organizations are engaged in areas. One obvious activity is the dle East, where only Israel has any programs to set aside land for wildlife pressuring of international organiza- active groups. There are signs of a and to promote humane, sustainable tions—e.g., the World Trade Organi- stirring of animal protection interest development activities. zation (WTO), Food and Agriculture in Russia and some of the other Sovi- Organization (FAO) (see Trent et al. et republics, but the movement is still in this volume), International Whal- very new and weak. ing Commission (IWC), and CITES—

6 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Advocacy developing countries were set up to program in Jaipur, India, has record- All four of the major international address domestic dog and cat issues, ed a decline in street dog populations organizations are active in advocating however, often by expatriates from (C. Townend, personal communica- for animals on a wide range of inter- Group A countries. Currently most of tion, n.d. 2003), and HSI (2001) national issues. The WTO is currently the companion animal activities are reports that a Bahamian program a particular concern, because coun- focused on attempts to gain some reduced the number of strays on the tries with strong animal protection control of community and stray dog streets, left the sterilized strays in a laws are being threatened with trade populations. In developing countries healthier state, and began to change sanctions if they use those laws to the “pet” dog makes up a relatively the attitudes of local human popula- restrict the import of animal prod- small proportion (perhaps 5 percent tions toward the street dogs. ucts from countries with weaker or or less) of the total dog population. It is clear that dog and cat welfare nonexistent animal protection legisla- Most of the dogs are either communi- projects in the developing world tion or enforcement. However animal ty dogs, with some tenuous connec- cannot involve simply the direct appli- protection has had a major presence tion to a household or group of cation of approaches that have been at CITES since its establishment households, or true strays who survive used in Europe and North America. in 1973 and at the IWC for the past exclusively by scavenging. These pop- New, appropriate technology pro- thirty years. Indeed the current ulations can be very significant; for grams need to be developed that restrictions on whaling are largely a example, 85 percent of households in recognize that, although the nurture result of the effectiveness of animal Miacatlan, a Mexican village, have of animals is a universal phenomenon advocates over this period. Some of stray/community dogs who use the of human nature, appropriate nurtur- the other international treaties that house as home base for their territory ing behavior does not simply appear intersect with animal protection con- (Orihuela and Solano 1995). without role models acceptable to the cerns are: Because community and stray dogs local community and adequate oppor- IATTC/IDCPA: Inter-American are an important conduit through tunity to engage in such behavior. It Tropical Tuna Commission and which humans contract rabies (and a must also be recognized that animal dolphins (dolphin protection); range of other diseases, such as nurturance, and animal protection, WSSD: sustainable development, hydatidosis), the World Health Orga- cannot thrive where human commu- animal agriculture, fisheries, drift- nization has worked with WSPA to nities do not have adequate security nets; develop approaches to control popu- or opportunities to provide food and ISO: international standards involv- lations of stray and community dogs. shelter for themselves. ing humane farming and trapping; For the most part, developing coun- FAO: trade, fisheries, whaling, tries have tried to deal with stray dog Farm and farm animal husbandry, slaughter issues by periodically killing as many Draft Animals and transport; dogs as they can (often by poisoning). However canids respond to such pro- Farm and draft animals are vital in SPAW: specially protected areas providing families with food security and wildlife in the Caribbean; grams by having larger litters and breeding more frequently, therefore (in the context of availability, not of CMS: Bonn Convention on migra- safety) and the means to support tory species; 70 percent or more of a dog popula- tion must be killed before a signifi- themselves in much of the developing CBD: convention on biological world. In parts of Africa, cattle and diversity. cant drop in the population may be noticed. Such dog control programs other livestock are a family’s social Several organizations (including security system and “bank.” Thus the HSI and WSPA) now have consultative rarely have the resources to take the first essential step—to conduct dog welfare of these animals is tied closely status at the United Nations and are to the welfare of families and commu- using that status to campaign for ani- population studies. Over the past ten years, it has been nities. The FAO is working with mals at the level of these internation- HSI on a range of humane slaughter al organizations. suggested that a variation of the “trap, neuter, vaccinate, and release” initiatives that not only address approach currently used to control animal welfare but also include such Dogs and Cats stray cats in developed countries might elements as food security and hygiene Although companion animals are a be used for control of community and for local communities and the rele- driving force behind the development stray dog populations. Only a few of vant state. Draft animals (e.g., work- and growth of animal protection orga- such dog trap, neuter, vaccinate, and ing equines) also are important for nizations in Group A countries, they release programs have included the local communities, and it is impor- have not carried the same weight in collection of dog population data, so tant to help support their health and countries in Groups B, C, and D. Most it is not yet possible to conclude that welfare with appropriate initiatives. of the organizations established in this approach can work. However a

A Strategic Review of International Animal Protection 7 Wildlife tion activities, other organizations Humane Society International (HSI). For most of the developing world, also do their part. For example, Earth- 2001. Dogs on Abaco Island, wildlife represents either a competi- Voice has been working with U.K.- The Bahamas: A case study. tor for resources or a resource in based Fauna and Flora International Washington, D.C.: HSI. July. itself. Therefore wildlife protection to set aside land in Africa and the Kellert, S.R. 1993. Attitudes, knowl- issues in developing countries involve: Americas that secures important edge, and behavior toward wildlife (1) attempting to establish ap- habitats for wild species. HSI has among the industrial superpowers: propriate protected areas been engaged in a project to explore United States, Japan, and Ger- where wildlife can thrive; the potential of developing an many. Journal of Social Issues 49: (2) attempting to enforce protec- immunocontraceptive vaccine to 53–70. tions for populations of manage elephant populations in Orihuela, T.A., and V.J.Solano. 1995. threatened and endangered Southern Africa without resorting to Demographics of the owned dog species; and culling. population in Miacatlan, Morelos, (3) dealing with the many associat- Mexico. Anthrozoös 8: 171–175. ed cruelties of the trade in wildlife and bushmeat and Conclusions attempting to address human- International animal protection has animal conflicts. been growing in its sophistication, These issues frequently interest reach, and impact for the past quar- both wildlife conservation and wildlife ter century. The Internet provides a protection groups and provide oppor- valuable new tool to support the activ- tunities for such groups to work ities of the major international together to support land protection, groups as well as assist local individu- conservation initiatives, and wildlife als to be more effective in their advo- protection. The work of many conser- cacy. In ten years animal protection vation organizations already involves will have a foothold in those countries significant overlap with the programs where it is now mostly a curiosity and put in place by the international ani- will be much stronger around the mal protection groups. For example, globe. The message of kindness to HSI ran a three-year project to sup- animals is developing sophisticated port wildlife rehabilitation around the new clothing. As the habit of helping world. Many zoos and conservation and protecting animals spreads groups, most notably the Wildlife around the world, not only will the Conservation Society, which is based animals will be better off, but in the United States, support similar humans, and the communities, soci- veterinary programs. Animal protec- eties, and nations they people, also tion groups campaign against various will grow less violent and more civil. aspects of wildlife trade. The U.K.- The dream of a safer and more nur- based WildAid runs active programs turing world gradually will emerge to educate people in source countries into reality. about the harmful impact of wildlife trade and provides training to rangers and customs officials in source coun- Literature Cited tries to enable them to be more effec- American Humane Association. 1910. tive. WSPA has developed a very suc- The First International Humane cessful bear protection initiative Congress. Washington, D.C. Octo- (“Libearty”) to address the cruelties ber 10–15. involved in harvesting bear products Anonymous. (undated but circa for the traditional medicines market 1947). You and the animals in and in performing-bear activities peace and war. London: The throughout Asia. Animal Defence and Anti-Vivisec- While the U.S.-based Nature Con- tion Society. servancy is the giant of land preserva-

8 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Companion Animal Demographics in the United States: 2CHAPTER A Historical Perspective

Elizabeth A. Clancy and Andrew N. Rowan

Introduction here are a variety of welfare Americans are bombarded with infor- concerns relating to companion mation on the economy, public National Tdogs and cats in the United health, social and psychological atti- States but one of the more pervasive tude trends, and other matters that Dog and Cat is the “pet homelessness,” “pet over- are considered important. For exam- population,” or “pet surplus” prob- ple, no self-respecting politician Demographic lem. These widely used terms may dis- would think of launching a political Data comfit some in the animal shelter campaign or initiative without some community. Some of the terms can be sense of what the public might be Base-line misleading in that their use implies worrying about. Addressing pet popu- that the problem—however it is lation issues should be no different. Population Data couched—could be solved simply by Data are needed in order to define the The United States has never had a reducing the number of available nature and scope of the dog and cat national system in place to collect, dogs and cats. In addition the term demographic challenge. Data can store and analyze data relating to pet surplus specifically implies a property help people to understand the impact care-giving. Although detailed demo- function—that companion dogs and of “pet homelessness” on companion graphic data on the human popula- cats are inherently expendable when- animals; to identify some of the char- tion are gathered by the U.S. Census ever they fall outside of a stable acteristics of both successful and Bureau, no similar database exists for human-animal relationship. A detailed failed human-animal relationships; companion dogs and cats. Our society examination of the population issue and to develop sound, effective, and routinely refers to household pets as will reveal that it is not merely a case long-lasting solutions that will “members of the family” but the cen- of the indiscriminate breeding of strengthen humans’ relationships sus process does not accept that data dogs and cats, but also a complex with companion animals and enhance on pets should be collected. Several problem with both sociological and companion animals’ welfare. attempts by animal industries and biological elements that has no sim- Given the need for reliable data, interest groups to gain approval for ple solution. what is known now about trends con- the inclusion of questions on pets on Modern American society recog- cerning the companion animal popu- the U.S. Census have thus far been nizes the crucial role of data and lation and the shelters that help unsuccessful. One of us (A.N.R.) at- information in evaluating and effec- address the “homelessness” problem? tempted to do this in the mid-1980s tively addressing societal problems. but, despite the support of numerous

9 Table 1 Pet Population Estimates

Total U.S. Household Dog and Cat Populations (millions)

1987 1991 1996 2001

Dogs 52.4 52.5 52.9 61.6

Cats 54.6 57.0 59.1 68.9

Percent of Households with Dogs and Cats (mean number/household)

1987 1991 1996 2001

Dogs 38.2(1.51) 36.5(1.52) 31.6(1.69) 36.1(1.6)

Cats 30.5(2.04) 30.9(1.95) 27.3(2.19) 31.6(2.1)

Source: AVMA Survey 1997, 2002 academics, animal industries, and lation. To be included in such a panel, mates of Indiana pet populations. animal advocates, did not succeed. a person must have resided at the cur- The latest data published by the Nonetheless relatively accurate rent address for a year or more. AVMA indicate that in 2001 Ameri- data are available on the number of Therefore these panels cannot repre- cans shared their households with household dogs and cats in the Unit- sent the more transient elements of 61.6 million dogs and 68.9 million ed States now and historically. These the United States. cats. An examination of Table 1 illus- data are collected primarily by veteri- The second approach uses tele- trates that, on a national level, the nary organizations (e.g., the Ameri- phones and random digit dial tech- owned dog population remained rela- can Veterinary Medical Association, nology to sample the population. This tively stable between 1987 and 1996 or AVMA, and the American Animal method under-samples households at (although the rate of care-giving fluc- Hospital Association) and pet indus- the lower end of the economic pyra- tuated quite widely), while the owned try organizations (e.g., the American mid because they are less likely to cat population increased from 54.6 to Pet Products Manufacturers Associa- have telephones. 59.1 million (AVMA 1997, 2002). tion, or APPMA, and the Pet Food Thus both approaches have limita- While the AVMA population esti- Institute)—groups whose work tions and appear to produce differ- mates may be on the high side, the depends on having reliable and cur- ences in estimates of the national dog fact that the same technique has rent data on dog and cat populations. and cat population. As demonstrated been used for all four AVMA surveys The APPMA has conducted national by Patronek and Rowan (1995), the should mean that the trends are accu- surveys on pet populations every household panel approach produces rate. Thus between 1996 and 2001 other year since 1988. The AVMA has estimates that are approximately the total population numbers published data from national surveys twenty percent higher than those increased substantially for both dogs in 1983, 1988, 1992, 1997, and 2002. obtained from telephone surveys. In (8.7 million increase) and cats (9.8 Two basic approaches have been Massachusetts telephone surveys con- million increase) (AVMA 2002). The used to gather data on dog and cat ducted by both the Massachusetts substantial jump in population esti- populations. The first uses surveys of Society for the Prevention of Cruelty mate in 2001 is the result of a jump sample populations drawn from an to Animals (MSPCA) (C. Luke, per- in the percentage of households with already established panel of U.S. sonal communication with A.N.R., either dogs or cats. It is not clear why households. Both the APPMA and the n.d. 1991) and Manning and Rowan the AVMA surveys show a downward AVMA use this method. The panels (1992) in the same time frame pro- trend in 1996. The APPMA surveys are recruited on the understanding duced estimates of state pet popula- show no such dip (APPMA 2002). that the participants will complete tions that were substantially lower Another factor to keep in mind is periodic mail surveys. (Response than those obtained using data col- that the number of households in the rates typically are high—around 70 lected by the AVMA in 1991. In Indi- United States increases steadily. Thus percent.) A sample of households is ana Patronek found similar disparities the dog population remained stable drawn from the panels so as to make between data he collected using tele- between 1987 and 1996 even though them representative of the U.S. popu- phone sampling and the AVMA esti- the rate of care-giving (household

10 The State of the Animals II: 2003 than dog care-givers are to their dogs. to assessing the suitability of poten- Table 2 Attachment levels were measured tial adopters. However the character- Percent of by a research group in Kentucky istics of the Miller-Rada “commit- using the Lexington Attachment to ment instrument” have not been Households Pets Scale, or LAPS (Johnson, Garri- established for a national probability with Animals ty, and Stallones 1992). The sample. At present any suggestions researchers used a twenty-three-item regarding potential connections be- Year Dogs Cats scale (e.g., My pet understands me, I tween attachment, commitment, and enjoy showing other people pictures animal relinquishment are pure spec- 1988 37 30 of my pet) to obtain relative scores of ulation. 1990 38 33 attachment. The scores indicating level of attachment were based on the Regional and Life 1992 38 32 interviewer’s rating. The proportions Stage Differences 1994 36 30 of the population identified as being very or somewhat attached are what in Pet Care-giving 1996 37 32 one might intuitively expect (Table The national pet population surveys 4). This scale has not been put into 1998 39 32 also indicate that there are regional practical use, but there is no appar- differences in pet care-giving. This is 2000 39 34 ent reason it could not be explored as an important factor when addressing part of a questionnaire used by shel- welfare concerns relating to pet care- Source: APPMA Survey 2002 ters to assess the suitability of a giving. The 2001 AVMA survey prospective animal adopter. The can- revealed significant differences in the percentage) dropped from 38.2 to didates could be administered the percentage of households providing 31.6 percent. See Table 2 for changes LAPS assessment regarding their pre- for pets around the country. Table 5a recorded by the APPMA in rates of vious or a current favorite pet and shows the highest rates of pet care- dog and cat households in the United then scored to see how attached they giving in the Mountain Pacific and States. The fluctuations from one were (or are). West South Central regions of the year to the next may be due mostly to It should be noted that, in studying United States, and the lowest rates in random statistical variation in the the Miller-Rada “commitment to the Middle Atlantic, South Atlantic, survey. pets” scale, Staats et al. (1996) and New England regions (AVMA The estimated 130.5 million dogs demonstrated that “attachment” is 2002). and cats in American households different from “commitment.” It is In fact, as seen in Table 5b, state to drawn from the AVMA 2001 survey possible that the Miller-Rada instru- state differences in dog and cat care- reside in approximately 53 percent of ment for measuring commitment giving rates can vary by a factor of two the approximately 100 million house- might prove to be a better approach from highest to lowest (AVMA 2002). holds (58.3 percent of households contain a pet of any sort) (AVMA 2002). Thus more than half the Table 3 households in this country include an Characteristics of Animal animal companion. The average household with pets has the charac- Care-giving Households and teristics indicated in Table 3. In gen- Their Pets in the United States eral dog sterilization rates are lower than those of cats because of the Dogs Cats reluctance of dog care-givers (used in place of “owner”) to have their male Time household has included pets 18 yrs. 18 yrs. dogs neutered. The same reluctance Average age of “main” pet 6.6 yrs 6.4 yrs is not observed among care-givers who have male cats. The fact that Animal(s) kept indoors during the day 43% 54% fewer cat care-givers report taking Households did not visit vet in past year 9% 27% their animals to the veterinarian in the previous year is consistent with Pets sterilized 70% 82% the observation that cats tend to Average annual veterinary expenses $196 $104 require lower levels of involvement and cat care-givers generally are Source: APPMA 2002 somewhat less attached to their cats

Companion Animal Demographics in the United States: A Historical Perspective 11 Table 4 Table 5a Levels of Attachment to Companion Pet Care-Giving Animals in the Household by Region

Percent of Average Pet Care-giving Care-givers LAPS Score Households Region (percent) Very attached 50.0 54.9 Mountain 61.9 Somewhat attached 35.7 44.8 Pacific 60.6 Not very attached 12.4 32.6 West South Central 60.5 Not at all attached 1.9 26.2 East South Central 56.7 East North Central 55.2 New England 54.1 Average LAPS Score for Demographic Categories South Atlantic 53.8 Average Middle Atlantic 50.2 Category LAPS Score Source: AVMA Survey 2002 Household size = 1 52.8 Household size = 5+ 43.5 populations usually do not focus on differences among urban, suburban, Never married/sep./div. 52.0 and rural communities; thus they Married 45.7 overlook significant causes of error in estimates of pet populations. Female 50.0 These differences in pet care-giving Male 45.1 around the country mean that a “one size fits all” approach will not be suffi- White 47.6 cient to resolve the pet population cri- African American 53.8 sis, and that it is crucial for regions and communities to initiate and main- Household income under $30k 51.5 tain their own data collection efforts Household income over $50k 43.2 in order to have reliable and accurate information with which to serve the Household education: pet care-givers in their jurisdictions. less than high school 53.0 Communities can use the available Household education: national data as a guide to direct their college graduate 44.2 own data collection efforts. They should be cautious, however, about Favorite pet is dog 49.2 relying on rote formulae derived from Favorite pet is cat 45.1 national data to estimate their own dog and cat populations. Using the Source: Johnson, Garrity, and Stallones 1992 APPMA (2002) survey data, it has been suggested that one can calculate the number of dogs in a community. Thus use of national survey data to commuting distance of Boston. The The technique is to multiply the num- assess care-giving of regional or state rate of dog care-giving was 25.4 per- ber of occupied households (derived pet populations can lead to signifi- cent in Boston compared with 37 per- from the census data) by 0.39 (the cant over-estimates or under-esti- cent in Wellesley; the rate of cat care- percentage of households nationally mates. Local studies of pet care-giv- giving was 37.8 percent in Boston containing dogs) and then multiply- ing also indicate significant urban to compared with 26 percent in Welles- ing by 1.7 (the average number of suburban differences. Unpublished ley (Rowan and Williams 1987). Pet dogs in each household). However this data from Massachusetts revealed dif- care-giving rates generally are signifi- will overestimate dog populations in a ferences in pet care-giving rates cantly lower in dense urban complex- Northeastern urban community and between Boston, an urban center, and es than they are in suburban commu- underestimate dog populations in a Wellesley, an affluent suburb within nities. National surveys of pet

12 The State of the Animals II: 2003 sources); the total percentage of cats Table 5b acquired from these sources is 38 (or Pet Care-giving by Species in about 29 percent of the identified sources). This indicates that cats are Selected States (percent of households) more likely to be acquired on a whim. Other surveys have shown similar State Dog Care-giving State Cat Care-giving differences between the sources of dogs and cats. Nassar, Mosier, and MA 21.4 LA 26.1 Williams (1984) found that in Las Vegas cats (24.5 percent) were much NY 26.1 MI 26.1 more likely to be acquired from the NJ 26.2 MD 26.5 stray population than dogs (8 per- cent), but only 9 percent of cats were CT 28.4 IL 28.0 purchased compared with 26 percent MT 46.6 MT 44.6 of dogs. In Massachusetts 71 percent of pet care-givers had planned to ID 48.1 WY 44.6 acquire their dogs, going to such sources as breeders (33 percent), OK 48.5 OR 45.2 shelters (16 percent), and pet stores WV 50.3 ME 46.3 (7 percent) (MSPCA 1996). Source: AVMA Survey 2002 Feral/Stray Dogs and Cats stage” of the household (see Table 6). No discussion of the nation’s dog and Table 6 It is generally known that families cat populations is complete without Varying Rates of with children between the ages of five an estimate of the feral/stray popula- and seventeen have the highest rates tion. In the past two decades, it Pet Care-Giving of pet care-giving (almost four out of appears that the number of stray and by Life Stage five have pets). However, as indicated feral dogs has fallen to a very low level by Table 4, these families are less (with the possible exception of some attached to their pets (just as there is Life Stage Percent communities in dense urban, very Category with Pets less time to devote to each family rural, and Native American areas). member the more there are). As can The same is not true of cats. This pop- Young singles 50.2 be seen from Table 6, singles house- ulation is not easy to define because Young couples 72.5 holds are less likely to have pets household cats may join and leave the (about 20 percent lower rate than perceived “stray” population. The Young parents 64.1 that of families), and pet care-giving Humane Society of the United States declines with age. No known studies Middle singles 44.4 (HSUS) 1999 “Statement on Free- assess relinquishment rates by life Roaming Cats” notes, Middle parents 74.8 stage of the care-giver. Cats elude simple categoriza- Older parents 69.0 tions. Free-roaming cats are often Acquisition of Pets referred to as either stray or feral, Working older couple 58.9 Pet care-givers acquire dogs and cats but these designations do not Retired older couple 39.8 from a variety of sources. These reflect the many types of outdoor sources are believed to play an inte- cats. Free-roaming cats can be Older singles 29.7 gral role in pet population problems. owned cats who are allowed to According to the APPMA National Pet roam; owned cats who have Source: AVMA 2002 Owners Survey, pets in 1998 were become lost; previously owned acquired as indicated in Table 7 cats who have been abandoned rural part of the Southeast or South- (APPMA 2000, 2002). Use of those and no longer have a home; quasi- west. Nonetheless such formulae are sources marked with an asterisk indi- owned cats who roam freely and useful first approximations of the cates that some forethought and plan- are fed by several residents in an number of dogs and cats in a particu- ning usually went into the acquisition area but “owned” by none of lar community. of the pet. The total percentage of them; and so-called working cats Animal care-giving rates also vary dogs acquired from such sources is 74 who serve as “mousers.” Almost dramatically according to the “life (or about 48 percent of the identified every community also has feral,

Companion Animal Demographics in the United States: A Historical Perspective 13 transition from owned animal to Table 7 homeless animal. Because the num- Sources from Which Dogs ber of animals entering shelters cur- and Cats Were Acquired rently exceeds available home place- ments, many pet population management policies allow euthana- Source (percent) Dogs Cats sia of animals who cannot be placed Friend/relative 34 40 in an acceptable home. Animals who are killed include healthy, adoptable Breeder* 29 4 animals, as well as animals deemed unadoptable due to illness, age, aber- Newspaper/private party* 20 11 rant behavior, or some other charac- Stray 18 32 teristic. Recent attention has focused on collecting data on “animal shelter Animal shelter* 17 18 demographics,” including data that Puppy/kitten from own pet 16 12 describes the animals populating shelters and that tracks trends in the Pet store* 8 5 movement of animals into and out of Gift 7 2 shelters. “Other” 5 5 The 1960s and 1970s: Veterinarian 1 4 Experiential Policy TOTAL 155 133 The early 1970s is considered by many to be a defining period for Respondents could name more than one source. Therefore the percentage totals amount to more than 100. changes in the American approach to pet population issues. In 1974 a sur- *Some forethought and planning usually went into the acquisition of the pet. vey of U.S. mayors ranked animal- Source: APPMA 2002 related issues as the number one complaint received by their offices unsocialized cats who may be one communication, n.d. 2003). Nonethe- (Bancroft 1974). During the 1970s or more generations removed less one of the authors (A.N.R) has attention to and awareness of what from a home environment and used the survey to estimate the Amer- were perceived as growing pet popu- who may subsist in a colony of ican feral/stray cat population at lation concerns led to development of similar cats living on the fringes roughly 30–40 million (or about a new approach that was to shape the of human existence. Because cats 60–70 percent less than the number course of pet population policy well exhibit varying degrees of socia- of cats being cared for in households). into the 1990s. Called LES (Legisla- bility, even an animal care and Some support for this estimate comes tion, Education, and Sterilization), it control professional may not from two regional surveys in Califor- was a three-pronged approach immediately be able to tell the nia that have produced similar per- designed to reduce the numbers of difference between a feral cat and centages for the stray/feral cat popu- animals that shelters were handling a frightened indoor-only cat who lation (Anonymous 1995, 1996). and subsequently to reduce the need has escaped and become lost. for euthanasia as a population control In a national survey of pet care- Animal Shelter method. LES was launched by Phyllis givers commissioned by The HSUS, Demographics: Wright of The HSUS with the catchy respondents were asked if they fed tag phrase “less born, less killed, and stray cats and, if so, how many they A Historical less cruelty.” LES’s major projects fed (Anonymous 1993). It was possi- Perspective included establishment of steriliza- ble to extrapolate that pet care-givers tion programs, mandating adequate fed about 32.7 million cats (assuming In the United States a network of ani- mal shelters exists to address and licensing fees, and educating the no cats were fed by more than one community via humane education household). However The HSUS ques- manage pet population control. One of the primary functions of U.S. ani- programs, the media, and veterinari- tioned these “cat-feeder” results and ans. The HSUS also called for and exhorted caution in using the data to mal shelters is to attempt to find new homes for dogs and cats who, for a helped organize two national confer- establish a national estimate of stray ences of interested parties (e.g., the and feral cats (G. Handy, personal variety of reasons, have made the

14 The State of the Animals II: 2003 a more viable solution (Anonymous 1978; Rowan and Williams 1987). Despite the lack of support from orga- nized veterinary medicine, the Department of Animal Regulation in the City of Los Angeles set up a municipal spay-neuter clinic and a differential licensing system—in which it cost more to license intact dogs than neutered ones—in 1970. This clinic evoked a storm of protest from the veterinary community, but within ten years the proportion of licensed dogs in Los Angeles who were sterilized rose from 10 percent to 51 percent. The municipal clinic was doing far too few sterilizations to account for such a large change. There had to have been a change of behavior among the private veteri- AVMA, the American Kennel Club, shelter. It should also be noted that nary practices. Over this same period, and other animal-related groups) in the shelter intake numbers were the number of animals taken in by the 1974 and 1976 to address the pet falling at a time when the population city’s Department of Animal Regula- population crisis (Rowan and of New York City was growing (from tion fell from about 140,000 a year, to Williams 1987). 5.63 million in 1928 to 8 million in about 85,000 a year (Rowan and The rationale for the LES approach 1954, where it has remained). Williams 1987). was based largely on anecdotal It is not clear why alarms were Reliable and consistent data are reports from animal shelters around raised about unwanted and stray dogs crucial for an evaluation of the suc- the country. Few shelters were keep- and cats in the early 1970s (cf. cess of any proposed pet population ing any data on the numbers of ani- Djerassi, Israel, and Jochle 1973), program. Early data collection mals handled, on those returned-to- although it may be that Djerassi, focused solely on determining how care-givers (RTC), or on those known as the inventor of the birth many animals were being killed as adopted and euthanized. No regional control pill, was looking for possible part of pet population control, with- or national organizations focused on new markets for his invention. How- out considering other aspects of shel- data collection for homeless pets. ever, his article led to others in which ter demographics, such as number From the limited data available, it was the focus was not on cats (the ASPCA of animals handled, the number estimated that in 1973 approximately data indicates that cats formed the returned to the caregiver, and the 20 percent of the dog and cat popula- bulk of the animal intake) but on the number adopted. In 1973 The HSUS tion in households was being eutha- stray dog population. The stray dogs commissioned a national survey of nized in shelters (Rowan and Williams were portrayed as presenting a public animal shelters. Although the 1987). Since then some data has health and safety risk as well as wel- response rate was low, the survey pro- been published on the experiences of fare issues for the dogs themselves vided a baseline estimate of 13.5 mil- the ASPCA in New York City from (Marx and Furculow 1969; Beck lion dogs and cats euthanized annual- 1896 to 1994, when it gave up animal 1973; Feldman 1974). Schneider and ly. A follow-up survey in 1982 control for New York City (Zawistow- Vaida (1975), in their surveys of dog suggested that the total number of ski et al. 1998). Figure 1 shows the and cat populations in California, euthanasias had declined to an esti- trends in animal intake over this 98- argued that cats should not be over- mated range of 7.6 million to 10 mil- year period. What is readily apparent looked. lion, despite an overall increase in the is that, even in 1973 when the alarm Animal protection groups began owned pet population from an esti- was raised about too many dogs and pushing the concept of companion mated 60 million in 1973 to an esti- cats and not enough homes, the situ- animal surgical sterilization as a pet mated 90 million in 1983 (Rowan and ation was much improved over the population control method. Initially Williams 1987). Thus there had been 1920s and 1930s. Up until 1950 the the veterinary community was resis- not only a fall in absolute shelter ASPCA was euthanizing 95 percent or tant and suggested that the develop- euthanasia numbers but also an even more of the animals brought into the ment of contraceptive drugs might be greater fall in the relative numbers.

Companion Animal Demographics in the United States: A Historical Perspective 15 Table 8 provides additional evi- surveys (Rowan 1992a). There have to be identified as a shelter, the orga- dence that shelter animal intakes been two significant problems in nization must possess a building that declined substantially in the 1970s. developing reliable estimates of shel- houses animals and has its own postal These data come from a large county- ter animal numbers. First, there was address. Beginning with a list of wide program run by a humane soci- and still is no reliable public list of about 6,000 organizations, The HSUS ety under a county contract in Cali- shelters in the United States. Second, removed duplicates and non-shel- fornia (Savesky 2001). Basically the many shelters either do not keep tered organizations, leaving approxi- data show that animal intakes appropriate program data or are very mately 3,500 entities. An unpub- plunged in the 1970s, stayed more or reluctant to release them for fear that lished 1999 HSUS survey of this less the same from 1980 to 1990, and the data will be used to criticize their group produced a 20 percent then began falling again. organizations. An additional chal- response rate and the following data. While the evidence cited above lenge is posed by the fact that the The duplicate and “address demonstrates that shelter intakes and term shelter encompasses a wide unknown” returns indicated that the euthanasias moved in the right direc- range of entities, from an animal con- accurate total of shelters was about tion (i.e., down) from World War II to trol facility that serves several towns 2,800–2,900. Of the respondents that the present, the prevailing view in the and handles thousands of animals per identified their status, 38.2 percent shelter community through the 1980s year to the private citizen who res- were municipal entities, 43.6 percent and even into part of the 1990s was cues a few strays a year. were private entities with some form that of wrestling with an intractable With the increasing utilitization of of municipal contract, and 18.2 per- problem. Part of the problem was computers and the growing awareness cent were private entities with no again a lack of solid data and the gen- of the value of shelter demographic municipal contract. In terms of size, eration of inaccurate estimates of data, more individual shelters had 45.2 percent had annual budgets of shelter intakes and euthanasias. In begun collecting and storing data by $250,000 or less, 22.9 percent had the 1980s some surveys estimated the 1990s. A recognition that euthana- budgets between $250,001 and that as many as 20 million animals sia data alone was of limited value led $500,000, 16.6 percent had budgets were being euthanized in shelters an- to the collection of statistics on the between $500,001 and $1,000,000, nually (Rowan and Williams 1987). number of animals entering shelters, and 15.4 percent had budgets exceed- These surveys continued to be quoted as well as the disposition of the ani- ing $1 million. These data agree well into the 1990s. The result was mals (e.g., adoption, RTC, euthanasia, closely with those reported by Wen- that both humane society workers and death). The availability of some region- strup and Dowidchuk (1999) in their the public continued to assess prog- al data enabled an analysis of regional smaller sample of shelters. Finally the ress on pet population issues based on shelter trends and estimates of the shelters in The HSUS survey reported these old statistics, giving a “doom national picture. This analysis revealed a mean of fourteen full-time (median: and gloom” outlook to the situation, that, just as there were regional differ- six) and five part-time (median: when in fact a retrospective examina- ences in pet care-giving trends, there three) employees. tion of euthanasia trends indicates were regional differences in shelter As Rowan (1992a) noted, the larger that euthanasias appeared to be animal populations. shelters handle a disproportionately decreasing over time. Rowan examined regional data large percentage of the animals. Thus from New Jersey, Washington State, in New Jersey, where the average shel- Reliable Estimates and Massachusetts and, by extrapola- ter is small and town-based, 30 per- tion, determined that, of approxi- cent of the shelters handled 82 per- from Regional Data mately 110 million owned dogs and cent of the shelter animals. In Djerassi, Israel, and Jochle (1973) cats in the United States, an estimat- Washington State, where the shelters noted that the lack of comprehensive, ed 5 million–6 million, or 5 percent of are typically larger and county-based, high quality data was the biggest the owned population, were eutha- 30 percent of the shelters handled 63 roadblock to efficient and effective nized. This was a much more conser- percent of the animals. Therefore if program development and comment- vative estimate than the range of data were collected from the largest ed that this deficiency was a universal 11.75 million–19.54 million found in 50–60 percent of shelters (or approx- weakness, common even among AHA’s 1990 survey (Rowan 1992a). imately 1,500 entities), it is reason- those countries that had long estab- Others then produced numbers simi- ably certain that these shelters would lished a sophisticated human census. lar to Rowan’s extrapolation, based account for at least 90 percent of the The lack of a standardized list of ani- on a broader range of state data (e.g., animals handled annually. mal shelters contributes significantly Arkow 1994). to the challenges that continue to be More recently The HSUS has been faced by researchers doing shelter developing a list of shelters in which,

16 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Table 8 The Animal Intake/Disposition Experience of One Large California Shelter

Year Dogs Cats Total RTC/ADOP Euth.

1970 23,500 22,600 49,100 9,130 37,025

1971 26,425 20,785 46,210 7,095 39,935

1972 18,265 14,212 32,477 7,650 24,917

1973 20,034 14,920 34,954 9,278 25,676

1974 17,131 10,890 28,021 9,989 18,032

1975 15,019 10,052 25,071 9,552 15,519

1976 12,530 8,528 21,058 7,250 13,808

1977 11,199 8,001 19,200 6,770 12,430

1978 9,949 6,899 16,148 5,073 11,775

1979 8,969 6,055 15,054 5,870 9,154

1980 7,603 6,628 14,231 5,580 8,651

1981 8,235 6,888 15,123 5,634 9,489

1982 8,301 7,833 16,144 5,789 10,345

1983 8,199 6,729 14,928 4,922 10,006

1984 8,360 6,639 14,999 5,041 9,958

1985 8,477 7,014 15,491 5,522 9,969

1986 8,141 8,010 16,151 6,099 10,052

1987 7,165 8,710 15,875 5,962 9,913

1988 7,171 8,916 16,087 6,199 9,888

1989 6,843 9,021 15,864 6,274 9,590

1990 5,866 9,211 15,077 6,088 9,009

1991 5,224 9,442 14,666 6,042 8,624

1992 5,226 9,702 14,928 6,176 8,752

1993 5,116 8,257 13,373 5,902 7,471

1994 4,723 7,312 12,035 5,797 6,238

1995 4,894 6,963 11,857 5,544 6,313

1996 4,925 6,499 11,424 5,624 5,800

1997 4,934 5,866 10,800 5,470 5,330

Source: Savesky 2001

Companion Animal Demographics in the United States: A Historical Perspective 17 Table 9a Trends in New Jersey Dog Shelter Intakes and Euthanasia

Returned to Dead on Euth. Year Impounded Care-giver Adopted Euth. Arrival Rate (percent)

1984 95,813 14,372 19,360 47,703 7,000 53.7

1985 80,071 13,067 17,605 40,757 7,455 56.1

1986 75,784 12,604 20,365 37,115 7,669 54.5

1987 81,876 13,717 22,597 40,400 7,051 54.0

1988 72,887 12,560 21,917 34,175 6,110 51.2

1989 73,974 12,422 21,350 33,408 5,552 48.8

1990 66,870 12,426 21,273 28,937 5,126 46.9

1991 60,901 11,914 21,210 22,379 4,940 40.0

1992 56,760 13,290 20,030 20,131 3,641 37.9

1993 55,480 12,765 18,924 18,502 3,739 35.8

1994 52,092 13,375 19,372 15,188 3,426 31.2

1995 48,954 12,565 17,951 14,880 3,021 32.4

1996 52,791 13,178 17,489 17,429 2,993 35.0

1997 50,779 13,991 19,328 15,294 2,902 31.9

Note: The euthanasia rate is calculated by dividing the total euthanized by the total impounded less those who are dead on arrival. Source: Data collated and provided by G. Patronek, from annual reports from C. Campbell (New Jersey Health Department) in 1998.

Tables 9a, 9b, and 9c provide data in New Jersey. Pet surveys indicate mals to animal shelters not as an iso- from New Jersey on dog and cat that these households probably lated event but as one piece of a entries into the state shelters, and on include more than one million dogs dynamic process that is composed of outcomes. (These data were compiled and cats. Thus New Jersey shelters many elements. The concept of a pet by Dr. Gary Patronek of Tufts Univer- impound less than 2.5 percent of the population model began as an esti- sity from materials provided in 1998 dog population per annum (euthaniz- mate of animal populations from the by Colin Campbell of New Jersey.) ing less than 0.75 percent) and 3 per- readily available human population New Jersey had established a program cent of the cat population (euthaniz- data (Schneider and Vaida 1975, Nas- in 1984 to support low-cost steriliza- ing less than 1.5 percent). A sar and Mosier 1980), and subse- tion of pets in needy households, but comparison of these rates with the quently was developed into a popula- the program also required all shelters national shelter euthanasia rates of tion model that could be utilized to to register with the state health 20 percent or more in the early 1970s estimate pet (or dog) populations in department and provide baseline data makes apparent how much progress any community (Nassar, Mosier, and on animal acquisition and disposi- has been made in dealing with pet Williams 1984; Patronek and Rowan tion. As the tables indicate, euthana- homelessness! 1995). The models essentially track sia rates declined from 1984 to 1997, the source and number of animals although rates for cats remained Population Dynamics entering the owned pet population in higher than those for dogs (primarily The next advance during the 1970s in a defined area; what percentage of because the RTC rate is so much utilizing data to define and address them enter the shelter system; and lower for cats than for dogs). There the pet population crisis involved the population’s final disposition. The are approximately 7.8 million people treating the transfer of owned ani- population dynamics model is an living in about 3 million households important development in our under-

18 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Table 9b Trends in New Jersey Cat Shelter Intakes and Euthanasia

Returned to Dead on Euth. Year Impounded Care-giver Adopted Euth. Arrival Rate (percent)

1984 62,747 2,042 11,951 34,863 7,000 62.5

1985 53,788 765 13,292 32,365 7,044 69.2

1986 57,998 1,021 15,728 35,198 7,813 70.1

1987 72,243 1,153 17,690 45,506 8,509 71.4

1988 72,887 993 18,668 42,820 7,347 65.3

1989 75,380 1,190 18,658 45,432 7,542 67.0

1990 74,491 1,117 28,826 44,225 8,524 67.0

1991 70,515 1,446 18,582 39,102 7,462 62.0

1992 67,891 1,524 18,064 41,569 6,392 67.6

1993 63,424 1,517 18,087 34,756 7,381 62.0

1994 66,802 2,133 21,005 36,419 7,256 61.2

1995 64,974 1,202 20,361 33,359 5,831 56.4

1996 66,181 1,411 20,529 35,873 2,993 56.8

1997 60,172 1,394 20,990 31,597 5,389 57.7

Note: The euthanasia rate is calculated by dividing the total euthanized by the total impounded less those who are dead on arrival. Source: Data collated and provided by G. Patronek, from annual reports from C. Campbell (New Jersey Health Department) in 1998. standing of the pet population. Chal- et al. 1998). NCPPSP’s main mission over-represented: in two of the sur- lenges to implementing the model was to be a driving force in centraliz- veys, these shelters accounted for 53 include continued lack of standard- ing and standardizing data collection and 46 percent of the sample respec- ized data in most communities and a for animal shelters. tively. lack of data on stray populations, The group initiated its shelter sur- Overall the surveys reported that especially in regard to cats. vey in 1994. It sent surveys to the 63 percent of animals being handled 4,700 known sheltering agencies and by the participating shelters were The National Council requested a variety of data, including euthanized (71 percent of cats and 56 the number of dogs and cats handled, percent of dogs). Moreover dogs were on Pet Population returned to their caregiver, adopted, returned to their caregivers at signif- Study and Policy and euthanized. The survey was icantly higher rates than cats (16 per- In 1993 the National Council on Pet repeated three more times. Unfortu- cent versus 2 percent), while adop- Population Study and Policy (NCPP- nately it experienced a relatively low tion rates were approximately 25 SP) was established as a coalition of response rate (approximately 23 per- percent for both species (Zawistowski interest groups with the goal of gath- cent, or 1,100 shelters and other et al. 1998). These findings were sim- ering and analyzing reliable data in organizations) and a limited overlap ilar to those of other studies. order to characterize the number, ori- of respondents (Zawistowski et al. After the 1996 shelter survey, the gin, and disposition of owned dogs 1998). (Reportedly only 396 shelters NCPPSP focused its efforts on imple- and cats in the United States and to responded in all four surveys, M. Arm- menting a regional shelter relinquish- make recommendations on program strong, personal communication, n.d. ment study, a research project and policy development to address 2003.) The authors of this chapter designed to explore pet and house- the pet population crisis (Zawistowski believe that municipal shelters were holder characteristics of cases where

Companion Animal Demographics in the United States: A Historical Perspective 19 were mixed breed (Patronek, Glick- 1995, 36 percent were adopted, 34 Table 9c man, and Moyer 1995). Results from percent were euthanized, and 20 per- Trends in the NCPPSP’s regional shelter study cent were returned to their care-giv- showed that most dogs and cats sur- ers (1996). In addition a recent New Jersey rendered to shelters were between review of shelter demographic data Euthanasia Rates five months and three years of age. reportedly collected from every “ma- Sixty-eight percent of dogs and 93 jor” (major not defined) shelter in Euth. percent of cats were mixed breed the country calculated a national Year Impounded Rate (%) (Salman et al. 1998). In the same euthanasia estimate of 4.4 million, study, animals relinquished by their the lowest estimate ever recorded. 1984 158,560 57.1 care-givers were more likely to be According to this review, which in- 1985 133,859 61.3 intact, younger, and mixed breed cluded an examination of trends over 1986 133,782 61.1 (New et al. 2000). Another study of time, the euthanasia or disposal of 1987 154,119 62.0 186 shelters found that only 13 per- animals in shelters likely peaked at cent of animals entering shelters approximately 23.4 million in 1970; 1988 145,774 58.2 were puppies and kittens, apparently by 1992 the number had dropped to 1989 149,354 57.9 confirming the anecdotes that pup- an estimated 5.7 million. (The ASPCA 1990 141,361 57.3 pies are become rarer in the shelter data provided in Figure 1 indicate 1991 131,416 51.7 population (Wenstrup and Dowid- that shelter euthanasia may have 1992 124,651 53.8 chuk 1999). However few shelters peaked fifty years earlier. However from the Southeast, the Southwest, there were far fewer shelters in the 1993 118,904 49.4 and the Midwest, where puppies are still 1930s–1950s, so each shelter may 1994 118,894 47.7 common, participated in this survey. have had to handle a larger number of 1995 113,928 45.9 Numerous studies have defined stray and homeless animals.) Esti- 1996 118,972 47.2 shelter populations in terms of ani- mates for 1999 and 2000 were 4.5 mals surrendered by their care-givers million and 4.6 million, respectively. 1997 110,951 45.7 versus animals arriving at the shelters The 2001 evaluation concluded that Source: Data collated and provided by G. Patronek, from annual reports from as strays and have identified varia- the lowest rate of shelter euthanasia C. Campbell (New Jersey Health tions in these populations by region was in the Northeast and the highest Department) in 1998. as well as species. One survey found in the South, with significant decreas- that approximately 54 percent of the es in euthanasia rates occurring in animals are relinquished. The survey, shelter population was stray and the Midwest and the Sunbelt (Clifton which involved four regions of the approximately 42 percent was surren- 2002). United States and twelve shelters, dered, with no significant differences Two studies have confirmed that a resulted in a database of thousands of between cats and dogs (Wenstrup and sizable proportion of pet care-givers animals (Salman et al. 1998). It is the Dowidchuk 1999). In contrast unpub- bring their pets to animal shelters to most ambitious and extensive survey lished data from Massachusetts indi- be euthanized. Data from a Pennsylva- of the pet population crisis to date. cated that 73 percent of dogs were nia shelter indicate that 17.2 percent This research effort reflected an surrendered and 27 percent were of care-giver-relinquished animals increasing shift away from focusing stray, while 42 percent of cats were were brought to the shelter for imme- on collecting shelter population data surrendered and 58 percent were diate euthanasia (Patronek, Glick- to a concentration on determining stray (Clancy, Birkholz, and Luke man, and Moyer 1995). The regional the characteristics of animals in shel- 1996). Such differences from one shelter survey (Kass et al. 2001) ters; the characteristics of their previ- region to another reflect the chang- found similar results: of 4,000 ani- ous households; and the circum- ing ecology of stray animals. Many mals surrendered, 24 percent of dogs stances leading to their transition to communities, particularly in the and 17 percent of cats were surren- the shelter. Northeast, report a minimal or nonex- dered for immediate euthanasia. The Several studies have characterized istent stray dog population, while the primary reasons care-givers gave for the shelter animal population in majority of the country is grappling requesting this service included old terms of age, breed, and sterilization with the remaining stray and feral cat age, serious illness, and serious status. In a study conducted at a population (Patronek 1998). behavior problems. The median Pennsylvania shelter, 72.5 percent of Clancy, Birkholz, and Luke found length of care-giving of these animals dogs were one year of age or older that, of 143,456 dogs and cats admit- was ten years (Kass et al. 2001). This and 59 percent of incoming dogs ted to Massachusetts shelters in illustrates a function of the animal

20 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Table 10a Risk factors for Dog Relinquishment: Indiana (odds ratios)

Characteristic OR Characteristic OR

Purchased or adopted 1 Two or more visits per year 1

Received as gift 0.6 One visit per year 2.6

Free from previous care-giver 3.0 Less than one visit per year 6.2

No veterinary visits 40.4

Source: private (cost > $100) 1 Relinquishment age > 5 years 1

Source: private (cost: $31–$100) 3.6 Relinquishment age 3–5 years 4.1

Source: private (cost < $31) 5.0 Relinquishment age 0.5–3 years 9.7

Source: unknown 1.0 Relinquishment age < 0.5 years 18.3

Source: pet store 0.75 Acquisition age < 0.5 years 1

Source: born in home 4.0 Acquisition age 0.5–1 year 1.5

Source: stray 3 Acquisition age: 1–2 years 2.8

Source: shelter 6.1 Acquisition age > 4 years 2.1

Source: Patronek et al. 1996a shelter that has been overlooked— community who had not surrendered community needs to be concerned that of potentially providing a euth- an animal. Tables 10a and 10b outline that dogs acquired from their facili- anasia outlet and support for grieving the major risk factors for cats and ties are more likely to be relinquished pet care-givers. It also demonstrates dogs that were identified in this study and should emphasize the impor- that not all animals handled by shel- (Patronek et al. 1996a, 1996b). tance of pet care-givers establishing ters are potential candidates for The study authors used a measure- strong relationships with a veterinari- adoption and adds another dimension ment called an Odds Ratio (OR) to an (their “other family doctor”). to our understanding of the pet pop- assess what factors might make a dog The OR data for cats is less inter- ulation situation. or cat more likely to be relinquished esting. Having a veterinarian is im- by a care-giver. In developing an OR, portant but not so major a factor as it Risk Factors for a researcher identifies a factor (such is for dogs, and shelter cats are not as not visiting a veterinarian in the more likely to be relinquished than Relinquishment previous year) and then compares the cats obtained from other sources. The Several studies have increased our group of animals who have that char- relinquishment age data are very sim- understanding of some of the charac- acteristic with a group who have a ilar for dogs and cats. teristics of care-giver relinquishment related but different characteristic These data are consistent with both and have identified potential risk fac- (e.g., visiting a veterinarian once a previous and later studies that found tors for relinquishment of pets to ani- year). Usually an odds ratio of greater that surrendered dogs were obtained mal shelters. It is no surprise that than 2 is considered a significant dif- most frequently from family or friends there are differences for dogs and ference. As Table 10a shows, the data at no charge (Arkow and Dow 1984; cats. The first good study of this collected by Patronek et al (1996a) Salman et al. 1998). issue—a case-control study in a com- refute at least one cherished belief The NCPPSP’s Regional Shelter munity in Indiana—compared two (that dogs received as gifts or from Survey identified the top ten reasons groups of pet care-givers: those who pet stores are more likely to be given for relinquishment based on 3,772 had surrendered a pet to an animal up) and confirm a number of others interviews of care-givers who surren- shelter and those representing a ran- (that age is an important factor in dered a pet to the participating shel- dom sample of pet care-givers in the relinquishment of dogs). The shelter ters. While these studies found many

Companion Animal Demographics in the United States: A Historical Perspective 21 Table 10b Risk Factors for Cat Relinquishment: Indiana (odds ratios)

Characteristic OR Characteristic OR

Purchased or adopted 1 Two or more veterinary visits per year 1

Received as gift 0.7 One veterinary visit per year 0.6

Free from previous care-giver 2.0 Less than one veterinary visit per year 0.9

No veterinary visits 3.1

Source: private breeder or care-giver 1 Relinquishment age > 5 yrs 1

Source: pet store 1.2 Relinquishment age 3–5 years 4.3

Source: born in home 0.9 Relinquishment age 0.5–3 years 7.3

Source: stray 0.6 Relinquishment age < 0.5 years 14.2

Source: shelter 0.7

Source: Patronek et al. 1996b similarities between dogs and cats, three classes: health/personal issues would have been taken to the shelter there are a few differences (Table 11). (relating to the care-giver), behav- or abandoned. In other words the peo- The most common reasons for relin- ioral (relating to the pet), and hous- ple started off as reluctant care- quishment include animal-centered ing. Health/personal issues repre- givers. These care-givers then tolerat- issues, such as behavior and pet ill- sented the leading class of surrender ed the situation with the new animal ness, as well as care-giver-centered for cats and the third most significant for a varying period of time (up to a issues, such as landlord issues and class for dogs (after behavioral and year) and put off relinquishment of personal problems (Salman et al. housing, respectively). The top three the pet because such an action was 1998). reasons for surrender in the perceived as a negative one that was In the regional shelter survey, mov- health/personal issues category for likely to result in euthanasia. One ing was the primary reason for sur- cats were a family member’s allergy other important finding of this study render of dogs and the number three to cats, care-giver personal problems, was that most of the relinquishers reason for surrender of cats. Most and a new baby in the house. An had other animals that were not care-givers in this category were in examination of the same category for being surrendered! This speaks to the 25–39 age range and had lived dogs revealed that lack of time, care- the importance of developing early with their pets for less than two years, giver personal problems, and allergies intervention strategies that identify perhaps suggesting that attachment were the most common (Scarlett et and support “at-risk” pet relation- or bonding factors may play a role in al. 1999). ships (DiGiacomo, Arluke, and these surrenders. Additionally 40.8 The regional shelter survey Patronek 1998). percent of care-givers in this category revealed that many care-givers sur- noted that they were unable to find veyed gave several different reasons suitable new housing that would for surrender, indicating that decid- Shelters and accommodate their pets, suggesting ing to surrender a pet is a complex, that working with landlords and hous- multifaceted process. Indeed an Data Collection ing authorities may be a helpful long- ethnographic study of care-givers who term strategy for care-givers in this had relinquished their pets found and Analysis group. Some relinquishers acknowl- that a combination of challenges in Clearly there was a call for more edged that other factors may have the pet care-giver relationship com- attention to pet population and ani- played a role in their decision to sur- bined with lifestyle pressures ulti- mal shelter demographics in the render their pets when moving, such mately led to the relinquishment of 1990s, but it is unclear what impact as behavior issues (New et al. 1999). the pet. In most cases the care-giver this has had in terms of changing The study also grouped the 71 dis- had accepted responsibility for the policies and procedures of animal tinct reasons for relinquishment into animal because otherwise he or she shelters. The focus of animal shelters

22 The State of the Animals II: 2003 has always been, and continues to be, direct animal care, and accomplish- Table 11 ments relating to saving animals’ Top Ten Reasons Nationally lives and promoting adoption contin- ue to be the emphasis of direct mail for Pet Relinquishment campaigns and other fundraising efforts. Most shelters are short-staffed Dogs Cats and operate under stressful condi- Moving Too many in house tions and with limited budgets. Under such circumstances it is understand- Landlord issues Allergies able that they may have difficulty rec- Cost of pet maintenance Moving ognizing the value of numbers and statistics, especially when immediate No time for pet Cost of pet maintenance problems are clamoring (literally) for attention. Inadequate facilities Landlord issues A relatively small proportion of the Too many pets at home No homes for littermates animal sheltering community attends organized educational events regular- Pet illness House soiling ly. Few subscribe to the academic Personal problems Personal problems journals in which much of this data is published. However Animal People Biting Inadequate facilities regularly reports on shelter animal No homes for littermates Doesn’t get along with other pets handling (Clifton 2002), Animal Shel- tering Magazine now includes more Source: Kass et al. 2001 data in its pages, and the NCPPSP website (which includes copies of adapted to meet a shelter’s specific for healthy shelter dogs and cats NCPPSP studies) enjoys a healthy needs. (The ASPCA has taken over across the country,” and to “save the traffic. Therefore it is likely that the responsibility for PetWhere and will sick and injured pets in animal shel- latest data is reaching a greater, but continue to distribute it free of ters” (Maddie’s Fund 2002). Lastly still small, proportion of the animal charge.) donors are increasingly asking for sta- sheltering community. A decreasing In addition a trend toward collabo- tistical data, in addition to informa- number of facilities lack basic ration in the sheltering community tion regarding an organization’s mis- computer technology that would began to develop in the 1980s. This sion and programs, in order to make facilitate the collection of data. Re- trend has increased awareness of the donation decisions. cent attempts at increasing organiza- relevance of data collection and the While sterilization programs have tion awareness of the importance of issue of facilitating data sharing. Col- remained a priority for many shelter data collection have focused on iden- laboration is occurring among shel- organizations, the late 1990s saw a tifying what data shelters need to col- ters within a community area (e.g., shift in organizational approach and lect. Future efforts need to provide the Washington, D.C., Denver, and program development. Due in part to guidance regarding data analysis San Francisco regions), and between the new data on care-giver relinquish- (Wenstrup and Dowidchuk 1999). shelters and other animal protection ment and behavior issues (and proba- Shelters that do perform analysis organizations, educational institu- bly in part to the declining number of should be encouraged to publish their tions, corporations, and the business animals entering shelters, which data, so that the information is avail- sector. An increasing number of foun- potentially frees up resources for new able to other shelters and can serve as dations and grant programs are fund- initiatives), more shelters have devot- a model (Patronek and Zawistowski ing companion animal welfare pro- ed time and money to developing 2002). jects. Many of these foundations are behavior programs. These programs To make it easier for shelters to requiring relevant, reliable, and con- range from largely informal approach- develop data management protocols, sistent data in order to evaluate grant es, in which potential adopters are several software packages for animal applicants and assess the success of educated about behavior issues and shelters have come on the market, funded projects (personal communi- receive some training on site, to including Chameleon and PetWhere. cation, N. DiGiacomo, n.d. 2002). ambitious, structured programs tar- Some packages are offered free of Maddie’s Fund, a well-endowed foun- geted to current pet care-givers as charge to shelters. Generally such dation, was founded in 1999 specifi- well as the shelter dog population. software allows for the collection of cally to fund collaborative projects Structured programs include behav- basic admission and disposition data that seek to “guarantee loving homes ior help lines, formal classes, and the and also allows the databases to be

Companion Animal Demographics in the United States: A Historical Perspective 23 work of on-staff trainers and behav- the public, despite the significant the effectiveness of adoption pre- iorists. The HSUS established the Pets companion animal welfare concerns screening systems. Do some adopter for Life National Training Center in sometimes associated with these prescreens produce better outcomes collaboration with Denver Dumb businesses. In contrast she argues (fewer failed adoptions) than others? Friends League in 1999 to provide that, from the public’s perspective, As shelters continue to debate the education and training for shelter the business of “re-homing” animals practicality, usefulness, and ethics of personnel in companion animal has been poorly organized, often inac- various adoption protocols, it would behavior. This project is part of a cessible, and not well understood. appear that only sound data will serve broader HSUS campaign focusing on Many shelters are beginning to to provide solid answers (Patronek developing new ways to strengthen acknowledge the importance of mar- and Zawistowski 2002). pet care-giver relationships. keting techniques by redesigning Adoptions now take place in a vari- their facilities—both the physical ety of venues. “Virtual shelters,” in plant and their policies and proce- which potential adopters can learn Future dures—to make their organizations about available animals, are common- more “user-friendly” and appealing to place, and Petfinder.com is one of the Directions the public. There is growing recogni- 2,000 most-visited websites in the New data on pet populations are tion that shelter animals must be pre- world. A recent study evaluated adop- beginning to move U.S. pet popula- sented in the best possible light in tion success at three locations: a tra- tion policies in new directions. order to attract a greater pool of ditional animal shelter setting, an off- Nonetheless some significant deficits potential adopters. A recent study site adoption site at a pet store continue to slow progress. These that examined predictors of adoption (PETsMART), and a special event include the failure to standardize and versus euthanasia outcomes rein- “adoptathon.” Satisfaction and reten- broaden data collection on such basic forces this view: age, sex, coat color, tion were found to be associated with questions as how many animal shel- and reason for surrender were impor- the pet’s personality, behavior, and ters there are in the United States tant predictors for adoption. Dogs compatibility with the new house- and how many animals are eutha- with brindle or black coats were least hold. The level of satisfaction with the nized each year. likely to be adopted, while cats with adoption experience was not related Brestrup (1997) and Fennell white, color point, or gray coats were to adoption setting. The survey iden- (1999) have challenged some of the more likely to be adopted than their tified some significant and troubling prevailing views about pet population brown or black counterparts (Lepper, potential challenges to adoption fol- policies. Fennell, for example, Kass, and Hart 2002). One policy low-up: a full 58 percent of adopters approaches the issue from the per- application of these data would be the could not be reached two weeks after spective of a free market and suggests development of creative means to adoption, and 6 percent of adopters that discounting the consumer bring positive attention to animals declined to provide any information aspects of pet care-giving may be such as the brown and black cats who (Neidhart and Boyd 2002). The low shortsighted. She observes that new otherwise may be passed over. success of the follow-up may have perspective may be gained by examin- been related to the fact that the adop- ing the application of the laws of sup- New Research tion centers were not traditional, ply and demand, and the economic well-established shelters. Anecdotal and cultural forces that govern the Directions reports claim that well-established “production” and destruction of A largely overlooked area of investiga- shelters (e.g., those in Marin County, owned dogs and cats. Fennell argues a tion in pet population and shelter California) have a much better rate of market model would shift the focus demographics is post-adoption follow- reaching and gaining the cooperation from placing blame on prodigal pet up. This investigation would be the of adopters in post-adoption surveys. care-givers to a focus on the charac- logical next phase in long-term reso- A deeper understanding is needed teristics and roots of consumer lution of the pet population crisis. concerning the decisions leading to choice regarding pets. Moreover Little published data exists on failed adoption and euthanasia in the shel- research into what pet care-givers adoption rates, including animals ter, and the potential effect these want may ultimately give animal shel- who are returned to the shelter as decisions have on both shelter opera- ters the tools they need to shift con- well as those who end up in other tions and shelter employees. As sumer demand in their direction. Fen- homes or shelters; on the duration of euthanasia rates continue to fall, a nell notes that the market for puppies the adoptive relationship; on the paradoxical result may be that the and kittens, as represented by the pet short-term and long-term challenges stressful effect of euthanasia on the store and breeding industries, is rela- for the adopter; and on the evaluation employee and the organization (cf. tively orderly, well developed, easily of effective support services. In addi- Arluke and Sanders 1996, Arluke, in accessible, and well understood by tion there is very little information on this volume) increases. It might seem

24 The State of the Animals II: 2003 likely that, as the number of euth- increasingly professional advice and A.N. Rowan, 67–83. Washington, anasias in a shelter falls (see Tables support for pet care-givers in the D.C.: Humane Society Press. 9a, 9b, and 9c), the related stress community. Arluke, A., and C. Sanders. 1996. might also decline. However as Regarding animals. Philadelphia: euthanasia becomes less routine, it is Acknowledgements Temple University Press. also possible that the opposite might Research for this paper was supported Bancroft, R.L. 1974. America’s may- happen. Arluke (this volume) pro- by the Bide-A-Wee Home Association ors and councilmen: Their prob- vides hints that this might be the and funded by the Edith Goode Trust. lems and frustrations. Nations case. The HSUS as of 2003 was sup- Cities 12(Apr): 14–16. porting a euthanasia study through Beck, A.M. 1973. The ecology of stray Bowling Green University and provid- dogs: A study of free-ranging urban ing “Compassion Fatigue” workshops Literature Cited animals. Baltimore: York Press. American Pet Products Manufacturers that included the use of a survey Brestrup, C. 1997. Disposable ani- Association, Inc (APPMA). 2000. instrument to measure both burnout mals: Ending the tragedy of throw- 1999–2000 APPMA national pet and compassion fatigue. Initial away pets. Leander, Tex.: Camino owners survey. Greenwich, Conn.: results indicated that both compas- Bay Books. APPMA. sion fatigue and burnout rates are Clancy, E.A., E. Birkholz, and C.J. ———. 2002. 2001–2002 APPMA very high among shelter employees Luke. 1996. Comprehensive mod- national pet owners survey. Green- (R. Roop, personal communication, els of dog and cat population flows wich, Conn.: APPMA. n.d. 2002). As debate about euthana- in Massachusetts. Unpublished American Veterinary Medical Associa- sia in shelters, and about the mean- master’s thesis. Tufts University tion (AVMA). 1997. U.S. pet owner- ing of the terms adoptable and non- School of Veterinary Medicine. ship and demographics sourcebook. adoptable, continues, Americans Clifton, M. 2002. Latest U.S. data Schaumburg, Ill.: Center for Infor- desperately need some actual data to shows shelter killing down to 4.4 mation Management, AVMA. determine how best to proceed. million a year. Animal People (Sept.) ———. 2002. U.S. pet ownership It also is necessary to go one step 14. and demographics sourcebook. further in exploring regional and DiGiacomo, N., A. Arluke, and G. Schaumburg, Ill.: Center for Infor- species differences. While regional Patronek. 1998. Surrendering pets mation Management, AVMA. differences have been identified and to shelters: The relinquisher’s per- Anonymous. 1978. Pet population acknowledged, these data have not spective. Anthrozoös 11(1): 41–51. control and ovariohysterectomy been utilized to discover the general Djerassi, C., A. Israel, and W. Jochle. clinics: Reaffirmation of 1973 criteria or patterns underlying the 1973. Planned parenthood for statement. Journal of the American differences (Wenstrup and Dowid- pets? Bulletin of the Atomic Scien- Veterinary Medical Association chuk 2001). Such information would tists (Jan): 10–19. 173(11): 1408. enable researchers to get at the root Feldman, B.M. 1974. The problem of ———. 1993. Pet owner survey. causes of the pet population crisis. urban dogs. Science 185: 931. Anthrozoös 6(3): 203–204. The questions to ask are: Why do Fennell, L.A. 1999. Beyond overpopu- ———. 1995. Animal demographics these differences exist? What do they lation: A comment on Zawistowski of Santa Clara County (California). mean? What societal, cultural, and et al. and Salman et al. Journal of Anthrozoös 8(3): 178–179. educational forces drive pet care- Applied Animal Welfare Science ———. 1996. Stray and feral cats. giver choices? In order to discover the 2(3): 217–228. Anthrozoös 9(2/3): 117–119. answers to these questions, humane Humane Society of the United States Arkow, P.S. 1994. A new look at pet societies will need to broaden their (HSUS). 1999. Statement on free- overpopulation. Anthrozoös 7(4): point of reference. Past research has roaming cats. Washington, D.C.: 202–205. demonstrated consistently that ani- HSUS. Arkow, P.S., and S.J. Dow. 1984. The mal shelters are not the most com- Johnson, T.P., T.F. Garrity, and L. Stal- ties that do not bind: A study of the mon source of pet dogs and cats— lones. 1992. Psychometric evalua- human-animal bonds that fail. In and are not the only care-giver option tion of the Lexington Attachment The pet connection, ed. R.K. Ander- for pet relinquishment (Patronek and to Pets Scale (LAPS). Anthrozoös son, B.L. Hart, and L.A. Hart, Zawistowski 2002). Prospective, long- 5(3): 160–175. 348–354. Minneapolis: CENSHARE, term studies of representative pet Kass, P.H., J.C. New Jr., J.M. Scarlett, University of Minnesota. care-giving populations, as well as a and M.D. Salman. 2001. Under- Arluke, A. 2003. The no-kill contro- more visible role for animal shelters standing animal companion sur- versy: Manifest and latent sources in the community, will enable shelters plus in the U.S.: Relinquishment of of tension. In The state of the ani- to become more common choices of nonadoptables to animal shelters mals II: 2003, ed. D.J. Salem and potential care-givers and to provide for euthanasia. Journal of Applied

Companion Animal Demographics in the United States: A Historical Perspective 25 Animal Welfare Science 4(4): J.M. Scarlett, P.H. Kass, and J.M. ment of dogs and cats in 12 select- 237–248. Hutchison. 2000. Shelter relin- ed animal shelters in the U.S. Jour- Lepper, M., P.H. Kass, and L.A. Hart. quishment: Characteristics of shel- nal of Applied Animal Welfare Sci- 2002. Prediction of adoption vs. ter-relinquished animals and their ence 1(3): 207–226. euthanasia among dogs and cats in owners compared with animals and Salman, M.D., J. Hutchison, R. Ruch- a California animal shelter. Journal their owners in U.S. pet-owning Gallie, L. Kogan, J.C. New, Jr., P.H. of Applied Animal Welfare Science households. Journal of Applied Ani- Kass, and J.M. Scarlett. 2000. 5(1): 29–42. mal Welfare Science 3(3): 179–201. Behavioral reasons for relinquish- Maddie’s Fund. 2002. http://www. Patronek, G.J. 1998. Free-roaming ment of dogs and cats to 12 shel- maddies.org. and feral cats—Their impact on ters. Journal of Applied Animal Wel- Manning, A.M., and A.N. Rowan. wildlife and human beings. Journal fare Science 3(2): 93–106. 1992. Companion animal demo- of the American Veterinary Medical Savesky, K. 2001. HSU case study: graphics and sterilization status: Association 212(2): 218–226. The Coastal SPCA. Washington, Results from a survey in four Mass- Patronek, G.J., and A.N. Rowan. D.C.: HSUS. achusetts towns. Anthrozoös 5: 1995. Determining dog and cat Scarlett, J.M., M.D. Salman, J.G. New, 192–201. numbers and population dynamics. Jr., and P.H. Kass. 1999. Reasons for Marx, M.B., and M.L. Furculow. 1969. Anthrozoös 8(4): 199–205. relinquishment of companion ani- What is the dog population? A Patronek, G.J., and S. Zawistowski. mals in U.S. animal shelters: review of surveys in the U.S. 2002. The value of data. Journal of Selected health and personal Archives of Environmental Health Applied Animal Welfare Science issues. Journal of Applied Animal 19: 217–219. 5(3): 171–174. Welfare Science 2(1): 41–57. Massachusetts Society for the Preven- Patronek, G.J., L.T. Glickman, and Schneider, R., and M.L. Vaida. 1975. tion of Cruelty to Animals M.R. Moyer. 1995. Population Survey of canine and feline popula- (MSPCA). 1996. Companion ani- dynamics and the risk of euthanasia tions: Alameda and Contra Costa mal populations in Massachusetts. for dogs in an animal shelter. counties, California, 1970. Journal A survey conducted for the MSPCA Anthrozoös 8(1): 31–43. of the American Veterinary Medical by Dorr Research Corporation. Patronek, G.J., L.T. Glickman, A.M. Association 166: 481–486. October. Beck, G.P. McCabe, and C. Ecker. Staats, S., D. Miller, M.J. Carnot, K. Nassar, R., and J.E. Mosier. 1980. 1996a. Risk factors for relinquish- Rada, and J. Turnes. 1996. The Canine population dynamics: A ment of dogs to an animal shelter. Miller-Rada commitment to pets study of the Manhattan, Kansas, Journal of the American Veterinary scale. Anthrozoös 9(2/3): 88–94. canine population. American Jour- Medical Association 209(3): Wenstrup, J., and A. Dowidchuk. nal of Veterinary Research 41: 572–581. 1999. Pet overpopulation: Data and 1798–1803. ———. 1996b. Risk factors for relin- measurement issues in shelters. Nassar, R., J.E. Mosier, and L.W. quishment of cats to an animal Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Williams. 1984. Study of the feline shelter. Journal of the American Vet- Science 2(4): 303–319. and canine populations in the erinary Medical Association Zawistowski, S., J. Morris, M.D. greater Las Vegas area. American 209(3): 582–588. Salman, and R. Ruch-Gallie. 1998. Journal of Veterinary Research 45: Rowan, A.N. 1992a. Shelters and pet Population dynamics, overpopula- 282–287. overpopulation: A statistical black tion, and the welfare of companion Neidhart, L., and R. Boyd. 2002. hole. Anthrozoös 5(3): 140–143. animals: New insights on old and Companion animal adoption study. ———. 1992b. Companion animal new data. Journal of Applied Ani- Journal of Applied Animal Welfare demographics and unwanted ani- mal Welfare Science 1(3): 193–206. Science 5(3): 175–192. mals in the U.S. Anthrozoös 5(4): New, Jr., J.C., M.D. Salman, J.M. Scar- 222–225. lett, P.H. Kass, J.A. Vaughn, S. Rowan, A.N., and J. Williams. 1987. Scherr, and W.J. Kelch. 1999. Mov- The success of companion animal ing: Characteristics of dogs and management programs: A review. cats and those relinquishing them Anthrozoös 1(2): 110–122. to 12 U.S. animal shelters. Journal Salman, M.D., J.G. New, Jr., J.M. Scar- of Applied Animal Welfare Science lett, P.H. Kass, R. Ruch-Gallie, and 2(2): 83–96. S. Hetts. 1998. Human and animal New Jr., J.C., M.D. Salman, M. King, factors related to the relinquish-

26 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 3CHAPTER

Bernard Unti and Bill DeRosa

Introduction rom the earliest years of orga- need to correct children’s cruelty. tance of a virtuous citizenry devoted nized animal protection in “This tendency should be watched in to republican principles of gover- FNorth America, humane educa- them, and, if they incline to any such nance. This made education of the tion—the attempt to inculcate the cruelty, they should be taught the boy especially critical, since as a man kindness-to-animals ethic through contrary usage,” Locke wrote. “For he would assume authority over fami- formal or informal instruction of chil- the custom of tormenting and killing ly, chattel, property, and social insti- dren—has been cast as a fruitful other animals will, by degrees, harden tutions. Responsibility for educating response to the challenge of reducing their hearts even toward men; and the child for his leadership role rested the abuse and neglect of animals. Yet, they who delight in the suffering and with women, who were assumed to be almost 140 years after the move- destruction of inferior creatures, will the repositories of gentle virtue, com- ment’s formation, humane education not be apt to be very compassionate passionate feeling, and devotion— remains largely the province of local or benign to those of their own kind” buffers against the heartless struggle societies for the prevention of cruelty (Locke 1989). of the masculine public sphere. and their educational divisions—if Over time Locke’s insight raised Humane education provided one they have such divisions. Efforts to interest in the beneficial moral effect means of insulating boys against the institutionalize the teaching of of childhood instruction favoring the tyrannical tendencies that might humane treatment of animals within kindly treatment of animals. Growing undermine civic life were they to go the larger framework of the American comprehension of the importance of unchecked. Animals were nicely suit- educational establishment have had childhood experience and its impact ed for instruction that impressed only limited success. Moreover, on youthful character sustained a upon the child their helplessness and knowledge, understanding, and robust transatlantic publishing indus- dependence upon him and his consid- empirical measures of the impact of try devoted to the production of liter- erable power over them (Kerber humane education remain limited. In ature for children. In North America 1980; Grier 1999; Unti 2002). many respects humane education is the first juvenile works infused with The presence of the kindness-to- best seen as an arena of untapped the humane didactic began to appear animals ethic in antebellum child- potential rather than one of unful- in the late 1790s and early 1800s. The hood experience had still broader filled promise. earliest were reprints or excerpts of implications for the process of class English titles, but the genre quickly formation in North America. From gained important American enthusi- the 1820s onward, sympathy with The Origins of asts, including Lydia Maria Child and domestic animals, gradually encoded Harriet Beecher Stowe (Pickering in education lessons for children, the Kindness-to- 1981; Unti 2002). became an important means of incul- One explanation for the spread of cating such standards of bourgeois Animals Ethic the kindness-to-animals ethic lies in gentility as self-discipline, Christian Appreciation for the value of cultivat- its consonance with the republican sentiment, empathy, and moral sensi- ing kindness to animals in children gender ideology of the post-revolu- tivity. Moreover, as a household com- flowed directly from John Locke’s tionary United States. Early American panion, a domestic animal could observations on the subject. Although society assumed a set of paternalistic serve as a convenient real life medi- others had made the point previously, relationships both within and outside um for the practice and expression of in 1693 Locke offered the most the family, emphasizing the impor- compassionate feelings. Merciful prominent early statement of the

27 regard for animals became one hall- cruelty. Although many advocates cation they would push young citizens mark of a developing middle-class cul- adopted this approach, George T. toward what one reformer called the ture rooted in Protestant evangelical Angell of the Massachusetts Society “civilized life” of order, self-discipline, piety (Grier 1999). for the Prevention of Cruelty to Ani- civic loyalty, and respect for private In addition to their sociocultural mals (MSPCA) stood at its forefront. property. Between 1860 and 1920, the utility for instilling and enacting the Under Angell’s leadership, the common school movement, expand- principles of kindness and compas- MSPCA and its sister organization, ing its reach to include kindergarten, sion, the presence of animals in chil- the American Humane Education elementary, and secondary levels, dren’s literature fulfilled other didac- Society (AHES), provided both the became the dominant tradition in tic functions in nineteenth-century inspiration and the resources for American education. During the same domestic ideology. Narratives of ani- humane education, which became period, compulsory attendance re- mal life offered idealized conceptions central to the coalescence of a na- quirements—rare before the Civil of middle-class family relationships tional animal protection movement War—became universal, with Missis- and served as morality tales for during the last quarter of the nine- sippi the one exception (Butts and human domestic relations. By their teenth century (Angell n.d.). Cremin 1953; Cremin 1969). example the animal heroes of these Like the kindness-to-animals ethic Mann recognized the value of hu- narratives served to reinforce cher- itself, enthusiasm for humane educa- mane instruction, noting that ished norms of conduct and behavior tion of children within organized sys- the good man grows in virtue, and (Grier 1999). tems of education predated the anti- the bad man grows in sin....From Over time such functions helped to cruelty societies, coinciding with the the youthful benevolence that consolidate the place of animals in emergence of the common school rejoices to see an animal happy, the emotional framework of middle- movement. The massive influx of one grows up into a world-wide class domestic life. By the 1850s the immigrants in the 1830s and 1840s benefactor, into the healer of dis- kindness-to-animals ethic was a staple led some educators to envision the eases, the restorer of sight to the of juvenile literature as well as a fix- school as a central instrument of blind, the giver of a tongue to the ture of many middle-class homes. A assimilation, guiding immigrant chil- dumb, the founder of hospit- generation before the advent of orga- dren away from the “backward” cul- als....Another grows from cruel- nized animal protection in America, tures of their parents. Horace Mann ty to animals, to being a kidnap- the humane didactic was an estab- (1796–1859), universal schooling’s per, and enslaver, and seller of lished instrument of childhood social- best-known proponent, based his edu- men, women, and children. ization (Grier 1999; Unti 2002). cational philosophy on unlimited (Mann 1861) faith in the perfectibility of human Over time, humane values were beings and their institutions. His con- incorporated into formal systems of The Era of viction that the public school could education, including those inspired be the answer to all of the Republic’s by the object-teaching method associ- Organized problems had roots in the deepest of ated with the State Normal School at American traditions, including Jeffer- Oswego, New York, and its president, Animal sonian republicanism, Christian Edward A. Sheldon (1823–1897) moralism, and Emersonian idealism. (Sheldon 1862). Protection As Mann conceived the common Angell, influenced by Mann, After the anti-cruelty societies school, it would be a guarantor of stressed humane education’s utility formed in the late 1860s, humane social order that reduced the destruc- for ensuring public order, suppressing education became a vital objective of tive potential of class, political, or anarchy and radicalism, smoothing a burgeoning social movement specif- sectarian difference. This was not an relations between the classes, and re- ically devoted to the welfare of ani- unproblematic or unchallenged view, ducing crime. Humane education mals. In the earliest stages of anti- of course, and popular education was would be the solution to social unrest cruelty work, humane education a subject of intense debate (Cremin and revolutionary politics, he be- referred broadly to the instruction of 1969; Button and Provenzo 1983). lieved, and a valuable means for both adults and children. As the lim- By 1860 Mann’s ideals had reached socializing the young, especially the its of law enforcement-centered fruition, with public schools operating offspring of the lower classes. Angell approaches became clear, animal pro- in a majority of the states. Although also appreciated the significance of tectionists embraced early instruc- their philosophies varied, supporters the public school system as a forum tion in kindliness as a means of reduc- of the common schools hoped to for socialization in an increasingly ing adult crimes and prosecutions. improve children’s character by incul- secular society. He told the annual Accordingly they shifted their empha- cating morality and citizenship and to meeting of the American Humane sis to the education of children as a facilitate social mobility by promoting Association (AHA) in 1885 that “the long-term response to the spread of talent and hard effort. Through edu- public school teachers have in the

28 The State of the Animals II: 2003 first fortnight of each school year, inspire a canine analogue, advertised its “Do Everything” phase under about four times as many children, a contest for the purpose. The win- Frances Willard (Unti 2002). and have them more hours, than the ning entry was Beautiful Joe, by Mar- Sunday school teachers do during the garet Marshall Saunders of Nova Sco- whole year.” Humane education pro- tia. Later, a spate of autobiographical The vided a means of spreading the word works—written by a host of maltreat- that could be adapted easily by other ed animals—appeared, and the ani- Compulsory advocates, especially women, in what- mal autobiography became a staple of ever region or situation they might be humane literature. The other books Humane active. It did not require substantial in the AHES series anchored by Black funds, and anyone able and willing to Beauty—Our Goldmine at Hollyhurst Education work with children in the schools or (1893), The Strike at Shane’s (1893), Movement elsewhere could participate (Unti Four Months in New Hampshire The first discussion of compulsory 2002). (1894), and For Pity’s Sake (1897)— humane education occurred in Mass- Angell’s enthusiasm for humane were mainstays of the field well into achusetts in the 1880s, and by 1886 education helped to make it one of the twentieth century. The books, George Angell had helped to secure a the most important elements of ani- along with cash awards, medallions, humane instruction mandate as part mal protection work in the Gilded badges, and rewards of merit, were of compliance with an extant statute Age and the Progressive Era. The distributed in schools in recognition requiring “the teaching of humanity, MSPCA directed tens of thousands of of good behavior, recitations, essays, universal benevolence, etc.” By the dollars toward the production and dis- acts of kindness, and other attain- early 1900s, the notion of a national tribution of humane education litera- ments (Sewell 1890; Anonymous campaign for compulsory humane ture, making it the preeminent 1893; Bray 1893; Saunders 1893; education began to gather momen- source of such materials in the Barrows 1894; Carter 1897; Unti tum. In 1905 William O. Stillman of nation. It also invested time, effort, 2002). AHA and professional educator Stella and funds toward the formation of In the post-Civil War period, the for- H. Preston formed the New York Bands of Mercy. The English temper- mation of character became “a new Humane Education Committee to ance movement’s Bands of Hope, social religion and the dynamic for advance a state requirement. In that which rallied children against alcohol social change,” especially for femi- same year, both Oklahoma and Penn- consumption and related evils, pro- nists and moral reformers. It was sylvania passed state laws providing vided the model. Band of Mercy mem- believed that the properly instructed for moral and humane education. bers pledged to “be kind to all harm- child could resist temptation and The Oklahoma legislation required less living creatures and try to protect internalize a morality consistent with humane instruction as part of the them from cruel usage.” Angell and middle-class ideals of social purity moral education of future citizens. Thomas Timmins, a minister who had (Pivar 1973). Such preoccupation Sponsors wanted educators assisted with the development of with youthful virtue provided humane to teach morality in the broadest Bands of Mercy in his native England, advocates with both rationale and meaning of the word, for the pur- introduced the concept to the United wider opportunities. The promotion pose of elevating and refining the States in 1882. Timmins worked to of humane education as an antidote character of school children... form bands, while Angell strove to to depraved character and a panacea that they may know how to con- raise money and awareness (Timmins for numerous social ills brought ani- duct themselves as social beings 1883). In 1889 this initiative coa- mal protection into close alignment in relation to each other...and lesced as AHES. with other reform movements of the thereby lessen wrong-doing and From the 1870s onward, Angell had era. The movements for temperance, crime. been on the lookout for suitable liter- child protection, and humane treat- The law mandated that one half hour ature to guide the young toward the ment of animals, in particular, all each week be devoted to teaching values of kindness. He found his ideal reflected deep concerns about the “kindness to and humane treatment vehicle in Black Beauty, the novel dic- ramifications of cruelty and violence and protection of dumb animals and tated by a dying British invalid, Anna for individuals, the family, and the birds; their lives, habits and useful- Sewell, and first published in 1878. In social order. Each cause addressed ness, and the important part they are 1890 Angell circumvented copyright issues that straddled the line between intended to fulfil in the economy of laws and brought out the first Ameri- private and public spheres. Humane nature” (Unti 2002). can edition under the auspices of education work received an especially In 1909 the compulsory humane AHES. In just two years, more than significant boost in the 1890s from education movement achieved its one million copies were in circula- the creation of the Department of most important benchmark—the pas- tion. Black Beauty cast a long shadow Mercy as a division of the Women’s sage of legislation in Illinois that over the field, and Angell, wishing to Christian Temperance Union during

Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 29 included sanctions for noncompli- kindness to animals. Many humane late 1930s that the law in her state ance and provisions for instruction in periodicals included selections for was “unevenly observed,” its enforce- teacher-training schools. In Novem- children, and some of these found ment usually contingent on “some ber 1915 AHA adopted a resolution their way into published works superintendent, principal, or teacher favoring establishment of compulsory marked for use by Bands of Mercy with a kind heart, who personally has humane education in every state, (Firth 1883; Timmins 1883). In the compelled action” (Shultz 1924; selecting the 1909 Illinois law as its 1890s, however, the first manuals and Krows 1938). model. However, of the twenty states textbooks with systematic humane that had humane education require- lesson plans, question and answer ments in place by 1920, only two oth- sets, and related offerings began to The Longevity ers—New York and Oklahoma—fol- appear. In 1902 AHA formed a com- lowed the Illinois model in providing mittee to promote the publication of and Impact sanctions for non-compliance. In New textbooks that inculcated humane York compliance was tied to public ideals and to draw up guidelines for of the Bands funds, and the commissioner of edu- publishers of children’s textbooks. By cation was directed to publicize the 1930 about a dozen humane educa- of Mercy requirement (Unti 2002). tion titles had appeared (Unti 2002). For years, Our Dumb Animals (the The emergence of the professional Here and there, progress in institu- MSPCA’s monthly magazine) report- humane educator was a natural out- tionalizing humane education ed extensively on the formation of growth of the compulsory humane ensued. In Colorado the State Teach- Bands of Mercy. However, such education movement. The American ers College adopted a course of study reports were better reflections of Society for the Prevention of Cruelty in ethical and humane education that speaking engagements than of actual to Animals (ASPCA) created a was directed by the state’s Bureau of clubs or groups that went on to con- humane education department in Child and Animal Protection. For a tinuous activity. Referring to the 1916. The stated goal of the division time, humane advocates made efforts “sixty thousand branches of our was “not to do the humane education to canvass the meetings of the American Bands of Mercy” in 1905, work in our schools, so much as to National Education Association George Angell wrote, “What does this stimulate the work of the schools (NEA), and it seems that animal pro- mean? It means that over sixty thou- themselves.” By the beginning of the tectionists were successful in their sand audiences have been addressed academic year in autumn 1921, the outreach to national and regional on kindness both to human beings ASPCA was promoting essay contests teaching organizations, as well as to and the lower animals” (in Unti 2002, within the school system. That sum- school system administrators. In 588). Some years later AHES claimed mer, the humane education depart- 1924 the NEA president endorsed that more than 103,000 bands had ment cooperated with four Lower humane education at the annual formed between 1882 and 1916. In East Side school districts in New York meeting of AHA (Unti 2002). 1922 Angell’s successor, Francis Row- City to measure the effectiveness of Despite such progress, the push for ley, estimated that in forty years of humane propaganda with the chil- compulsory humane instruction was activity, the Bands of Mercy had dren of the foreign-born. The activity not necessarily instrumental in ensur- enrolled more than 4 million children the ASPCA chose to encourage was ing access or influence within the (Unti 2002). the rounding up of unwanted strays. schools. The law was frequently a While admitting their positive During 1922 the department estimat- dead letter in those states where it influence, social scientist William ed that it had reached 300 New York was approved. Hostile and indifferent Shultz underscored the “transitory City schools in the course of its work. superintendents and teachers could character” of the bands. Where “no Preston estimated that, in the sum- ignore the statutes with little fear of attempt is made to encourage them, mer of 1923, New York schoolchildren recrimination, and effective texts and they soon dissolve, leaving little or no brought in more than 28,000 small materials were not always readily effect upon the children’s charac- animals from the streets. As an available. Chicago, with its tradition ters.” AHA’s William Stillman conced- instrument of character develop- of progressive experimentation in ed that the bands “were not as care- ment, the kindness ethic nicely education, promised to be one place fully looked after or as rigorously served the goal of assimilation by in which humane education might followed up as they might be.” Rowley exposing immigrant children to nor- gain a significant foothold. But by believed that, in many cases, interest mative values and expectations 1923 advocates were casting doubt was sustained through the course of (Shultz 1924; Unti 2002). on the success of the movement for one school year, and that in succes- Throughout most of the nineteenth humane education even in Illinois. On sive years new bands would form at century, humane educators relied on the basis of her own experience in a the instigation of teachers or humane eclectic anthologies and an array of small town outside New York City, a educators who visited the schools didactic stories and novels devoted to New York reformer concluded in the again. In some cases, the bands

30 The State of the Animals II: 2003 enjoyed great longevity (Shultz 1924; ing” of American youth. Rowley met cation, university president Nicholas Unti 2002). the matter straight on in an editorial, Murray Butler used it to support a In fact under Rowley’s leadership writing: faculty position in social legislation. AHES launched an ambitious effort to Should anyone imagine that The funds disappeared into Colum- hold the bands together by maintain- humane education means a gen- bia’s general accounts and, with the ing humane educators in the field. eration of boys and girls with all exception of several historical stud- None of the organizational initiatives iron sapped from their blood, a ies, no progress toward the goal of the of the early twentieth century generation of cowards and crav- donor was realized (Unti 2002). matched the accomplishments of ens, he only reveals his total igno- The Columbia initiative was the AHES in building and sustaining a rance of what humane education most significant missed opportunity cadre of humane missionaries during is. The spirit of chivalry toward all in the history of humane education. the period from 1910 to 1925. Edu- the weak and defenseless, the Had the gift been allocated different- cational outreach to the schools was hatred of injustice and cruelty. . . ly, it might have supported the review especially robust in the pre-World War will make of the citizen, should and validation of teaching methods I years. the time demand it, a far better and content; the resolution of differ- The success of the AHES initiatives patriot and soldier than the self- ences between humane education, depended heavily on its field repre- ish, bullying pugnacious spirit nature study, and science education; sentatives, at least some of whom that often proclaims not a possi- the development of a training pro- were paid (Unti 2002). The field rep- ble hero, but only an arrant cow- gram for humane education special- resentatives were armed with a broad ard. (in Unti 2002, 590) ists; or the institutionalization of the selection of humane education mate- In any case, once America entered kindness-to-animals ethic in the cur- rials, including novels such as Black the conflict, war animal relief filtered riculum. However, the bias of Butler Beauty. By 1913 AHES was the straight into Band of Mercy work and and the professors he consulted made world’s largest publisher and distribu- such other humane initiatives as Be it hard for them to take seriously such tor of humane literature by far. Our Kind to Animals Week. The message academic investigations of humane Dumb Animals enjoyed a monthly cir- of universal peace through humane education (Unti 2002). culation of 60,000. In December education was subordinated to patri- At least a few researchers in the 1916 931 new bands were reported, otic imperatives. The movement’s pre-World War II era believed that the largest figure ever for a one- most vital activity—its outreach to humane education was a proper sub- month period, although one third of children—was reconfigured dramati- ject for scholarly inquiry. In 1931 these formed in Massachusetts. That cally to serve the interests of Ameri- concern for animals found its way same year AHES estimated that it had can nationalism (Unti 2002). onto the agenda of the Conference of spent more than $100,000 on litera- Educational Associations, whose ture and its distribution since 1882 members came together annually to (Unti 2002). The Failure of discuss educational theory and prac- Once World War I began, the focus tice in Great Britain. That year Susan of many animal protection organiza- Institutionali- Isaacs, chair of the British Psycholog- tions shifted to war concerns. Not ical Society’s Education Section, simply a distraction, however, the war zation spoke about her research concerning threatened humane ideals more fun- It was not the war but the lack of suc- childhood socialization and attitudes damentally as the United States pre- cess in institutionalizing humane concerning animals. Her method, pared for battle. In the years before education that led to its decline dur- applied in a small Cambridge school America joined the war, humanitari- ing the middle decades of the twenti- during the years 1924–1927, permit- ans could point to humane education eth century. Very few of the initiatives ted children the greatest possible as a powerful solution to the world’s launched by humane organizations freedom to pursue their own inter- ills. With the war tearing Europe gained the lasting attention of ests. In her research Isaacs paid spe- apart, American advocates cast it as teacher-training institutions, and cial attention to the conflicting ten- an inoculant against the animosities humane education certainly did not dencies toward cruelty and kindness and prejudices bred by conflict, and become a regular element of teacher to animals that she observed in chil- the guarantor of peace. But the preparation. The fate of a $100,000 dren. She had proposed that educa- wartime focus on preparedness also donation to Columbia University in tors should strive “to make a positive placed on the defensive humanitari- 1907, specifically earmarked for pro- educational use of the child’s impuls- ans who had so closely identified moting humane education, was per- es” so that children could be helped themselves with anti-militarism. haps the most conspicuous setback to reach “a more satisfactory psycho- Humanitarians felt vulnerable to the on this front. Rather than direct the logical solution for their own internal charge that their own educational money toward Teachers College for conflicts.” This method of instruc- program would lead to the “soften- studies and training in humane edu- tion, she asserted, would become “an

Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 31 active influence in the building up of emphasis on humane education sive Era animal protectionists. a positive morality of behavior to- promised to shift the balance of These considerations render the wards animals, going beyond the humane work. As an Our Dumb Ani- success of the campaign for compul- mere negative standard of not being mals editorialist, probably Rowley, sory humane education legislation unkind to them, and expressed in an optimistically predicted, highly ironic. Its clear relationship to eager and intelligent interest in their More and more societies orga- moral instruction and the inculcation life-histories, and a lively sympathy nized for the prevention of cruel- of good citizenship was endorsed in with their doings and happenings” ty to animals will turn to the work state houses all across America. Para- (Isaacs 1930, 166). of humane education. . .as their doxically, however, the determination Isaacs’s special focus was on chil- widest and most important field to see such laws passed was not dren’s exposure to the death of ani- of service. Train the heart of the matched by commensurate effort to mals and on dissection. The children child aright, and the cruelty from see them honored. In general, the she observed “showed greater sympa- which animals suffer will end far cadre of SPCA activists committed to thy with the living animals, and more more quickly than by punishing humane education dwindled, and consistent care, after they had the ignorant and cruel man. (Unti efforts to see its principles enshrined ‘looked inside’ the dead ones, and 2002, 610) in the curriculum of teachers’ insti- fewer lapses into experimental cruel- As it happened humane education tutes and colleges failed (Unti 2002). ty,” Isaacs reported. “In other words, did not become more central to the Ultimately, the difficulty of pene- the impulse to master and destroy work of SPCAs in the years that fol- trating local and regional school sys- was taken up into the aim of under- lowed. By the era of the Depression it tem bureaucracies proved insur- standing. The living animal became had diminished greatly, as the practi- mountable for a movement with much less of an object of power and cal and financial burdens of shelter limited resources and more urgent possession, and much more an inde- and hospital work, animal control concerns and responsibilities. Yet the pendent creature to be learnt about, obligations, and law enforcement cast blame for such failures should not be watched and known for its own sake.” other initiatives, including humane laid simply upon organized animal Isaacs found that the children moved education, to the margins of activity. protection itself; the impact of coun- steadily toward the non-interfering, What survived was the simple lesson tervailing forces was decisive. The observational attitude of many mod- of kindness to pets, carried into the classroom and the educational sys- ern naturalists, and developed a schools by SPCA staff members and tem were the subject of increasing humane outlook and sense of respon- volunteers who continued to enjoy struggles during the twentieth centu- sibility toward their pets and toward access to the earliest grades of ele- ry, and the question of how humans animals in general (Isaacs 1930, mentary school. Changes (such as the ought to encounter and treat animals 165–166). advent of motor vehicles) that elimi- was implicated in several of these. Obviously, these findings, gathered nated from Americans’ daily experi- Humanitarians were not the only ones in one school, could not be consid- ence the abuse of horses and other with an interest in animals. Agricul- ered broadly representative or conclu- working animals rendered obsolete tural societies, industry associations, sive. Nevertheless, the very singulari- much of the earlier practical educa- religionists, and science education ty of the approach taken by Isaacs and tion concerning animal welfare. At groups also fought for a stake in shap- her colleagues makes one thing clear: the same time, the movement’s edu- ing modern American education. fruitful research on children’s psycho- cational focus, normally centered on Many of these interests promoted logical development and on the meth- acts of individual cruelty, failed to consumptive uses of animals that ods by which an attitude of respect touch upon newer and socially sanc- were at odds with humane impera- and interest in animals could be tioned forms of animal use. Both self- tives (Unti 2002). inculcated was a neglected pursuit for censorship and the constraints The fortunes of “nature-study,” a much of the twentieth century. imposed by educational institutions contemporaneous education move- prevented humane education from ment, were very similar to those of reaching into the realm of the new humane education, as both declined The Mid- cruelties—institutionalized uses of in the face of a professionalizing field animals such as animal experimenta- of science instruction. The rise of a Twentieth tion and the mass production of ani- professional science education cadre, mals for food and fur that were well committed to the unification, ratio- Century beyond the experience and influence nalization, and standardization of In the early twentieth century, argu- of most individuals. Undoubtedly, too, American science curricula, crowded ments in favor of increased emphasis the disillusionment wrought by war, out both nature-study and humane on education as distinct from practi- depression, and other events deflated education, incorporating some of cal relief work for animals surfaced the grand claims and expectations their elements but ridding those ele- regularly. If actively pursued, the expressed by Gilded Age and Progres- ments of their romantic notions of

32 The State of the Animals II: 2003 affinity with nature and non-human of humane education. By the 1970s A study conducted by Jaime Olin animals. By the 1930s the term ele- such efforts sparked the formation of (2002), a graduate student at the mentary science had subsumed a separate division of The HSUS, pre- Tufts University Center for Animals nature-study, and humane education decessor of the National Association and Public Policy, provides some as a discrete subject of instruction for Humane and Environmental Edu- answers. Olin surveyed 600 animal was on the wane. As one scholar sug- cation (NAHEE). Founded in 1973 shelters, selected at random from gests, the “abstract rationalism” of NAHEE has become a preeminent approximately 2,800 in existence biology instruction in the higher source for information, research, and nationwide, about the scope and grades and in university courses also analysis in the field of humane educa- nature of their efforts to teach chil- left little room for the empathy-build- tion. dren humane values. The results of ing emphasis of nature-study and her investigation paint a picture of humane education approaches (Pauly humane education as a relatively 2002). The Status Quo widespread enterprise, yet one that The anti-cruelty movement’s over- Today the locus of humane education typically is relegated to side issue sta- all loss of influence and lack of vitali- activity in the United States contin- tus, addressed perfunctorily by most ty in the interwar period also had its ues to be the animal care and control animal care and control organizations effect. Humane education suffered as community, as elementary and sec- and simply ignored by others. much as any area of organized animal ondary schools and colleges of educa- Of the 203 animal care and control protection from the absence of tion have yet to accept and integrate agencies that responded to Olin’s 32- enlightened and energetic leadership, the teaching of most humane con- item questionnaire, 144—71 per- and the loss of a receptive public. By cepts into their curricula. Many ani- cent—were classified as having a World War II, organizations were mal care and control agencies humane education program. Those using badly dated humane education (SPCAs, humane societies, animal respondents reported being involved materials, if any. rescue leagues, and the like) offer in humane education for a median of In some regions viable outreach education programs in some form, ten years, and 42 percent reported programs undertaken by regional working primarily at the municipal or relevant activity for between eleven humane societies survived and county level. Such programs fre- and fifty years (Figure 1). The majori- enjoyed good access to public schools quently involve partnerships with ty of shelters with humane education even during the mid-twentieth centu- schools or other youth-oriented insti- programs claimed reaching between ry decades (Matthewson 1942; Whyte tutions. 100 and 500 children per year, most 1948; Walter 1950; American What methodologies does humane of whom were of elementary school Humane Association 1952). While education employ? What is being age (Figure 2). The vast majority of humane education outreach now taught and how effectively? How sig- respondents—94 percent—indicated tended to focus on the treatment of nificant is the role of youth education that they regard humane education companion animals and the benefits within the animal welfare movement? as either “essential” or “very impor- of keeping pets, it nevertheless rein- forced the simple message of kind- ness to animals as an important stan- dard of individual conduct. In addition, the kindness-to-animals ethic continued to resonate through children’s literature (Oswald 1994) and other cultural media (Cartmill 1993). These influences certainly strengthened decades of effort aimed at promoting personal rectitude in dealings with animals. After the post-World War II revival of organized animal protection (Unti and Rowan 2001), humane education gradually resurfaced as a priority of both national and local groups. In the mid-1960s, The HSUS began to invest serious attention and resources in humane education, collaborating with university researchers to formu- late and test methods and techniques

Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 33 nated by companion animal issues (Figure 4). Olin’s respondents indi- cated that responsible pet ownership accounted for an average of 49 per- cent of their programs’ subject mat- ter, safety around animals for 26 per- 40 cent, and the role of animal shelters 35 for 20 percent. On average, 8 percent 30 of programming was devoted to 25 wildlife issues, and 2 percent to topics related to farm animals. Obviously, 20 this distribution of priority reflects 15 the primacy of direct care and pro- 10 tection of companion animals in the 5 missions and day-to-day activities of 0 animal shelters. In addition, omission from youth education programs of such topics as intensive farming, the use of animals in research, and con- sumptive uses of wildlife may stem from other factors. These include the philosophical orientation of shelter tant” to their overall mission. munity service programs (44 per- administrators and boards of direc- If classroom visits and shelter tours cent), junior volunteer programs (30 tors; sensitivity to local politics; the traditionally have been the educa- percent), after-school activities (23 influence of competing and some- tional methods of choice employed percent), and summer camps (15 times hostile interest groups; the by animal shelters since the mid- percent). Thirty-six percent reported view that such issues do not fall under twentieth century, then it appears serving as a source of curriculum- the purview of animal care and con- from Olin’s investigation that little blended materials for classroom trol agencies; and the reluctance of has changed (Figure 3). Eighty-eight teachers. Children saw live animals in school officials to accept special percent of respondents reported con- 86 percent of humane education pro- interest topics into the curriculum— ducting classroom visits, and 77 per- grams and were allowed to touch an especially those that may be consid- cent included tours of their facilities animal in 73 percent. ered age-inappropriate, inflammato- in their programs. Fewer organiza- The content of humane education ry, or inimical to a community’s tions reported offering youth com- programs at the local level is domi- values, traditions, or economic base. Olin’s investigation also reveals that 88 percent of local animal care and control agencies obtain at least a portion of their youth education materials from outside organizations. Materials were procured most often from national animal protection 100 groups with a history of providing shelter-related services and dissemi- 80 nating youth education resources with a strong emphasis on compan- 60 ion-animal issues: The HSUS, the 40 ASPCA, and AHA. Thirty-five percent of the respondents reported using 20 KIND News, a classroom newspaper published by NAHEE. Sixty-four per- 0 cent said they included their own materials in their programs. If, prima facie, the above data shows humane education to be a vibrant enterprise, the deeper reality is that it remains a peripheral compo-

34 The State of the Animals II: 2003 57 percent of respondents said “media relations”; 51 percent said “adult education”; 33 percent said “animal behavior counseling”; 25 per- cent said “violence prevention”; and 23 percent said “pet therapy.” Although some of those job duties are not unrelated to children, it is clear that youth education, per se, rarely is given the undivided attention of one or more staff members. That educa- tion personnel are spread thin is also reflected in the fact that an average of only 21 percent of children reached by Olin’s respondents received more than one humane education interven- tion, e.g., more than one classroom visit or shelter tour, per year. If youth education were a high pri- ority in the animal care and control community, one might expect that nent of animal welfare activity, as it 7). But personnel responsible for formal education credentials would be was throughout most of the last cen- youth education often are spread a criterion in the hiring of staff tury. Despite the fact that a majority thin, charged with handling a wide assigned to teach children. Olin of local animal care and control agen- variety of disparate job duties. For found, however, that only 15 percent cies report offering humane educa- example, when asked to give the title of respondents reported that the staff tion programs, have been doing so for of the person involved most directly member most directly involved with quite some time, and regard humane with humane education, 26 percent humane education had classroom education as mission-critical, com- of respondents indicated “shelter teaching certification, while 50 per- mitment to youth education as director,” while only 12 percent cited cent cited “on-the-job-training” in measured by funding—perhaps the “humane education director.” Thirty- lieu of such credentials. Twenty-four most salient measure—is anemic. eight percent indicated “other,” and percent indicated that their education Although the median annual budget in most cases, Olin found, that meant staff had informal teaching or youth reported by Olin’s respondents was “animal control officer” (Figure 8). leadership experience (Figure 9). $200,000 (Figure 5), 63 percent of When asked by Olin about other One of the most telling signs of organizations with humane education services performed by education staff, generally tepid support for humane programs reported allocating less than $1,000 to those programs, and only 21 percent reported having an annual humane education budget of $5,000 or more (Figure 6). Most respondents (74 percent) admitted that the amount of money budgeted for education was “not enough,” while 26 percent said the amount their organizations had allocated was “just about right.” The animal care and control com- munity’s reluctance fully to embrace youth education also can be inferred from staffing-related data. Organiza- tions responding to Olin’s study reported a median of one paid educa- tion staff member (a significant num- ber given that the median number of full-time, paid staff overall was four) and one education volunteer (Figure

Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 35 education is that 29 percent of the organizations answering Olin’s ques- tionnaire did not respond to the item asking about the size of their educa- tion budget. Olin classified those organizations as not having a humane 80 education program. While the 70 assumption behind that classification 60 (i.e., no education budget means no 50 education program) may not be entirely valid, the fact remains that a 40 significant number of animal care 30 and control organizations make no 20 effort to teach humane values to chil- 10 dren, while most make a weak 0 attempt at best. Why? Why would an undertaking that, at least intuitively, holds such promise for advancing the cause of animal protection and that was so energetically pursued during the early decades of the animal wel- fare movement be given such minimal or funds would be raised to augment solving or preventing the problems attention nowadays by those most existing budgets. Perhaps a more fun- animals face, it typically does not ren- directly engaged in solving their com- damental answer lies in the dilemma der the same immediate, tangible munities’ animal-related problems? faced by animal care and control per- outcomes or level of emotional fulfill- Answers from animal shelter profes- sonnel: how can they meet basic, ment as, for example, uniting a fami- sionals typically hinge on points short-term needs—such as a commu- ly with a homeless pet or rescuing a about lack of time and/or funding— nity’s need for adequate animal con- stray dog from the hardships of the points raised, in fact, by some respon- trol and sheltering—and also reach street. In contrast its potential dents to Olin’s survey. Such ratio- broader, long-term goals, such as rewards may seem distant and nales, however, beg the underlying eliminating or significantly reducing abstract. So, while animal care and question, since if youth education animal abuse, neglect, and the over- control professionals may view youth were seen as crucial to achieving ani- population of companion animals? education as mission-critical in a mal protection objectives, time and Although youth education is seen as long-range sense, it often is treated in funds to support it would be allocated an important means of permanently the short term as a drain on resources that might otherwise be applied to more pressing, day-to-day concerns. That seems to have been the pre- vailing reasoning for many years. In 1922 Francis Rowley speculated that the promise of immediate results was 60 what kept so many humane advocates involved in direct relief of animals 50 rather than humane education of sub- 40 sequent generations (Unti 2002). It appears that similar forces are at 30 work now. As a result, youth educa- 20 tion continues to be a marginal if not entirely dispensable facet of animal 10 welfare work in the United States. 0

36 The State of the Animals II: 2003 it is simply that humane education initiatives typically are not subjected to formal evaluation to test their effi- cacy. Of the organizations responding to Olin’s survey, for example, only 7 percent reported formally evaluating their programs. Given the relatively low level of support for humane edu- cation, this assessment gap is not sur- prising. But it is significant, for two reasons: first, a lack of formal evalua- tion limits understanding of what methodologies are most and least effective and how humane education programs can be improved; and, sec- ond, it deprives animal protection advocates of an important tool for convincing school officials, colleges of education, and the public that humane education is a worthwhile pursuit that deserves funding and representation in standard curricula. Empirical studies conducted over Consequently, relatively little the last twenty-five years have tended Can Humane empirical evidence exists showing to show that education programs can that humane education programs indeed generate gains in knowledge Values Be increase children’s knowledge about of animal protection issues, improve- Taught? or improve their attitudes and behav- ment in attitudes toward animals, ior toward animals. None exists show- If, as suggested, a lack of immedi- and improvements in projected behav- ing that such gains are carried into ate—or at least immediately visible— ior toward them. Positive results have adulthood. The issue is not that there results is a disincentive for humane been inconsistent, however, and is proof to the contrary—indeed, organizations to expend resources on investigations have not been under- intuition, anecdotal evidence, and a youth education, it would seem that taken to determine whether humane handful of formal studies suggest that definitive empirical evidence demon- education results in positive changes humane education can work. Rather, strating the effectiveness of humane in actual behavior related to animals. education programs would provide an important incentive. That is, if the intended benefits of teaching humane values to children (e.g., gains in general knowledge about animal protection issues and the develop- ment of positive attitudes and behav- ior toward animals) were consistently brought to light through program evaluation, perhaps humane educa- tion would come to be seen as more of an urgent imperative than an abstract panacea. But there is an obvious Catch-22 here: an interest in spending time and money to assess the effects of a humane education ini- tiative presupposes a relatively high level of interest in committing resources to humane education in general, and such willingness has been in short supply.

Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 37 The special challenges associated treatment—reading material with dren. Children who had been induced with assessing actual behavior toward four instruction sessions over a two- to empathize with animals, however, animals—such as cost, difficulty of month period. (A control group showed little tendency to extend that observation, and potential harm to received no instruction or materials.) increased empathy to other children. animals and children—have, no The lessons and reading material That finding calls into question the doubt, hindered such inquiries. focused on responsible pet ownership validity of the transference theory, Systematic research to test the and related topics. In contrast to the which holds that positive attitudes effects of general approaches to earlier study, results showed that, toward animals are transferable, or humane education and specific pro- although all three interventions led will generalize, to humans—a tacit grams peaked during the 1980s. Sev- to an increase in positive attitudes assumption in much humane litera- eral studies conducted early in that toward animals, the intensive, one- ture. Findings casting doubt on the decade relied on the Fireman Tests, lesson treatment had a greater posi- transference theory also have been assessment tools that presented chil- tive impact on attitudes than did the reported by Ray (1982) and Paul dren with a story about a boy whose reading material alone. Somewhat (2000), while Poresky (1990), house is burning down and who is unexpectedly, however, the repeated Ascione (1992), and O’Hare and given the opportunity to ask a fire- treatment was not found to be more Montminy-Danna (2001) have found fighter to save certain household effective than the one-time presenta- evidence to support it. items (Vockell and Hodal 1980). A list tion. The researcher suggested that In one of the few efforts during the of ten items is given, consisting of the more focused nature of the inten- early 1980s to assess the impact of seven inanimate objects, such as a sive treatment contributed to its suc- humane education on older children, television and a checkbook, and three cess compared with the repeated Cameron (1983) compared the animals: a dog, a cat, and a canary. intervention, the content of which effects of two intensive, classroom- The tests asked children to select was only loosely connected. No differ- based interventions on the attitudes three items from the list which they ences in test scores were found of eighth-graders. One relied on print think the boy in the story should tell between boys and girls or between material and media-based instruction the firefighter to save, the rationale fifth and sixth-graders. (films and filmstrips), the other on being that the more positive an indi- Contradicting the results of that print material and lecture-method vidual’s attitudes toward animals, the investigation was a similar one instruction. A control group received more likely it is that he or she will designed by the Animal Rescue no materials or instruction. Students choose the dog, cat, and canary for League of Boston. Relying on the receiving media-based treatment rescue. The first investigation Fireman Tests as the assessment tool, showed the greatest improvement in employing the Fireman Tests sought the Boston evaluation found that a attitudes. The lecture treatment to evaluate the effects that a single repeated humane education treat- group also improved but to a lesser classroom presentation conducted by ment consisting of lessons and mate- extent, while the control group a visiting humane educator had on rials presented over a period of sever- showed no positive change in atti- attitudes of third through sixth-grade al days had a greater positive effect on tudes. students, compared with simply giv- the attitudes of fourth and fifth- ing the children reading material graders toward animals than either a (Vockell and Hodal 1980). The one-time presentation or reading The Humane researchers found that the one-time materials without instruction (Mal- presentation had no more impact on carne 1983). The fact that the repeat- Education attitudes than did distributing the lit- ed intervention in this case took erature. The omission of a pretest place over a fairly concentrated peri- Evaluation from the study design, however, made od of time may have contributed to interpreting those results problemat- its success compared with the more Project ic (Ascione 1992). diluted, two-month repeated treat- Perhaps the most ambitious attempt A year later another Fireman Tests ment employed in the Jefferson at program assessment was NAHEE’s study analyzed the impact of three County study. Humane Education Evaluation Pro- different humane education treat- An innovative study during the ject. In that investigation, Ascione, ments on the attitudes of fifth and same period analyzed the effects of Latham, and Worthen (1985) sought sixth-grade students in Jefferson role-play as an empathy-building tech- to measure the impact of a curricu- County, Colorado (Fitzgerald 1981). nique. Malcarne (1981) found that lum-blended approach to teaching The three approaches tested were: playing the role of animals is an effec- humane values, using as the proto- light-treatment—reading material tive means for children to increase type NAHEE’s People and Animals: A with no instruction; intensive treat- their empathy with animals and that Humane Education Curriculum ment—reading material with one playing the role of children helps to Guide. The guide consisted of more instruction session; and repeated increase empathy with other chil- than 400 classroom activities, each

38 The State of the Animals II: 2003 designed to teach a humane concept showed improvement, generally their toward animals would extend to peo- along with a skill or concept in lan- attitude gains were not pronounced ple, the NAHEE project researchers guage arts, social studies, math, or enough to be statistically significant. developed two instruments: the Atti- science. The study involved more The researchers suggested that the tude Transfer Scale (ATS), which used than 1,800 children in kindergarten disparity in the treatment effects photos depicting situations involving through sixth grade and 77 teachers between the younger and older chil- other children to which students from various urban, suburban, and dren may have been due to the possi- could respond with varying degrees of rural school districts in Connecticut bility that conceptual knowledge and kindness and compassion; and the and California. Using a battery of attitudes are more malleable at the Revised Aggression Scale (AG), a mul- instruments developed by the West- earlier grades, or that baseline levels tiple-choice instrument that present- ern (formerly Wasatch) Institute for of knowledge and attitudes are lower ed school and home situations to Research and Evaluation, the investi- at the earlier grades, leaving more which children might react with vary- gation was designed to test the room for improvement. They also ing degrees of aggression. (The AG effects of a relatively weak treatment: cited the weak treatment as a possi- was administered only to children in teachers were required to lead only ble factor in the inconsistency of ex- grade three and above.) Results of the twenty activities (the equivalent of perimental-group gains. ATS and AG showed no statistically about ten hours of instruction) from The NAHEE study’s examination of significant differences between exper- the curriculum guide over the course projected behavior produced results imental and control group children at of an entire school year. The objective that were somewhat the reverse of the any grade except fourth. Surprisingly, was to evaluate the materials as they knowledge and attitude findings in fourth-grade boys in the experimental realistically might be applied during a terms of age-group comparisons. At group had lower interpersonal kind- typical school year by teachers with the kindergarten through third-grade ness scores on the ATS than did their many other curriculum requirements level, the projected behavior scores of counterparts in the control group. to meet. The instruments were experimental-group children did not Fourth-grade experimental-group designed to measure the curriculum differ significantly from control group children (girls and boys) also scored guide’s effect on (1) children’s knowl- scores. In contrast, at the fourth more aggressively on the AG than did edge of animals; (2) their attitudes through sixth-grade levels, the exper- fourth graders in the control group. toward animals; (3) their projected imental group showed significantly The researchers noted, however, that behavior toward animals, i.e., their more humane attitudes than did the the fourth-grade experimental-group perceptions of how they would behave control group. Why did older children scores were on the kind and non- in situations that allowed humane or respond more humanely on this mea- aggressive ends of the continuum of inhumane behavior; and (4) whether sure, while younger students showed scores for the attitude transfer mea- children’s attitudes toward animals greater gains on the knowledge and sures. transferred, or generalized, to people. attitude tests? According to the Despite its somewhat ambiguous The assessment tools were adminis- researchers, test format could have findings, the Humane Education tered as pretests and posttests to the had an influence. The knowledge and Evaluation Project produced some en- study sample, which was divided into attitude scales were composed of couraging—and intriguing—results an experimental and control group, multiple-choice or yes/no items, overall. The instruments that were the latter receiving no instruction which gave children a choice from created, the conclusions reached, and from the NAHEE curriculum guide at which to select an answer. The instru- the insights gained were valuable in any point in the school year. ment used to test projected behavior, providing direction for subsequent Results showed statistically signifi- on the other hand, required children research and can aid in development cant gains in knowledge as a result of to describe verbally the scenario and refinement of humane education the curriculum guide intervention at depicted in a drawing, formulate a methodologies. the kindergarten and first-grade lev- response to the situation, and explain els. Knowledge scores of second why they responded as they did— through sixth-grade children in the tasks that the older children may Recent Research experimental group also improved, have been developmentally more pre- Humane education program evalua- though not to a statistically signifi- pared to handle than were the tion continued sporadically in the cant degree. Attitudes toward ani- younger students. In addition the years following NAHEE’s landmark mals improved along similar lines: researchers surmised that teachers at study. In 1988 the MSPCA completed kindergarten and first-grade children the higher grades may have been an extensive investigation to examine in the experimental group showed more likely than those at the lower the impact of its statewide humane significantly more humane attitudes grades to focus their instruction on education program on the animal-wel- than their counterparts in the control the intentions and rationale behind fare-related knowledge and attitudes group. Although experimental-group humane behavior. of second through fifth-graders. Third, children at the higher grades also To determine if humane attitudes fourth, and fifth-grade children

Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 39 received three instruction sessions, mean attitude scores of the first and and posttest to determine the Potter and the investigation found gains in second-grade control and experimen- League program’s effect on animal- their knowledge and attitudes. This tal groups were higher (more hu- welfare-related knowledge, attitudes, was not the case, however, among sec- mane) than the mean attitude scores and projected behavior; (2) a measure ond-graders, who were exposed to a from the 1985 investigation. One rea- of attitude transference obtained by single classroom presentation. The son, the researcher suggested, was comparing pretest results with scores researchers concluded that results the possibility that the children par- from instruments designed to gauge were positive but limited, and sug- ticipating in the 1992 study were children’s human-directed empathy gested that a more marked impact more aware of and better educated on and quality of peer relations; and (3) might be achieved by consolidating humane and environmental issues an examination of the intellectual, the program, i.e., delivering a more in- than were their 1985 counterparts. If affective, and behavioral responses of tense intervention (Davis et al. 1988). that was the case, by 1992 scores on children to the program through the In a follow-up to the Humane Edu- the instrument used to measure the use of student and teacher focus cation Evaluation Project, Ascione younger children’s attitudes may have groups and classroom observation. (1992) assessed a treatment employ- been reaching a “ceiling,” which The study sample consisted of 181 ing NAHEE’s People and Animals cur- would make detecting differences third-graders, who took part in eight riculum guide and other materials in between control and experimental weekly forty-five-minute classroom thirty-two first, second, fourth, and groups more difficult. Ascione noted lessons, and 152 seventh graders, who fifth-grade classrooms. Pretests and that the scale used to measure the participated in five weekly forty-five- posttests were administered to assess older children’s attitudes was less sus- minute lessons. The third-grade changes in children’s attitudes to- ceptible to such ceiling effects. lessons covered such areas as basic ward animals and human-directed As a follow-up to the 1992 investi- pet care, the role of animal shelters, empathy. (The attitude measure was gation, Ascione and Weber (1996) and safety around animals; the sev- the same as that used in the 1985 tested fifth-grade students who had enth-grade lessons covered animals in study.) Results showed that the inter- participated a year earlier in the entertainment, endangered species, vention enhanced fourth-graders’ above study to determine if the pet overpopulation, and animal-relat- humane attitudes to a statistically effects found when they were fourth- ed moral dilemmas. significant degree. In addition fourth- graders were maintained. Results The Potter League investigation grade scores revealed a significant showed that fourth-graders who had revealed statistically significant gains generalization, or transfer, effect received the People and Animals in knowledge, attitudes, and intended from animal-related attitudes to intervention the previous year scored behavior at both the third and sev- human-directed empathy. Fifth-grade higher on humane attitudes scales enth-grade levels. In addition the children in the experimental group than did those who had not. Once examination of attitude transference also showed more humane attitudes again a generalization effect from indicated that children who were than did the control group, though attitudes toward animals to human- more knowledgeable about and favor- the difference was not statistically directed empathy was found. The ably disposed toward animals also significant. Ascione suggested the researchers interpreted their findings were more likely to respond with more modest gains among fifth- as evidence that classroom-based, greater empathy to people and have graders were due to the fact that fifth curriculum-blended humane educa- better relationships with peers. Qual- grade control group teachers report- tion can be an effective means of itative analysis yielded a wide range of ed substantially more instruction developing sensitivity in children information, most of which reflected related to humane education than toward animals and people. positively on the Potter League pro- their experimental group counter- Positive results also were found by gram. Conclusions regarding the parts. (Ascione noted that restricting O’Hare and Montminy-Danna (2001) third-grade intervention included the content of control group teach- in a comprehensive evaluation of a that the children enjoy the program ers’ instruction for purposes of the humane education program for third (especially the opportunity to relate study would have been unacceptable.) and seventh-grade students. The pro- stories about their pets), that con- No statistically significant effects on gram was offered by the Potter cepts are presented in a clear, age- attitudes or human-directed empathy League for Animals, an animal care appropriate manner, and that positive were found at the first and second- and control organization serving behavior toward animals is constantly grade levels, although the first-grade southeastern Rhode Island. The Pot- reinforced throughout the program. experimental group children did show ter League study was unique in that it During focus groups third-graders some gain in humane attitudes over employed qualitative research meth- related evidence of behavior change, first-grade children in the control ods as well as more typical, quantita- some stating that they had begun to group. In comparing those results to tive techniques. It included the fol- spend more time with their pets, had the more pronounced gains from the lowing components: (1) the stopped hitting or teasing them, or 1985 study, Ascione noted that the administration of a true/false pretest had shared their new knowledge with

40 The State of the Animals II: 2003 friends and family members. definitively whether children can be and how they are using humane edu- At the seventh-grade level, class- taught to think and behave kindly cation materials provided to them. It room observations revealed that the toward animals or what the best can entail simply identifying program Potter League material was presented instructional methods might be. The objectives, and administering brief in a way that allowed students to see empirical evidence compiled thus far, surveys to students or teachers to both sides of controversial issues, that however, suggests that humane edu- determine whether those objectives, the program stressed the positive cation has promise. Moreover, investi- e.g., positive changes in attitudes impact a single individual can have, gations such as those reviewed here toward animals, are being met. Even and that it appeared to have an imme- are significant not just for what they evaluation efforts as limited as these diate effect on some students. (One may prove or disprove, but also for can provide valuable information that boy, for example, said he would no the questions they raise and the ultimately can help an agency make longer shoot birds.) The researchers directions they provide for future the most effective, efficient use of its also noted that some seventh-grade inquiry. Do gains resulting from ele- humane education resources. Several students appeared somber after dis- mentary-level humane education ini- national organizations, such as cussions of particularly hard-hitting tiatives extend into the teen years and NAHEE and the Character Education issues. During focus groups several beyond? Do improvements in project- Partnership, offer guides to basic pro- seventh graders, like their third-grade ed behavior translate into more gram assessment. In addition, copies counterparts, suggested that their humane behavior in fact? At what of the instruments used to assess the behavior had changed or would ages is humane education most effec- impact of the People and Animals cur- change as a result of the Potter tive? What impact, if any, do instruc- riculum guide in the 1985 Humane League program. Some, for example, tor enthusiasm and teaching style Education Evaluation Project are indicated that they had become have on the efficacy of humane edu- available from NAHEE and can be kinder toward their pets and would be cation interventions? Such are just a adapted for use in assessing other more willing to speak up about mis- few of the questions waiting to be humane education initiatives. treatment of companion animals. addressed in a field that is ripe for Certainly, conducting rigorous Most seventh-grade students ex- study, not only because of the paucity experimental investigations of the pressed concern about the uses of ani- of existing research, but also because impact of humane education pro- mals in entertainment and stated that humane education seems especially grams requires expertise and they would curtail participation in relevant at a time when the connec- resources beyond the reach of most activities that involved the mistreat- tion between childhood cruelty to animal shelters. But providing the ment of animals. A few, however, animals and interpersonal violence in impetus for such investigations and thought the program’s emphasis on adulthood is widely known, and the facilitating them does not. By part- the cruelty of circuses and other perceived moral decline of our nering with college and university forms of entertainment was overstat- nation’s youth is a common and academic departments (including ed. The findings of the Potter League increasingly fervent lament. education, child development, social evaluation were overwhelmingly posi- work, and psychology), animal pro- tive, though the investigators noted tection organizations engaged in several limitations of the study (i.e., The Road Ahead youth education can provide the sub- that it lacked a control group; it did Vitalizing humane education research ject matter for study and access to not measure the retention of cogni- would create a solid foundation on teachers, children, and classrooms. In tive or attitudinal gains over time; and which to build a more prominent, return, academic institutions can its outcomes were based on the pre- influential humane education move- offer expertise in instrument develop- sentation of a program by only one ment. A substantial body of empirical ment, study design, and data analysis, instructor), and thus advised caution evidence not only would provide as well as a pool of graduate and in interpreting its results. Neverthe- humane educators with the knowl- undergraduate students in search of less, the project generated a host of edge necessary to develop effective topics for senior projects, master’s recommendations useful to the Potter pedagogical strategies, it also would theses, and doctoral internships and League’s education personnel—and lend much-needed credibility and dissertations. In addition, since both potentially to others in the field—and recognition to humane education as a universities and animal-protection represents an important contribution serious discipline. Animal care and agencies typically are skilled in the to the body of knowledge concerning control organizations can become art of fundraising—and often have the effectiveness of school-focused involved in humane education pro- established relationships with philan- humane education programs. gram evaluation in a variety of ways thropic institutions—partnerships Although the above survey of that need not be prohibitively elabo- between the two can be mutually ben- humane education program evalua- rate, expensive, or time-consuming. eficial when it comes to obtaining tion is not exhaustive, existing re- Assessment can be as basic as inter- grants to fund humane education re- search still is too limited to tell us viewing teachers to ascertain whether search.

Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 41 lund 1982). For humane educators, in response to the widespread public Back-to-Basics recognizing school priorities typically perception that our youth have fallen has meant creating lessons and mate- into a state of moral decline, the Revisited rials that are “curriculum-blended,” modern character education move- Closing the assessment gap will not, i.e., provide instruction in core sub- ment departs sharply from the values- by itself, ensure the advancement of ject areas—math, English, science, clarification trend of the 1960s and humane education. Insofar as giving and social studies—as well as convey 1970s. While recognizing that debate the teaching of humane values a more a humane message. A prerequisite for about moral issues has an important prominent, permanent place in Amer- the success of school-focused humane place in the classroom, character ed- ican schools remains a goal, the chief education initiatives in the future will ucation seeks not to assist children in obstacle continues to be humane edu- be the addition of another dimension clarifying their own personal values cation’s identity as a special interest. to curriculum blending: the align- but to train them to develop certain Traditionally, special interests have ment of humane education programs fundamental character traits. Typical- been objectionable to school adminis- with state curriculum standards. ly those traits include respect, re- trators, and low priorities for teachers Indeed, in their report to the Potter sponsibility, caring, fairness, and citi- (Underhill 1941; Westerlund 1982). League, O’Hare and Montminy-Danna zenship—principles that have formed The back-to-basics movement of the (2001) recommend that the league the conceptual underpinnings of hu- 1970s and 1980s rendered humane collaborate with school officials to tie mane education since its inception. education and other special interests its programs to curriculum standards. Over the last twenty years, the char- all the more superfluous to educators Teachers and administrators are like- acter education movement has bene- facing declining test scores and gen- ly to be more receptive to the teach- fited from growing public and legisla- eral complaints that children were ing of humane values if they know tive support and significant advancing to higher grades with sub- specifically which curriculum stan- government funding (DeRosa 2001). standard reading, writing, and math dards a particular humane education In 2002 $25 million in federal grants skills. Today, back-to-basics thinking program or lesson plan will help them was made available to state depart- is reflected in the adoption of state meet. The task of linking lessons to ments of education for the develop- curriculum standards by all states curriculum standards need not be ment and implementation of charac- except Iowa, where directives regard- burdensome for humane educators. ter education programs (Grenadier ing curriculum content are generated On the contrary, various Web re- 2002). Such programs already have at the district level (Topics Education sources, e.g., www.explorasource.com, been incorporated into the curricula Group 2001). Curriculum standards provide ready access to all state cur- of thousands of schools nationwide, enforced by state departments of edu- riculum standards, and the standards and the movement shows no signs of cation or school districts, combined themselves can serve as valuable weakening. with a growing emphasis on standard- guideposts in developing pedagogical The rise of character education and ized testing (teacher career advance- objectives and humane education its conceptual symmetry with humane ment is often directly tied to test program content. education present animal protection scores now) has made schools and organizations with a clear opportunity teachers more accountable—and for blending the teaching of humane more pressed for time. Consequently, The Character values into school curricula. Relying winning representation in the class- on the widely recognized effectiveness room for the issues of special interest Connection of animal-related content for captur- groups, including animal protection An obvious but not yet thoroughly ing children’s attention and imagina- organizations, has become an increas- exploited strategy for ensuring future tion, humane education has great ingly formidable challenge. representation for humane content in potential for enriching and enlivening Meeting that challenge will require school curricula—and for invigorat- lessons in core values, making that animal protection professionals ing humane education in general—is abstract concepts such as respect and keep the needs of teachers and alignment with character education, responsibility more accessible and schools paramount—a simple but an incarnation of the back-to-basics engaging for children. By providing sometimes overlooked precept. Fail- trend in the moral education realm. programs that focus on the ways in ure to convince school officials of the Today character education typically which treating animals humanely is an importance of teaching humane val- refers to the teaching of “core” or essential part of good character, ues often has resulted from an inabil- “consensus” values, basic principles humane educators can serve as valu- ity or unwillingness on the part of of right and wrong, which, propo- able resources to classroom teachers humane education advocates to artic- nents argue, transcend political, cul- who increasingly are being required to ulate the benefits of their programs tural, and religious differences. In a incorporate formal character educa- within the framework of teachers’ and return to a more traditional, virtues- tion lessons into their classroom activ- administrators’ priorities (Wester- centered moral education model, and ities (DeRosa 2001).

42 The State of the Animals II: 2003 tors to reach, albeit indirectly, more eral receptiveness to humane educa- Alternative children more consistently than tion will vary among school districts, would be possible through classroom animal care and control agencies may Methodologies visits or shelter tours. indeed find that non-school options Aligning humane education program In addition to teacher training and provide an expedient use of limited content with state standards and support, other school-focused strate- resources. Such options may also pro- character education curricula will gies may provide animal protection vide a means of broadening program- help ensure that proposals to intro- organizations with opportunities to ming beyond companion animal duce the teaching of humane values maximize their impact while limiting issues in cases where school officials in schools will be well received by the expenditure of time and money. are resistant to accepting potentially teachers and administrators. Actually These include the use of technology- controversial subject matter into the institutionalizing humane education based methodologies, such as chat curriculum. Strategies employed by in schools—i.e., making the schools rooms and videoconferencing, to link organizations either as supplements themselves a primary source of elementary and secondary teachers to or replacements for school pro- instruction in humane values—and and their students to animal care and grams have included summer youth providing teachers with the necessary control professionals and to provide camps; family humane education pro- training, tools, and motivation will virtual field trips (Finch 2001). By grams; interactive shelter-based require a reexamination of traditional positioning themselves as service exhibits; programs designed to instill humane education methodology. learning sites, organizations with a empathy in youth at risk for violent or Standard practices such as classroom particular interest in reaching teens— antisocial behavior; Web-based visits and shelter tours typically rele- an audience traditionally neglected by instructional material on a broad gate the classroom teacher to the humane education— also will benefit range of animal issues; and the cre- role of bystander, involved marginally from the growth of service learning as ation of partnerships with social ser- at most in the presentation of an educational model in American vice agencies, law enforcement, and humane concepts and lessons. Such high schools (Winiarskyj 2002). Work- pet product retailers. Other poten- approaches can reinforce the notion ing with education departments in tially productive non-school strate- of humane education as a novelty or colleges and universities to introduce gies include reaching out to faith- special interest, exclusively the the teaching of humane values in rele- based youth organizations, home- purview of the animal protection vant courses will ensure that new schooled children, and after-school organization, and both separate from teachers are familiar with humane programs, especially those serving and subordinate to core curricula. education and that they understand communities where children and fam- Making schools partners in the propa- its connection to character education ilies and their animals may be at high gation of a humane ethic will involve, and other curriculum areas. In shift- risk for abuse or neglect (D. at the very least, cultivating ongoing ing their primary role from practition- McCauley, personal communication working relationships with teachers er to trainer and facilitator, humane with B.U., July 3, 2002). and administrators. Creating humane education professionals can benefit Ultimately, the success of any education committees, composed of from assistance offered by various methodology, whether school-based, teachers representing target schools, national animal protection organiza- shelter-based, or dependent on collab- to assist in the development of cur- tions—some of which offer supple- oration with some other agency, will riculum-blended interventions may mentary classroom materials for the be measured primarily by a single be an effective first step in fostering elementary and secondary levels—as standard: its effectiveness in improv- such collaboration. Inevitably, howev- well as training in such areas as the ing children’s attitudes and, most im- er, integrating humane education in creation and implementation of portant, behavior toward animals. As a school curricula will require that ani- teacher in-service workshops and result commitment to a particular mal protection professionals divert at strategies for reaching teens. strategy must be accompanied by the least some of their attention from Exploring potentially more effec- resolve continually to evaluate it and, instructing children directly. Con- tive, efficient alternatives to tradi- if necessary, improve or abandon it. ducting professional-development tional humane education practices workshops for teachers and providing may also take animal protection orga- them with instructional materials nizations away from the schoolhouse Conclusions (aligned, ideally, with state standards entirely. Savesky (2002) has argued Virtually unlimited faith in the influ- and character education curricula), that obstacles to classroom access, ence of humane education has long for example, will help transfer the such as increased emphasis on stan- been a hallmark of organized animal locus of humane education from the dards and testing, have made school- protection in the United States. From animal protection organization to the focused approaches inefficient or an early stage, the humane move- schools themselves. Such an unfeasible for many organizations. ment pinned its hopes on education approach will enable humane educa- While access to classrooms and gen- as the remedy to cruel treatment of

Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 43 animals by future generations. How- consensus about the importance of ing structures to enhance representa- ever, the movement has not support- character education, by offering their tive democracy. A similar approach ed humane education with practical services to schools and school sys- might be taken for subsidizing the and financial resources commensu- tems, and by asserting the value of hiring and placement of humane edu- rate with this expressed interest. humane education to the objectives cation specialists within humane soci- Moreover, the effects of humane edu- of the character education movement eties, or for the endowment of rele- cation outreach remain unclear, and, (DeRosa 2001). They may further vant positions and proper training for a variety of reasons, the work of enlarge their opportunities by provid- programs within institutions of high- promoting kindness to animals ing humane education lessons that er learning. Such an investment through school programs proceeds can be correlated with conventional might serve to free humane educa- with limited prospect for measuring subject matter. tion from subordinate status within results and outcome. The move- For the most part, organized ani- organizations that otherwise are well ment’s inability to institutionalize the mal protection has been unable to equipped to promote the lessons of teaching of humane education in secure the introduction and perpetu- kindness to animals. Higher levels of teacher-training schools and related ation of humane education programs activity, expanded levels of research, institutions has restricted its influ- and philosophy within institutions of and more rigorous evaluation pro- ence, and the penetration of humane higher learning and teacher training. grams all will help to bring greater education programs run by humane This remains the great unrealized credibility to humane education and societies has proceeded unevenly goal, and perhaps the most promising validate the hopes that advocates where it has proceeded at all. objective, in the field. Yet it presup- have attached to it in the several cen- Nevertheless, there is no question poses an increased commitment to turies since appreciation for the value that the diffusion of humane values humane education strategies on the of kindness to animals as a didactic throughout American culture has part of humane societies. Expanded instrument first surfaced. advanced in the years since the levels of activity on this front can advent of organized animal protec- broaden possibilities for collaboration tion in 1866. Whatever the level of with institutions of higher learning Literature Cited success on other fronts of humane and teacher training and generate American Humane Association work, wanton acts of individual cruel- opportunities for program evaluation (AHA). 1952. National survey ty against animal pets are now usual- and ongoing curriculum develop- reveals vast humane education pro- ly seen as the signs of a maladjusted ment. gram. National Humane Review. and sick personality. Conversely a One limiting factor undoubtedly March. kind disposition toward such animals will be the tenuousness of programs Angell, G.T. n.d. Autobiographical is considered an important attribute tied to humane societies and their sketches and personal recollections. of the well-adjusted individual (Lock- budgets. American animal protection Boston: American Humane Educa- wood and Ascione 1998). Humane is highly decentralized, and the tion Society. education undoubtedly has reinforced responsibilities of municipal animal Anonymous [G.S. Porter]. 1893. The such ideas about healthy social and control; fluctuations in donor sup- strike at Shane’s: A prize story of psychological development. Indeed, it port; and the press of other priorities Indiana. Boston: American Hu- is unlikely that such awareness could have all had an impact on commit- mane Education Society. have coalesced in the absence of a ment to humane education by local Ascione, F.R. 1992. Enhancing chil- movement that accepted this per- societies. Without a steady invest- dren’s attitudes about the humane spective as a commonplace and pur- ment of resources in this arena, the treatment of animals: Generaliza- sued extensive measures to carry the spread and impact of humane educa- tion to human-directed empathy. lessons of kindness to generations of tion efforts are likely to remain Anthrozoös 5(3): 176—191. American youth. uneven and uncertain. Ascione, F.R., and C.V. Weber. 1996. Now, as at other times in the past, Humane education would seem to Children’s attitudes about the heightened interest in character edu- be an especially fruitful channel for humane treatment of animals and cation promises to increase opportu- foundation support. Historically, phil- empathy: One-year follow-up of a nities for promoting humane educa- anthropic foundations have played a school-based intervention. Anthro- tion programs. Teaching kindness- crucial role in helping to shape the zoös 9(4): 188-–195. to-animals is highly compatible with course of social change through Ascione, F.R., G.I. Latham, and B.R. the focus of contemporary character strategic investments and subsidies. Worthen. 1985. Final report, year 2: education, concerned as it is with the During the civil rights era, for exam- An experimental study. Evaluation inculcation of compassion, caring, ple, foundations underwrote voting of the humane education curricu- responsibility, respect, and sociality. rights campaigns in an effort to direct lum guides. Report to the National Animal welfare organizations may be the freedom movement’s energies Association for Humane and Envi- able to take advantage of the growing toward the creation of viable and last- ronmental Education.

44 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Barrows, E.A. 1894. Four months in acter (e-mail newsletter of the Princeton: Princeton University New Hampshire. Boston: American Character Education Partnership). Press. Humane Education Society. April. Pickering, S.F. 1981. John Locke and Bray, M.M. 1893. Our gold mine at Grier, K.C. 1999. Childhood socializa- children’s books in eighteenth-centu- Hollyhurst. Boston: American tion and companion animals: Unit- ry England. Knoxville: University of Humane Education Society. ed States, 1820–1920. Society and Tennessee Press. Button, H.W., and E.F. Provenzo, Jr. Animals 7(2): 95–120. Pivar, D. 1973. Purity crusade: Sexual 1983. History of education and cul- Isaacs, S. 1930. Intellectual growth in morality and social control ture in America. Englewood: Pren- young children. London: George 1868–1900. Westport, Conn.: tice-Hall. Routledge and Sons. Greenwood Press. Butts, R.F., and L. Cremin. 1953. A Kerber, L. 1980. Women of the repub- Poresky, R.H. 1990. The young chil- history of education in American lic: Intellect and ideology in Revolu- dren’s empathy measure: Reliabili- culture. New York: Holt, Rinehart tionary America. Chapel Hill: Uni- ty, validity, and effects of companion and Winston. versity of North Carolina Press. animal bonding. Psychological Cameron, L. 1983. The effects of two Krows, M. 1938. The hounds of Hast- Reports 66: 931–936. instructional treatments on eighth- ings. New York: Columbia Universi- Ray, J.J. 1982. Love of animals and grade students’ attitudes toward ty Press. love of people. The Journal of Social animal life. Ph.D. diss., Purdue Uni- Locke, J. 1989. Some thoughts on Psychology 116: 229-–300. versity. education. eds. J.W. and J.S. Yolton. Rowley, F.H. 1916. Preparedness and Carter, S.N. 1897. For pity’s sake: A Oxford: Clarendon Press. humane education. Our Dumb Ani- story for the times, being reminis- Lockwood, R., and F. Ascione, eds. mals 48: 152. cences of a guest at a country inn. 1998. Cruelty to animals and inter- Saunders, M.M. 1893. Beautiful Joe. Boston: American Humane Educa- personal violence. West Lafayette, Philadelphia: American Baptist Pub- tion Society. Ind.: Purdue University Press. lication Society. Cartmill, M. 1993. A view to a death Malcarne, V. 1981. What can humane Savesky, K. 2002. Presentation deliv- in the morning: Hunting and nature education research do for you? ered at The HSUS Animal Care through history. Cambridge: Har- Humane Education 5(4): 18–19. Expo. Miami, Florida, April 3. vard University Press. ———. 1983. Evaluating humane Sewell, A. 1890. Black Beauty. Boston: Cremin, L. 1969. The transformation education: The Boston study. American Humane Education Soci- of the school: Progressivism in Humane Education 7(1): 12–13. ety. American education, 1876–1957. Mann, H. 1861. Twelve sermons Sheldon, E.A. 1862. Manual of ele- New York: Alfred A. Knopf. delivered at Antioch College. mentary instruction for the use of Davis, F.A., G.E. Hein, B. Starnes, and Boston: Ticknor and Fields. public and private schools and nor- S. Price. 1988. Evaluation report: Mathewson, L.M. 1942. Humane edu- mal classes. New York: Charles Massachusetts Society for the Pre- cation. Master’s thesis, Brown Uni- Scribner. vention of Cruelty to Animals school versity. Shultz, W.J. 1924. The humane move- outreach program, grades 2–5. O’Hare, T., and M. Montminy-Danna. ment in the United States. New York: Unpublished. 2001. Evaluation report: Effective- Columbia University Press. DeRosa, B. 2001. The character con- ness of the Potter League humane Timmins, T. 1883. The History of the nection. Animal Sheltering 24(4): education program. founding, aims, and growth of the 12-–21. Olin, J. 2002. Humane education in American Bands of Mercy. Boston: Finch, P. 2001. Humane education’s the 21st century: A survey of ani- P. H. Foster. radical new era. The Latham Letter mal shelters in the United States. Topics Education Group. 2001. Cur- 22(4): 6-–9. Master’s thesis, Tufts University. riculum standards: The new K–12 Firth, A., comp. 1883. Voices for the Oswald, L.J. 1994. Environmental mandate. www.topicseducation. speechless: Selections for schools and animal rights ethics in chil- com/download/Topics_Research_B and private reading. Boston: dren’s realistic animal novels of rief_v1n2.pdf. Houghton-Mifflin. twentieth century North America. Underhill, O.E. 1941. The origins and Fitzgerald, T.A. 1981. Evaluating Ph.D. diss., University of Oregon. development of elementary-school humane education: The Jefferson Paul, E.S. 2000. Empathy with ani- science. Chicago: Scott, Foresman, County study. Humane Education mals and with humans: Are they and Co. 5(3): 21-–22. linked? Anthrozoös 13(4): 194– Unti, B. 2002. The quality of mercy: Grenadier, A., ed. 2002. Character 200. Organized animal protection in the education program grant Pauly, P.J. 2000. Biologists and the United States, 1866–1930. Ph.D. announcement from U.S. Depart- promise of American life: From diss., American University. ment of Education. Essential Char- Meriwether Lewis to Alfred Kinsey. Unti, B., and A. Rowan. 2001. A social

Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 45 history of animal protection in the post-World War II period. In The state of the animals: 2001, ed. D. Salem and A. Rowan, 21–37. Wash- ington: Humane Society Press. Vockell, E., and E.F. Hodal. 1980. Developing humane attitudes: What does research tell us?, Humane Edu- cation 4(2): 19–21. Walter, M.R. 1950. The humane edu- cation program in the public schools of Ohio and Wisconsin. Mas- ter’s thesis, Kent State University. Westerlund, S.R. 1982. Spreading the word: Promoting humane education with administrators and fellow edu- cators. Humane Education 6(1): 7–8. Whyte, M.L. 1948. A study in humane education. Master’s thesis, Universi- ty of Dayton. Winiarskyj, L. 2002. Why generation Y? How service learning programs for teens can work for you. Animal Sheltering 26(2): 11–17.

46 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Appendix Milestones in Humane Education: A Pre-World War II Chronology Publications Released Organizations Legislation Other Founded Passed

1693 John Locke, Some Thoughts on Education published

1765 Goody Two-Shoes published

1780 Jeremy Bentham, Principles of Morals and Legislation published

1783 Dorothy Kilner, The Life and Perambulations of a Mouse published

1785 Sarah Trimmer, Fabulous Histories published

1792 Herman Daggett, The Rights of Animals published

1794 American edition of Fabulous Histories published

1794 American edition of Arnaud Berquin Looking Glass for the Mind published

1802 American edition of The Hare, or Hunting Incompatible with Humanity published

1824 Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) founded

1828 American Tract Society edition of Louisa’s Tenderness to the Little Birds published

1829 New York State anti- cruelty statute passed

1835 The Spirit of Humanity published

1845 American Sunday School Union edition of Charlotte Elizabeth’s Kindness to Animals; or The Sin of Cruelty Exposed and Rebuked published

1850 American Vegetarian Society Fugitive Slave Act passed Flogging in the U.S. founded in the U.S. Navy abolished

1851 Grace Greenwood, History of My Pets published

1852 Harriet Beecher Stowe, Massachusetts compulsory Uncle Tom’s Cabin published school attendance legislation passed

Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 47 (continued from previous page)

Appendix Milestones in Humane Education: A Pre-World War II Chronology

Publications Released Organizations Legislation Other Founded Passed 1866 Anson Randolph, American Society for the Autobiography of Prevention of Cruelty to a Canary Bird Animals (ASPCA) founded published

1867 Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (PSPCA) founded

1868 Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (MSPCA) founded

1874 Women’s Christian Temperance Union (WCTU) founded

1875 New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children launched by Henry Bergh and Elbridge T. Gerry

1877 Anna Sewell, American Humane Black Beauty published Association (AHA) founded

1882 Band of Mercy concept introduced to United States

1883 Abraham Firth, American Anti-Vivisection Voices of the Speechless Society founded published

Thomas Timmins, The History of the Founding, Aims, and Growth of the American Bands of Mercy published

1886 Humane education mandate in Massachusetts spurred by MSPCA

1889 American Humane Education Society (AHES) founded

1890 AHES edition of Black Beauty published

1891 WCTU Department of Mercy formed by Mary F. Lovell

1892 AHA campaign against classroom vivisection spurred by Albert Leffingwell

1893 Marshall Saunders, Beautiful Joe published

48 The State of the Animals II: 2003 (continued from previous page)

Appendix Milestones in Humane Education: A Pre-World War II Chronology

Publications Released Organizations Legislation Other Founded Passed

1893 ASPCA, Kindness to Animals: A Manual for Use in Schools and Families published

1894 American edition of Henry Ban on classroom Salt’s Animals’ Rights vivisection in Considered in Relation to Massachusetts Social Progress published secured by MSPCA

1895 New England Anti- Vivisection Society founded

1897 Sarah J. Eddy, Songs of Happy Life published

Emma Page, Heart Culture published

1899 Ralph Waldo Trine, Every Living Creature published

1902 AHA Textbook Committee formed

1904 Nora Finch, Colliery Jim: William O. Stillman Autobiography of a Mine Mule assumes presidency published of AHA

1905 Humane Education Committee Oklahoma and in New York State formed by Pennsylvania pass Stillman and Stella Preston compulsory humane education laws

1906 J. Howard Moore, The Universal Kinship published

Richard von Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis discusses sadistic behavior toward non-human animals

1907 Henry Bergh Foundation for the Promotion of Humane Education established at Columbia University

1909 Compulsory humane education legislation passed in Illinois

1910 Flora Helm Krause, Manual of Moral and Humane Education published

1911 Millennium Guild founded

1913 S. Louise Patteson, Pussy Meow published

Humane Education Past, Present, and Future 49 (continued from previous page)

Appendix Milestones in Humane Education: A Pre-World War II Chronology

Publications Released Organizations Legislation Other Founded Passed

1915 Be Kind to Animals Week launched

AHA votes to seek compulsory humane education in every state

1916 Sandor Ferenczi, AHES produces “A Little Chanticleer” the first humane (case study of a boy’s cruelty education film, toward humans and non- “The Bell of Atri” human animals) published ASPCA creates humane education department

1917 Compulsory humane education laws passed in Maine, Wisconsin, and New York

1919 Harriet C.C. Reynolds, Thoughts on Human Education: Suggestions on Kindness to Animals published

1920 Kentucky approves compulsory humane education law

1923 Florida approves compulsory humane education law

1924 William J. Schultz, The Humane Movement in the United States, judges humane education the most important development of the previous decade

Frances E. Clarke, Lessons for Teaching Humane Education in the Schools published

1925 Alexander Ernest Frederick, The Humane Guide: A Manual for Teachers and Humane Workers published

1931 Susan Isaacs, Intellectual Growth in Young Children published

50 The State of the Animals II: 2003 The No-Kill Controversy: Manifest and Latent 5CHAPTER Sources of Tension

Arnold Arluke

Introduction raditionally, most animal shel- ments of the sheltering community. ter workers have denied that the In 1994 the Duffield Family Founda- Method Tkilling, or euthanasia, of animals tion created the Maddie’s Fund, I investigated the shelter communi- in their facilities was cruel, even when which sought to revolutionize the sta- ty’s response to the no-kill movement euthanized animals were adoptable, tus and well-being of companion ani- in two communities that have taken young, attractive, and healthy.1 Work- mals by championing the no-kill different approaches to the issue. ers have sustained a core professional movement. No longer possible to Though located on opposite coasts of identity of being humane, good-heart- ignore or discount as an outrageous the country, these metropolitan areas ed “animal people” who want the very idea, this movement has spurred are similar in size and wealth. The best for their charges, despite—or debate at the national level about the makeup and nature of their humane even because of—their euthanasia of proper role of euthanasia in shelter organizations, however, are quite dis- animals. Killing has been taken for practice. The resulting challenges similar. One community is home to granted, regarded as a “necessary have strained the ability of conven- many independent organizations that evil” having no alternative in their tional shelters and humane organiza- individually have received praise or eyes. tions to protect workers psychologi- criticism over the years; until recent- One reason shelter workers have cally from the charge that euthanasia ly they have been a widespread group been able to maintain this self image is a form of cruelty. Instead of pre- of equals sharing a common media is that, until the last decade, little if venting cruelty, which their mission market. Even animal control pro- any organized criticism has been lev- maintains, these organizations now grams have been large, countywide, eled at them. When criticism are seen as causing it. In response, the and sometimes-progressive players in occurred, it tended to be case-specif- no-kill movement has been attacked their own right. In the other commu- ic, focusing on which animals were by those who defend the practice of nity, two key players are so large that euthanized, how it was done, and euthanasia and open admission. they have dwarfed the role and signif- whether the shelter shared this infor- Although some argue that everyone icance of others; the two players have mation with the public. Although a in the debate shares a passionate con- been conservative, lagging somewhat few shelters offered an alternative to cern for the welfare of animals, a rift behind the nationwide trends in shel- the standard paradigm by restricting over this issue divides the shelter tering. These two communities have admission of unadoptable animals community. Ultimately, the best dealt very differently with the pet and billing themselves as “no-kill” interests of animals may not be best overpopulation issue. In one case the shelters, they did not represent a seri- addressed in a climate of controversy SPCA (society for the prevention of ous threat to the continuation of and criticism. To understand and per- cruelty to animals) has embraced the “open-admission” policies toward haps reduce this controversy, the ten- no-kill concept, while in the other it euthanasia.2 sions fueling the no-kill conflict need has not. There are differences in the However, criticism of euthanasia to be identified and the breadth of relationships between the SPCAs and has mounted steadily in frequency the gulf separating its two camps neighboring humane organizations, and fervor from within certain seg- assessed. as well; in the former community 67 these relationships are uneasy, while tation, location, and financial health, beneath the surface of everyday com- in the latter they are cordial. but it was impossible, and perhaps munication, perhaps appearing in In each community I conducted unnecessary, to study every nuance innuendos that stop short of saying participant observation at the SPCA and variation. The wide diversity what actually is on the minds and in shelter, the city animal control office, makes it very difficult to characterize the hearts of speakers. For those hop- and nearby (i.e., within sixty miles) the perspectives of these camps. ing to reconcile tense intergroup rela- smaller shelters that either competed Indeed, at one level, the only thing tions, it is crucial to identify and cor- with or complemented the work of that makes each camp identifiable as rect sources of latent tension. the SPCAs. “Sanctuaries” and rescue a group is the fact that one supports Attempts to reduce conflict often groups also were studied. Gatekeep- the role of and need for euthanasia, stop short, staying at the manifest ers in these settings introduced me to while the other does not. Even here, level of perceived differences or prob- respondents as a sociologist interest- though, the why, the how, and the cir- lems and offering solutions that can- ed in understanding how people cumstances of euthanasia vary con- not significantly reduce group ten- thought and felt about the no-kill siderably. For example, the players, sion because issues, images, and issue. I was allowed to observe almost policies, and realities of animal shel- implications below the surface re- every facet of shelter and sanctuary tering in any one community vary in main untouched. operation, including, but not limited terms of numbers, composition, Certainly, the American humane to, kennel cleaning, intake, adoption strength, and orientation of shelter community is no exception to this work, behavior training, and euthana- organizations. Arguments and per- pattern. Discussions about no-kill sia. Ultimately I carried out more ceptions of individuals on both sides have been more cathartic than ana- than 200 hours of observation and 75 are informed by and respond to the lytic, allowing people to vent their interviews that elicited the intervie- realities of their own communities. In confusion or anger and identify allies wees’ perspective on the no-kill issue some cases, these local realities lead and enemies. These discussions have and the animal overpopulation prob- members of the same camp, who stayed at the manifest level of inter- lem. In addition I attended the na- work in different contexts, to make group tension, involving issues of tional meetings of the major no-kill very different comments about the dirty work and dishonesty. and open-admission organizations, opposition. Knowing this may help examined press accounts and shelter readers understand contradictory Manifest Tensions publications relating to no-kill, and statements made by respondents on combed several Internet news groups the same side of this controversy. Dirty Work that discussed shelter issues. Details about each camp’s perspec- Some jobs important to the everyday tive were subject to respondents’ bias- Manifest and operation of society are avoided by es, distortions, and memory limita- people who choose not to engage in tions. Information obtained was Latent Tensions disrespected occupations. This dirty treated as an accurate reflection of Groups experience tension in two work is seen as distasteful or discred- what people thought and felt, ways. At a manifest or surface level, iting because it casts a moral pall whether or not it was objectively true, group members are aware of and over those who do it (Hughes 1964). since the perception of truth motivat- speak about superficial differences in Most people turn a blind eye to this ed and justified people’s behavior. attitudes or behaviors thought to work, preferring that others do it but From these data I constructed, rather cause various problems. These sur- viewing those who do so as modern than assessed, the perspectives of face tensions are acknowledged pub- untouchables—members of a caste both camps toward the no-kill issue. licly at group meetings, written about thought to be symbolically contami- Although this approach follows that in professional and popular publica- nated and best avoided or pitied of sociologists and social historians, tions, and debated and mulled over by because they are associated with who argue that collective behavior is those who experience them. Since unpopular, unpleasant, or unclean best understood by examining partic- these manifest tensions are thought tasks. ipants’ own understandings in rela- to be the root cause of problems, Many of the open-admissionists I tion to their social context, it may solutions are aimed at altering, neu- interviewed felt that no-kill shelters frustrate those who think I should be tralizing, or eliminating them. delegated euthanasia to them. They more critical. However a critical While important to understand and believed that they were judged to be approach would be neither faithful to manage, these manifest tensions are morally tainted because they killed my ethnographic method nor helpful symptomatic of deeper, rarely verbal- animals. They sensed they were in creating dialogue and common ized tensions. These latent tensions uncomfortably tolerated, at best, for ground. are sensed by group members but carrying out such an unpleasant task, I also tried to sample a wide variety rarely articulated in a conscious or and challenged, at worst, for continu- of shelter organizations by size, orien- deliberate manner. The tensions lurk ing to do it. As one respondent said,

68 The State of the Animals II: 2003 “Why am I now an enemy? It used death.” And a number of shelter rather a combination of black humor to be the humane societies versus directors have been called “butcher,” and informal understanding that they the pounds, who were the baddies. “Hitler,” and “concentration-camp were using kill as a linguistic short- Now we are the baddies.” Another runner” (Foster 2000; Gilyard 2001, hand to describe their acts. Other respondent concurred, saying, “It’s 6–7). Short of specific references to shelter workers deliberately used the no fun being the villains with the the Nazi Holocaust, some no-kill term kill, at least before the rise of the black hats.” As the “baddies,” open- advocates suggested genocide-like no-kill movement, as an interesting admission workers thought that actions by open-admissionists way to demonstrate their continuing no-kill advocates cast them as wrong- because they were conducting “mass lack of acceptance of euthanasia as a doers who were “looked down upon” slaughter of animals” or “legitimized solution. For them it served as a (Milani 1997), “discredited” (Bogue mass slaughter.” reminder that this was something 1998b) or “guilty. . . because they Slightly less provocative were they did not like to do and wanted to are murderers” (Caras 1997a) charges of criminal-like action toward eliminate the need for. Thus, while “. . . sadists, or monsters” (Caras animals. “To me it’s criminal if a dog some objected to the use of this term 1997b). Moreover some respondents with poor manners or who is a little because they were concerned about it felt that, with the growing popularity bit standoff-ish should be euthanized making them look or feel callous, oth- of the no-kill concept, the public had for behavior reasons,” noted one no- ers supported its use, saying that it joined this critical bandwagon to cas- kill advocate. Sometimes the “crimi- helped remind them that they were tigate them as bad people for eutha- nal” metaphor was created through taking lives—a symbolic way of keep- nizing animals. The result was that the use of such penal language as ing fresh the commitment to attack open admissionists, rather than the “execute.” For example, one no-kill the source of the problem. public, were blamed. trainer was trying to modify the Open admissionists resented the The casting of open admissionists behavior of a very aggressive dog who perception of them as killers because as “baddies” stemmed from the lan- bit two staff members, required muz- they felt it was unfair or hypocritical. guage used by no-kill advocates. Many zling for walks, and was kept in the In their opinion, by being forced to open-admissionists argued that the shelter for sixteen months. She said euthanize many animals, they were term no-kill was itself an “attack” on that the dog would have been “exe- made to shoulder all the moral, emo- them, implying a “put-down” of open cuted” had the dog been in an open- tional, and aesthetic heartaches that admissionists as killers (Bogue admission facility. This terminology went with the job. One editorial 1998a). “When they say, ‘no-kill,’ suggests that, if open-admission argued that the harm of no-kill is that what they really mean is, ‘you-kill,’” workers euthanized this difficult-to- It punishes shelters that are claimed one critic (Miller n.d.). adopt, potentially dangerous dog, doing their very best but are Indeed, there was concern that the their act would be morally equivalent stuck with the dirty work. It is terminology itself positioned open to putting a criminal to death. While demoralizing and disheartening admissionsts as “pro-kill” (Paris open-admission shelters spoke of for humane workers who would do 1997), since the term no-kill implies “euthanasia rooms” and “euthanasia almost anything to stop that its opposite. “Open admission shel- technicians,” no-kill staff claimed heartbreaking selection process. ters are not ‘kill’ shelters any more that their shelters did not have “exe- Humane workers who are brave than ‘pro-choicers’ are ‘pro-abor- cution chambers” and maintained enough to accept that dirty work tion,’” explained one open-admission that they did not “kill” as did their deserve better than that. (Caras advocate. Not surprisingly, some open-admission peers. 1997c, 17) open-admissionists have called for At the core of this provocative Instead open admissionists called abolishing the “no-kill” label and sub- imagery was the idea that open for what one interviewee described as stituting the term limited admission. admissionists were killers, an idea “...sharing the burden. As long as Even more provocative was lan- that reinforced the no-kill distinction there is euthanasia to be done, the guage that accused open-admission between killing and euthanizing. resentment on the part of us is that shelters of killing animals in ways Open admissionists patently rejected we shouldn’t be doing it all. Any shel- reminiscent of Nazi cruelties to this distinction, claiming that they ter in the same town should be shar- humans. One charge labeled the only euthanized. Of course, when ing the burden. That’s like saying we open-admission approach the “final working with peers, open-admission are all working on the same issue. We solution,” a term referring to the workers did speak of killing. Shelter are all going to take the good stuff Holocaust. Another charge was even workers sometimes used the term kill and the bad stuff.” more specific: referring to euthana- when speaking with colleagues but However, no-kill proponents argued sia by open-admissionists, a no-kill were careful to say “euthanize” when that if anyone was to blame it should conference panelist described it as speaking to the public. Use of this be open admissionists. In their opin- the “holocaust of family members language was not an implicit accep- ion blaming no-killers for delegating [i.e., shelter animals] being put to tance of the no-kill distinction, but dirty work sidetracked shelter work-

The No-Kill Controversy: Manifest And Latent Sources of Tension 69 ers from a more important matter. No-kill proponents pointed out that I didn’t appreciate sitting in a Open admissionists, they said, needed they too have been discredited or workshop and having an HSUS to see that they were guilty of com- demonized for not killing enough ani- employee speaking, saying to me, plicity in killing because they made it mals as opposed to killing too many. “It is the responsibility of all of us “easy” for the public to handle their This stigma was felt, according to in the shelter profession to eutha- animals like unwanted consumer many no-kill spokespersons, when nize animals.” That’s a value judg- goods disposed of without fore- they were ignored by open-admission ment. They are communicating thought. “They [open-admission shel- leaders. Several speakers at a no-kill that no-kill is bad and that we ters] are teaching the public they can conference lamented the lack of sup- should all be euthanizing animals. throw away their animals at the shel- port for no-kill at national animal wel- She was basically dissing no-kill. I ter, and the shelter will euthanize fare and animal rights conferences, immediately raised my hand to their problem for them, and they where companion animal issues were defend [no-kill shelters] but I was aren’t to blame because they took the “not well represented.” They felt that not called on. pet to the shelter.” open-admission authorities spurned No-killers saw charges of dirty work their well-intentioned advances for Dishonesty delegation as “garbage talk,” contend- support of no-kill conferences and A palpable distrust existed between ing that open-admission shelters need- other activities. One national spokes- open-admission and no-kill followers. ed to rethink their mission and identi- woman for the no-kill movement Members of each camp insisted that ty so they could become no-kill claimed that prominent open-admis- they were woefully misunderstood themselves. Open-admission shelters sion leaders and academics even and misrepresented by the opposi- should “get out of the killing busi- refused to return her telephone calls. tion, which, in turn, was seen as por- ness,” as one no-kill worker said, for This lack of recognition by main- traying itself dishonestly to profes- the sake of those working in such set- stream humane authorities was seen sional colleagues and the general tings. Carrying out euthanasia was as hypocritical, given their presumed public. thought to be an “endlessly demoraliz- concern for promoting the welfare of Open admissionists attacked the ing activity” that stopped workers animals. As one speaker at a no-kill honesty of no-kill shelters and from focusing on their “core purpose: conference pointed out, “The most spokespersons on a number of bringing an end to the killing of these fundamental right of animals is to be counts. First, they said, no-kill advo- 3 animals.” Having sympathy for their allowed to lead their own lives and cates lied about not killing shelter euthanizing peers, many no-kill em- not be killed, yet this right has not animals when the term was taken lit- ployees wanted them to have the been strongly embraced by open- erally. “I believe they are trained to lie opportunity to work in an environment admission animal welfare and rights and there is deception to the pub- where the killing of animals was rare groups.” This was seen as a deliberate lic. . . that animals are not eutha- and, when done, was for apparently repudiation of the no-kill perspective. nized,” said one worker. One critic extreme veterinary or behavioral prob- No-kill advocates also felt ignored, maintained that some no-killers euth- lems. “People are drawn to work here misunderstood, and criticized at the anized animals “surreptitiously, because it is less scary,” observed one national conferences of open-admis- behind closed doors,” so supporters no-kill worker. The scariness refers to sion organizations, because euthana- would not find out. To many respon- the loss, guilt, and grief experienced if sia proponents seemed unwilling to dents this “deception” was termino- workers kill animals with whom they enter into a “dialogue.” As one no-kill logical: “What is a shelter’s definition have established some relationship, advocate put it, of no-kill? At our shelter it is that we especially if these animals were poten- I don’t like being demonized. So do not kill for overcrowding or when a tially adoptable. Another worker many people there were very dog’s ‘time runs out,’ but we do euth- explained, “I don’t have to worry that I resentful of us. They know the anize for behavioral and health rea- am going to bond with an animal and wonderful things we do here and sons. Now to me that’s not no-kill. It then have to put him down, which is how wonderful we are. We were makes that terminology close to a lie. my perception of what happens in kill expecting people to be, like, What do the press and the public and shelters. So I feel lucky that those are “Wow, you are affiliated with that donors think it means? Probably they the kinds of emotions I don’t have to wonderful group,” and instead we take the words literally—‘We don’t deal with.” This thinking suggested were, like, getting slammed, kill dogs, ever’—well, they do!” On that no-kill workers were not ducking shielding ourselves from the rot- the grounds that the term was false if responsibility for delegating dirty work ten vegetables being thrown at us. taken literally, some critics proposed or refusing to share the burden. That feeling was very pervasive new terminology, calling no-kill shel- Instead, they wondered why open there [at national meeting]. ters rarely-kills or low kills. Another admissionists continued their tradi- Another no-kill worker felt “dissed” problem that has less to do with ter- tional approach to euthanasia, given at a national humane meeting, recall- its adverse emotional impact on them. ing,

70 The State of the Animals II: 2003 minology, but still was regarded as a were too many similar looking ani- open-admission critique when she matter of dishonesty, has to do with mals together in a shelter, such as reported “incredible feelings of misrepresentation. Open-admission- tiger-striped kittens. Some critics guilt,” making it “hard to sleep at ists claimed that no-kill shelters mis- also charged that no-kill shelters used night,” because she felt “complicity” represented themselves by shifting a “changeable” classification, where- in adopting out dangerous animals to responsibility for killing to other shel- by a placeable animal could be reclas- clients from whom information was ters; this made the no-kill shelters sified as unplaceable if the animal was hidden about these problems and who accomplices to death, argued the not adopted, enabling the shelter to were blamed by staff when animals open-admissionists, although the claim a “huge” percentage of their were returned. shelters distanced themselves from it. “placeable” animals were adopted. Some critics claimed that, if not One such critic maintained, “. . . The Some felt that this classification deliberately dishonest, no-kill shel- reality of a ‘no-kill’ approach to shel- “game” was so capricious it made no- ters misrepresented themselves tering simply means ‘let someone kill “a joke.” All of these manipula- because they were unrealistic. One else kill’” (Savesky 1995a, 4). tions, some charged, enabled the “no- open-admissionist wrote, “The con- Second, open-admissionists said kill propagandists” through cept of the shelter where no animals no-killers were deceptive in claiming “deception” to produce statistics must die is a fantasy that seems too to adopt out all their animals, a tactic apparently documenting low rates for good to be true” (Caras 1997c, 16). some critics called a “smart market- euthanasia and high “save rates.” These “fantasies,” argued open ing strategy.” This point was under- Third, critics charged that no-kill admissionists, made donors and the scored by one critic who claimed that shelters misrepresented the cause of general public “feel good.” As one “their almost no-kill policy” resulted behavior problems in dogs, not admit- worker said: “The truth is that it is from only accepting “very adoptable ting that these difficulties were due impossible. They are encouraging an animals,” leaving the “burden” of to long-term confinement and/or the expectation that is unrealistic.” euthanizing turned-away animals to kind of training they received. For These expectations open-admission shelters. It was instance, “excuses” were made for . . . raise false hopes and wishes for alleged that no-kill shelters “take in the bad behavior of animals, as in the pet owners and our communities the ‘movie star’ dogs and cats, the case of a dog showing “guarding that animal abandonment is pretty ones they know they can place behavior” around food whose actions going to be prevented simply in new homes, and turn away the were “explained away” by pointing to because the killing of adoptable rest” (Caras 1997c, 17). The result of the lack of food the dog had experi- animals is going to be prohibited. such policies, open-admissionists enced. One worker spoke about “the The complexities of the problem said, was that most animals wound up betrayal the public would feel if they of killing so many animals in our at open-admission shelters. “They are were aware that the shelter they shelters is not simply due to the strays, ‘too old,’ unsocialized, injured, trusted has made them the subject of perception that an unwanted pet or diseased. They are considered an experiment in placing rehabilitat- is “better off alive on the streets unadoptable by no-kill shelters so ed biting dogs, an experiment with so than being killed at the pound.” they are brought to us” (Bogue many failures.” Critics maintained (Cubrda 1993) 1998b). One person compared this that the aggressiveness of shelter Critics argued that, in addition to self-serving policy to a school that dogs was not fully disclosed to raising false hopes, these fantasies led always has impressive SAT scores adopters. Upset by this problem, a people mistakenly to believe that because it accepts only bright stu- worker described a shelter that was euthanasia was unnecessary at their dents in the first place. No-kill shel- being sued for adopting out a Rot- local humane society, a strategy that ters were seen as excessively “picky,” tweiler who was known to have killed siphoned funds away from open- rejecting some animals with extreme- one dog, only to have him knock admission shelters. ly minor problems that could be used down his new owner and kill her pet No-kill advocates maintained that as excuses for turning them away. dog. The same worker also claimed their aims were distorted, bemoaning Expanding on this point, one respon- that this shelter concealed from the “warfare” and frequent “bashing” dent said, “If an animal has the tiniest potential adopters that another dog by open-admission spokespersons patch of flea allergy, dermatitis, which had bitten seven volunteers. In that resulted in “credibility hits” is curable, they say no if they want to. response, she resigned from her orga- against them. One no-kill staff mem- Bad teeth, they say no if they want to. nization, noting: “They adopted out ber spoke of her frustration with peo- Any animal they can say no to, they any and all dogs, no matter their his- ple who misconstrued the meaning of are going to say no. They don’t take tory and, worst of all, did not tell no-kill as a preference for animals to many that need treatment.” One adopting families if the dog had bit- be kept alive in unpleasant or respondent said that even “color” ten previously.” Another no-kill work- unhealthy circumstances. She noted, could be used as a reason to classify er, uncomfortable with her own shel- “I don’t know if there is any sane per- an animal as “unadoptable,” if there ter’s policy, gave credence to this son who would agree that a ware-

The No-Kill Controversy: Manifest And Latent Sources of Tension 71 house kind of life. . .is better than get only the worst here; everybody the unexpressed, complicated, and death. I don’t think anybody is argu- thinks we take only the best dogs recalcitrant issues that underlie man- ing that, except for an extremely here. It’s hard for me to find a family ifest tensions. small subset of people who are not in dog in our shelter because we are tak- the mainstream of the no-kill move- ing the ones no one else takes.” In ment.” No-kill advocates also dis- fact, in one no-kill shelter, there was Vested Interests agreed with those who criticized the strong internal pressure on intake Much like the abortion debate, the concept of no-kill because it failed to workers to accept as many dogs as persistence of which stems from the be literally true, admitting that a few possible from the nearby animal con- vested interests of pro-life and pro- animals, albeit a tiny number when trol office, regardless of their bad or choice proponents, the no-kill contro- compared to open-admission shel- “spooky” behavior or poor condition; versy is stubborn and resistant to easy ters, were euthanized. Some even otherwise the dogs were likely to be compromise. No-kill and open-admis- refused to label their shelters as no- euthanized. In one instance, after an sion followers cling to and defend kill or minimized use of this term intake worker refused an aggressive, their vested interests, including their because their euthanasia rates were six-month-old dog offered to her shel- collective identities, occupational not zero. ter, several coworkers chided her and lifestyles, and world views. These vest- For their part no-kill shelters called her a murderer. Challenging ed interests underlie any debate argued that open-admission organiza- back, some no-kill shelters felt that about the merits of different policies tions “kill healthy animals” (Foro their save rates might be even better for controlling and managing pet 1997, 16) and misrepresent the real were it not for having difficult and overpopulation or dealing “humane- meaning of euthanasia. Seeking to unadoptable animals dumped on ly” with its victims. undermine the semantic justification them by animal control organiza- Members of each camp in my for killing so many animals, one no- tions. A respondent explained, research had a vested interest in pro- kill spokesperson wrote: “The term We could inflate our save rate tecting their humane identities. For euthanasia, as used by these practi- even more if we had a bar that no-kill followers this identity provided tioners [open admission and animal resembled anything like another some cachet because it empowered control staff] in the destruction of shelter[’s], where they see the them. They saw themselves as “redis- healthy animals, softens the reality hint of a curl of a lip and that ani- covering” who they were, as opposed and lessens its impact on the public. mal is euthanized and it never to open-admission workers whom Sadly, to mislabel killing as euthana- goes to their staff as an adoptable they felt “have forgotten our mission sia for controlling animal overpopula- animal, where we would not even and are lost in the overwhelming job tion does not allow society to deal flinch at that. So I would say our of euthanasia,” according to one shel- with the tragedy or to accept respon- numbers are possibly even better ter worker whose organization was sibility for making this happen” (17). in so far as we are taking some switching from open admission to no- “True,” “authentic,” or “dictionary- serious-behavior animals—dogs kill. In the opinion of no-killer follow- defined” (17) euthanasia was spoken that bite you, dogs that are ers, open-admission work was simply about to separate “killing” from aggressive. not the work of a “’humane’ society.” other instances where extreme, Their new identity also was empower- untreatable, chronic suffering man- Latent Tensions ing because it had an outlaw quality; dated euthanizing animals. No-kill Identifying manifest tensions helps to this made it an attractive and power- advocates also reclaimed the concept detail the no-kill controversy but does ful label for no-kill workers who felt of euthanasia by asserting that little to diffuse it. Most proposals to alienated, misunderstood, and humane death be done only for the allay the conflict come from the open- excluded from the humane powers sake of suffering animals rather than admission camp, which has called for that be. Believing that they were dis- for owners who had their own agenda no-kill advocates to modify their empowered framed their camp’s for requesting euthanasia, suggesting provocative language. However, those stance as “anti-establishment” rela- that open admissionists wrongly concerned about inflammatory tive to open admissionists (Foro, blurred this distinction. Not surpris- speech in the no-kill controversy have n.d.a). Poorly endowed, small shelters ingly open-admission advocates tuned into only a small part of the especially were drawn to the identity rejected this distinction, claiming bigger picture that informs this con- tag of no-kill because it symbolically that it was mere “semantics.” troversy. Provocative language is a represented their perceived power- No-kill proponents also refuted the symptom and not a cause of the prob- lessness in an animal community charge that they were “picky” to lem; its social and psychological roots dominated by a few large and power- ensure high adoption rates. They are concealed and complex. To ful national organizations. The charge claimed to take many animals that explain the persistence and fervor of made by some that the San Francisco were far from the “cream of the the strife, it is necessary to analyze SPCA (SF SPCA) had “sold out” to crop,” as one worker pointed out. “We The HSUS (which is viewed as pro

72 The State of the Animals II: 2003 open admission in its orientation) by by a legal system which protected admissionists focused on the issue of increasing the number of animals it murderers and left victims unprotect- easing the suffering of animals and euthanized from almost none to a ed (Doyle 1982).4 In the end this providing options to owners who no few, speaks to the current importance cachet was strong enough to make it longer could or wanted to care for of boundaries in conferring identity virtually impossible to stop using their pets. However this symbolism in the humane community. some language, including the very paled in comparison with the no-kill Other features of the no-kill identi- term no-kill. Its advocates were un- movement’s moral concern for what ty that offered some cachet came likely to curtail use of this self- were seen as innocent, helpless, and from its evangelical quality, calling moniker because it so powerfully desirable animals, a stance similar to for people to see the “right” way to organized their identity. the pro-life movement’s symbolic con- approach this problem and convert to Open admissionists have discov- struction of the fetus (Doyle 1982; this “movement,” leaving behind ered little if any cachet in their Sheeran 1987). In American society their former, ill-conceived approach. humane identity, at least compared anti-death icons trump almost any Several respondents commented on with no-killers. For the most part, other image except that of freedom, the “religious fervor” of no-kill fol- they have refined their former identi- and this appears true in the present lowers; one said that there was a ty in a reactive and defensive manner case. Moreover, although some open “kind of saintliness” about the move- by digging in their psychological admissionists wish to develop their ment. There even were rare attempts heels and reaffirming their long- own label conveying a new identity to include elements of Buddhism and standing image as the standard bear- rivaling “no kill,” this would perpetu- vegetarianism as part of the “no-kill ers for humane treatment of animals. ate the tension rather than remedy it. philosophy” (Foro, n.d.b). Ironically their “new” identity has Workers also had vested interests in Perhaps the most cachet came from made them appear to be victims fac- protecting lifestyles, whether person- unintentional piggybacking on the ing a more powerful enemy. For exam- al or occupational, associated with pro-life movement. Large and suc- ple some open admissionists spoke as either the open-admission or no-kill cessful social movements provide an though they were on the “wrong side approach. They sought to defend assembly of symbols and ideological of the street” because the “dirty what was familiar to them at work, trappings—a cultural resource—that work” of killing was delegated to while questioning others who threat- other groups can use to fashion their them. They felt powerless to stop this ened this routine. For instance, at one own thinking and model their own flow of animals and the undesirable level, the open-admission approach to actions, or from which they can draw task of euthanizing so many. Some euthanasia was easier for established emotional power and symbolic staff in open-admission shelters and bureaucracies that had worked this coherency. While there was little evi- animal control offices, especially in way for years and had developed suit- dence that no-killers subscribed to cities that had strong and financially able defenses to cope with it. Main- pro-life beliefs, there were many par- stable no-kill programs, lamented stream open-admission shelters have allels between the ideologies of these having poorer facilities and less pub- had the resources to garner large- two groups that empowered the no- lic attention. This difference was scale support for euthanasia as the kill movement and emotionally noted in a major magazine article best way to deal with pet overpopula- charged the identity of its followers. about animal shelters, which referred tion, and they have grown comfort- Just as the pro-life movement cam- to one city’s animal control office as a able with their established methods paigns to save the “helpless unborn” “tenement” and its no-kill operation of doing so. One respondent claimed, who should not be “killed,” the no-kill as a “palace” (Hess 1998). We are all vulnerable to the possi- movement questions the moral, as Open-admissionists also failed to bility that euthanasia just makes well as the practical, basis for killing piggyback their identity on a cultural my day go a little bit easier. If you unwanted or undesirable shelter ani- resource that could give it momen- suddenly ended euthanasia for mals. The “killing” of shelter animals tum, coherency, and cachet. In con- reasons of space, you’ve got a big signaled a moral assault on the fabric trast, pro-choice advocates linked problem, don’t you? You are going of human-animal relationships that their cause to the feminist move- to have 20 or 80 percent more was unimaginable to no-killers, much ment’s protection of the rights of population than before. Solve as abortion was to pro-lifers (Gins- women. Support from animal rights that problem. If there is euthana- burg 1986; Kaufmann 1999). Many groups, such as People for the Ethical sia, it does make things a little bit no-kill proponents saw the open Treatment of Animals (PETA), did not easy, doesn’t it, to have your shel- admissionists’ version of euthanasia provide this cachet. One reason is ter running very smoothly and as murder committed by selfish own- that no-kill groups also claimed to be efficiently? ers and unimaginative shelter work- protecting the rights of animals by No-kill workers also developed orga- ers willing to accept the status quo, in opposing traditional euthanasia poli- nizational routines that made their the same way that pro-life advocates cy, making the rights issue somewhat work easier for them. Those most out- defined abortion as a crime approved of a wash. It was true that open spoken in their criticism of euthanasia

The No-Kill Controversy: Manifest And Latent Sources of Tension 73 took the moral high ground by dis- not solve this problem but merely approach seem impractical or even tancing themselves from it while on shifted the responsibility for euthana- outlandish. the job. In their shelters they regard- sia to another shelter or agency. No- ed euthanasia as a clinical, veterinary kill advocates, however, saw the fun- act performed elsewhere by techni- damental problem as a person Attacking the Problem cians in animal control agencies, or an problem—one of changing the nature Differing approaches to dealing with infrequent, highly ritualized and emo- of shelter work so that workers could animal overpopulation resulted in a tionally upsetting treatment of a have a professional identity unconta- second latent tension. No-kill workers “good friend” done by in-house veteri- minated by the contradictions posed “fought the good fight” for each ani- narians. They provided a language and by conducting frequent euthanasia, mal who came their way, expending as set of rationalizations to ensure that especially if it involved animals much time, labor, and money as nec- such rare, in-house killings would be thought to be adoptable. Evidence of essary to ensure that he or she was seen as impossible to avoid, without this changing emphasis from animals cared for, loved, and, they hoped, any ambiguity about the wisdom of to people came from the public justi- adopted. Workers could feel as doing them. These steps made them fications of shelters that have aban- though they championed individual comfortable and secure while on the doned their prior open-admission/ animals. As one respondent said, “We job. Like their open-admission coun- euthanasia policies for no-kill ap- dare to think that every individual life terparts, they came to see their par- proaches. When a major SPCA did so, does matter. . . that that individual’s ticular organizational way of life as the the New York Times headline pro- life actually matters.” This focus on best one for animals and themselves. claimed: “ASPCA Plans to Give Up the welfare and fate of individual ani- Finally, these accustomed ways of Job Killing New York Strays.” The text mals, combined with the knowledge working endured because workers explained that that euthanasia was very unlikely, accepted the presumptions that Killing stray dogs and cats has allowed these workers to indulge propped up, defended, and explained obscured its mission—and its their “rescue instinct” and their need them. Usually the presumptions were image....The society has backed to have emotionally deep and com- expressed by people as “truths” that away from killing, which it calls plex relationships with shelter ani- were rarely questioned and often animal control. “Philosophically, mals, even though they knew that thought to be self-evident. It was pre- it’s a nightmare to kill 30,000 to many animals would be adopted. dictable that the workers could not 40,000 animals a year....That’s The major force behind fighting the see the tenuousness of such “truths,” not our mission.”. . . Being per- good fight was the unabashed desire since ideologies make those who pro- ceived as an animal killer of no-killers to rescue or save animals, fess them shortsighted as to the has. . . saddled it with an image far believing that it almost always was implications of their beliefs. The different from the one it wants— worth trying to find homes for all ani- beliefs function as “reality” anchors that of an animal care and adop- mals, even if others classified them as for people and, as such, are clutched tion agency. (Hicks 1993, B14) unadoptable. As one respondent said, tenaciously. Respondents in my These divergent views were bol- There are a lot of self-proclaimed research supported these anchors by stered by the isolation of workers experts who will tell you that this use of key terms, such as shelter, from the realities of shelters unlike or that dog is unadoptable, don’t euthanasia, adoptable animal, and their own. Most workers in each camp even bother trying. And we don’t humane, whose meanings were am- had little if any firsthand experience accept that. You can get terrifical- biguous and therefore modifiable to with the opposing group. As in the ly good outcomes....It’s a ques- be consistent with each camp’s abortion controversy, where pro-life tion of when can you and when truths. The terms became a linguistic participants had little or no direct can’t you. The jury is out on our code to define a camp’s position rela- exposure to abortion (Luker 1984), animals until we have exhausted tive to other groups. most workers in no-kill facilities had all reasonable attempts. For example, while both open- scant exposure to euthanasia. Not No-kill trainers believed they could admission and no-kill advocates having direct contact can exaggerate rehabilitate most problem animals, abhorred euthanasia, they had differ- the emotional difficulty of doing including those exhibiting aggressive- ent takes on killing because they had something, making it seem even ness. One trainer compared this chal- different conceptions of the funda- more wrenching than it might be in lenge with working with criminals, mental problem. Each group defined reality, and making it seem even more concluding that both animals and the problem somewhat differently, horrific or ghastly than it seems to criminals can be rehabilitated if peo- making for different solutions. Open- those workers who have learned how ple try hard enough. “If you’ve gotten admission shelter workers saw the to rationalize or cope with it. Similar- people who’ve committed certain lev- problem as an animal problem—one ly, many open-admissionists never els of crime, can they be rehabilitat- of managing pet overpopulation. They worked in no-kill settings; this lack of ed? If you give them the right coun- argued that no-kill approaches did experience certainly made any other seling, can you turn them around, or

74 The State of the Animals II: 2003 is it always in them? I would submit arrived there three years earlier. one no-kill shelter when a small num- that the right kind of effort hasn’t Fighting the good fight for all ani- ber of overly aggressive dogs were been tried.” mals made euthanizing any of them a slated for euthanasia. “We could not No-kill workers felt that open- difficult and labored decision. One fix them. We were at the end of our admission shelters turned their backs facility had formal guidelines for ability,” lamented one worker. Some on animals that were less than “per- deciding on all acts of euthanasia dogs had become a danger to the staff fect,” euthanizing those that could be (except for extreme emergencies). and were a liability risk. Management placed in homes if given behavioral or The guidelines included obtaining held special meetings with different medical attention, along with time signatures of approval from the presi- groups of workers and volunteers to and careful placement. One no-kill dent, vice president, and initiating deliver this news, calm those upset or worker elaborated on this view, say- department head, and requiring that in “shock,” and reset the organiza- ing, the animals’ names be posted so no tion’s “bar” for rehabilitating difficult Where do you draw the line? Does staff would be shocked by inadver- dogs. During the meetings senior everything have to be pristine and tently discovering that a “friend” had staff placed most of the blame on perfect, and you kill everything been euthanized. After completing external forces, saying, “Our hand has else? We want to give animals a this paperwork, cats slated to be been forced by elements in society.” chance that we think ought to be euthanized were given special foods Those external forces included what given a chance. It’s kind of like a and treats; soft, comfortable, secure the staff described as unreasonable “quantity versus quality” type of bedding; adequate scratching posts; expectations for the behavior of ani- thing. I mean, the Blackies and and visits from the staff. Dogs were mals, and society’s excessive litigious- the Willies out there, they would given similar bedding; a rawhide bone ness. Trying to ease distraught and be killed because they are not per- during the day; a beef bone at night; confused listeners, senior staff fect, and I see this wonderful pet special food and “extra special good- claimed they “did not have choices” that would make a great compan- ies”; a cloth toy; and visits from staff and “couldn’t” do anything else with ion for someone and I think they members who would give them “qual- these dogs. are worth investing the resources ity time” through long walks, outdoor Nevertheless senior managers with- into. play “with their special buddies,” or drew their initial list as pressure This logic meant that no-kill facili- quiet time. This “spoiling period,” an mounted to spare these animals; a ties could “save” or “rescue” animals informal practice at many no-kill few workers and volunteers demand- from open-admission shelters, and facilities, involved special considera- ed meetings with shelter officials to that those shelters denied the value tion for animals after the decision was protest this list, and rumors circulat- of rehabilitating animals who could made to euthanize them. Spoiling ed about a volunteer protest strike be improved and perhaps adopted. periods “were awkward” for the staff and leaks to the press. Workers Saved animals often faced a severe- because they knew that animals were feared that conducting euthanasia ly reduced pool of potential adopters, to be “put down,” but the special on this scale would subvert their since it took a very special adopter to treatment also made the staff feel identities as no-kill advocates. One be the right match for an animal with better about the euthanasia decision. uneasy worker spoke about the slip- behavioral or veterinary problems, let One worker said, pery slope created by doing even a alone one that was old or unattrac- The last days are so difficult. I find small number of euthanasias: “We tive. Despite this, no-kill workers con- it very hard to look at a dog car- are in a position now of either vinced themselves that perfect rying on its normal life, when I becoming like every other shelter adopters existed for virtually all of know that soon it will all be over. and we save only perfect dogs who their charges. Having this view, how- But I think it helps us to know need nothing or what. . . ?” Consider- ever, justified keeping animals for a that our dog’s last day or so was able, continued pressure by workers long time as staff searched for suit- really special. It seems to bring resulted in several dogs being taken able adopters. This search could be peace to the people around the off the list and sent to sanctuaries. particularly trying when dogs were dog who are suffering, knowing Despite these efforts a few dogs highly aggressive and needed muz- that the dog is going to get euth- from the list were euthanized. The zling and constant monitoring. When anized. most unsettling case involved a dog a no-kill worker was asked who would The individualization of shelter ani- having a history of aggression, but be an appropriate adopter for such a mals meant that no-kill workers were with whom the animal’s “fan club” challenging animal, she said a dog very disturbed when euthanasia took had bonded intensely. Only this inner trainer would come to the shelter one place, even though, or perhaps because, circle was permitted to attend Maria’s day and adopt one. However, she this was a rare event. “It is always euthanasia; lights were dimmed in acknowledged—without apparent such a big deal. I just cannot get used the dog’s quarters, and the mood was irony—that no such adopter had to it,” observed one worker. Enor- extremely solemn if not despondent. come to her shelter since she had mous internal resistance occurred at Many workers were tormented; a few

The No-Kill Controversy: Manifest And Latent Sources of Tension 75 chose not to attend the euthanasia I can do for so many others. I always nizing animals. Having because they were so distressed. One have to come back to looking at all the people who were involved staff member was hospitalized because numbers. I can’t afford to get in his [the dog’s] life standing she was so disturbed by the event, and attached to a new dog. I have to around him, pushing their emo- several others took “sick days” be- think with my head. I have to keep tions on the doctor....it could be cause of their grief. During the hours part of me for the good of the whole. difficult for the doctor not to cry. preceding the euthanasia, as well as I won’t sacrifice a few for the many.” That’s not fair to do to the doctor the days following it, workers could According to open admissionists, or the tech holding the dog. Why be seen embracing each other, offer- relating to shelter animals with one’s should they be forced to have an ing words of comfort, and shedding heart caused ethical and emotional emotion for an animal that they tears. “People are walking around like problems. They claimed that no-kill have no connection to? They are zombies,” said one sad worker about shelters had such a narrow definition forced to feel sympathy. her peers. A wake held the evening of of suffering, they often could not These ethical and emotional draw- the euthanasia again excluded those “see” it; certain animals might not be backs of bonding so closely to shelter outside the inner circle of mourners; euthanized even to end their suffer- animals were worrisome not just to a poem in honor of Maria was avail- ing. Without clearly seeing suffering, the no-kill workers but also to open- able; stories were swapped about the workers as well as animals suffered, admission proponents who pondered animal along with photographs of although the workers’ suffering was the fate of their no-kill peers. her; flowers and wine were there for emotional. By comparison, a nearby municipal the occasion. As one worker said, the These problems were evident at animal-control office routinely and sentiment was: “We love you guys, you Maria’s euthanasia, according to shel- unceremoniously euthanized animals. did good work but this one just didn’t ter staff members who sympathized While bemoaning euthanasia, workers work.” Contrary to shelter policy, one with the open-admission approach. there felt that it was the right thing to of the workers requested Maria’s The fact that this euthanasia was for do given the large number of surren- ashes; a few staff members thought behavioral rather than medical rea- dered animals and the limited space this was going “overboard.” sons made it especially difficult for and resources available. They, like Open-admission workers, in con- workers to say that Maria’s “suffer- other open-admission workers, reject- trast, related to shelter animals less ing” justified her death. One excep- ed the notion that they were the “bad- with their hearts and more with their tion was a staff member who had dies” because no-kill workers needed heads. Unquestionably they too want- worked previously at an open-admis- to “rescue” their shelter animals. The ed the best for animals that came sion shelter. She commented, implication of using this language was their way, but their approach was col- Whenever I put an animal down, I that these animals were salvageable as ored by what they saw as a more always found it to be redeeming potential pets and therefore should important issue than the need to feel because the dog has been in tor- not be killed. The problem, according good about their relationships with ment—and any dog I have put to open admissionists, was that if no- individual animals—namely, the need down has either had an aggres- kill workers “rescued” with their to attack the overpopulation prob- sion issue or just not been happy, hearts, they would neglect the “bigger lem by increasing the number of has had a bad life. For me it was picture,” which the former could see. adoptions through euthanasia of ani- the one thing I was able to do for This criticism was expressed even by mals deemed unadoptable. They also that dog—give it some peace. I some no-kill workers who bemoaned used their heads because they felt it was able to end the suffering. turning away so many animals for lack was important never to say no to sur- Indeed, a number of workers at this of sufficient resources to deal with renderers of animals; despite their shelter felt that the strong emotional them all. To open admissionists, this frustration and anger with surrender- reaction to the death of Maria was was a management problem—a com- ers, open admissionists feared what “unfair” to some staff members and bination of poor resource allocation might happen to the animals if they out of proportion with what should and bad judgment—that allowed were not left at the shelter. This happen after the loss of an un-owned workers to be self-indulgent. Such thinking forestalled deeper emotion- shelter dog with a history of biting. shortsighted policies were seen as al relationships with their charges, One such dissenter said that, if any- beneficial to workers, since they because all the animals stood some thing, members of Maria’s fan club gained emotional gratification at the chance of being euthanized and usu- were “mourning their failure” to expense of animal welfare. ally were in the shelter for relatively rehabilitate this highly aggressive The above-mentioned animal-con- short periods. One worker aptly sum- dog. Moreover, his opinion was that, trol office, like many open-admission marized this type of thinking as fol- although he thought it might sound shelters, had no formal protocol call- lows: “There’s a part of me that I “cold,” it was a better idea for emo- ing for signing off on euthanasia deci- don’t give to the dogs—not to that tional reasons to have a veterinarian sions or for in-house postings of the dog—because that would inhibit what and technician be alone when eutha- events. Nor was there a spoiling peri-

76 The State of the Animals II: 2003 od for animals being euthanized, were responsible for “saving” more which takes a “toll.” One respondent, although the workers here, like their animals. One open-admission defend- however, did use the word suffer, peers in open-admission shelters, er wrote in an editorial, “The Door claiming that some no-kill shelters maintained that they “spoiled [the Remains Open,” that “no-kill shelters kept animals so long that they devel- animals] as much as possible” for as seldom operate programs to rescue oped “that nervous thing, like dogs long as they were in their shelter sick and injured animals off the spinning, or some of the barking “. . . not [just for] twenty-four hours.” streets,” suggesting that animals in [which] sounds like suffering to me. Spoiling periods per se were thought need are turned away (Savesky They are just unhappy and crying.” to be more for the psychological ben- 1995b, 2), while open-admission shel- Similarly, another critic of warehous- efit of workers than for the animals ters “rescue sick and injured animals ing pointed out after visiting a no-kill and to place a “huge emotional bur- every day. . . dogs hit by cars, cats tan- shelter that “it was spotless....They den” on the staff members doing the gled in debris, animals injured by had air conditioning, climbing trees, spoiling. While workers lamented hav- other animals, victims of all sorts of toys, and good food. But when you ing to euthanize animals, they han- accidents.” In addition, no-kill shel- walked in, they were all over you. I dled it quite differently from their no- ters, according to Savesky, “often had cats attached to my legs and kill peers. Rather than expressing turn away older animals, those with arms, on my shoulders and my head. I their emotions about preventing minor health or behavioral problems, had scratch marks for a week after euthanasia or grieving when it or those that they otherwise classify that but not from aggression. These occurred, these workers blocked their unadoptable.” Moreover, this author cats were starved for human contact. emotions when it came to euthanasia. added that “no-kill shelters seldom That’s what breaks my heart about As one worker recalled, “I was like a investigate and prosecute complaints these places” (Donald 1991, 4). Some killing machine, a certified euthana- of cruelty and neglect” (2). By con- critics suggested that workers com- sia tech that euthanized 60 to 100 trast, she argues that many such ani- pounded the detrimental psychologi- plus animals every single day. Some mals have a greater chance of being cal effects of long-term housing by days that’s all I did—clean and kill. adopted in open-admission shelters. using inappropriate behavior and And go home. You put your feelings People working in open-admission training techniques. As evidence, one on the shelf. You just do your job. You shelters also thought it was cruel to respondent cited a case of several have to deal with that sometime down “warehouse” animals past the point dogs who were born in a no-kill shel- the line.” where they should be “humanely ter and stayed there for seven years. euthanized.” Some claimed that All displayed serious behavior prob- Being Humane warehousing was cruel because of the lems that were attributed to the Short of the most extreme manifesta- harmful psychological effects of keep- methods used in their training. tions of physical suffering in animals, ing dogs and cats in long-term hous- Open-admission spokespersons also no-kill and open-admission workers ing, especially if caged with multiple argued that warehousing in no-kill had very different perceptions of what animals and given minimal stimula- shelters could cause physical harm. constituted suffering, or at least tion and human contact. But in dis- This critique was echoed in a popular enough discomfort to justify killing cussions less-than-ideal caging or ani- magazine, which reported the follow- an animal for his or her own sake. mal care often fell short of being ing reaction of a 4-H group leader Having conflicting ideas about the labeled as cruel. One animal control after taking the group to visit a no-kill nature of suffering led to suggestions worker, for instance, was uncomfort- shelter: “Dogs limping around with that members of the opposite camp able with the local no-kill shelter’s mange and open sores. Others gasp- were being cruel to shelter animals practice of putting animals into ing for air or dragging broken legs, because they caused needless suffer- boarding kennels when space ran out struggling to fight off vicious packs in ing, either for killing them or for in the facility. “Who do they have to the large communal pen. ‘I might as keeping them alive. Alternative love them? They are going from one well have taken them to a horror notions of suffering also allowed both cage to another just to keep them show’” (Foster 2000). The reporter open-admission and no-kill workers to alive. I don’t know if it is cruel; it just who wrote this article referred to the see themselves as humane because seems. . . neglectful. The reason why “atrocious conditions” at some no- they could say that they were acting it is hard to say it is cruel is that it is kill facilities, and the “luckless in the best interests of animals com- not for a bad reason. The intention is inmates” who are “condemned” to pared to their peers in the other ‘Hold on, hold on, you’ll get your “filth” and who “suffer” from long- camp. chance.’” Another respondent hesi- term caging. Indeed, one respondent Some open-admission representa- tated to use the word suffer, but claimed that the “quality of care of tives argued that no-kill workers were spoke of the unintentional emotional animals is horrific. They [no-kill shel- cruel to turn their backs on so many “neglect” of dogs who are confined in ters] need to do it right and have needy or less desirable animals, and cages and have to deal with many dif- some standard of care.” For example, that open-admission shelters actually ferent handlers and visitors—all of he pointed to a no-kill facility that

The No-Kill Controversy: Manifest And Latent Sources of Tension 77 called his shelter in hopes of transfer- Part of their defense also rested on mals could be kept alive and even ring some of its 110 animals to the language used by no-kill advo- adopted. Some methods of euthana- reduce overcrowding. When the cates to describe physical and mental sia were easier for critics to decry on respondent visited the no-kill shelter, problems of animals housed for long the grounds that they caused animal he found that the facility was very periods of time in shelters. The advo- suffering. For example critics of a cold, merely a “semblance” of a build- cates fought hard to describe these shelter that used carbon monoxide ing, and that some of the animals problems in ways that did not lead deemed this gassing to be morally were dead. In addition, when the no- quickly to perceptions of hopeless- “wrong” and “cruel” because animals kill shelter was told it could transfer ness for the animals. For example, in cried out in pain or fear and saw other some animals, its manager declined one such facility, animals with behav- animals dying (Gilyard 2001). The because the open-admission director ior problems who would have been more common method used, injec- could not rule out their euthanasia. euthanized in open-admission shel- tion of lethal drugs, still was attacked Most no-kill respondents denied ters were described as having as cruel. “warehousing.” They felt that they “issues.” The word “issues” conjures Moreover most no-kill workers felt addressed the “quality of life” issue up psychological problems in humans that if adverse “warehousing” existed and provided a better life for animals that can be lived with and managed, it was at a facility other than their in shelters than some had in adoptive as opposed to more troubling behav- own. Some no-kill proponents were homes. Although one worker admit- ior that is difficult to tolerate and very clear that shelters whose mission ted that, “from the dogs’ perspective, control. In one case a shelter dog had was to adopt animals should not keep they are always prisoners,” she felt a history of snapping at children, and unadoptable animals in too-small that their quality of life was “as good was spoken about as “having an issue quarters for extended periods of time; if not better than the [homes where] with children.” The solution was to to do so was considered inhumane. many open admission shelters place work on ridding the dog of that Other advocates acknowledged that their dogs....I know a good many “issue,” while seeking childless these abuses probably occurred in at dogs in suburbia who don’t get adopters who could keep the dog least some no-kill facilities, but they walked, have minimal veterinary care, away from children. were marginalized and viewed as don’t get socialized. They don’t get Language modification also helped exceptions rather than as represent- patted much by their owners. They’re lessen the image of dangerous ani- ing the vast majority of no-kill shel- in the yard.” Others defended extend- mals so they might appear as “nice, ters. Indeed one common way to cre- ed stays; one respondent said they soft.” One group of no-kill trainers ate this “bad egg” hierarchy was to were “less than ideal, however it is was particularly concerned, for legal refer to the abusing facility as a fortunate that [the animals] get a reasons, about written records that “sanctuary” (used here pejoratively) chance to end up in a wonderful created an image of dogs as vicious, rather than a no-kill shelter, thereby home where they are completely perhaps indiscriminate biters. They distancing it from “better” organiza- loved and adored.” started a “language project team” not tions. Well-funded no-kills described “lav- to “hide data,” but In fact no-kill proponents felt that ish” surroundings for shelter animals [T]o be cautious. If somebody keeping behaviorally or medically dif- to counter charges of inhumane ware- reports something, even if it’s lit- ficult animals was a sign of success housing—though these surroundings erally a puppy who puppy-bit, that and an opportunity to save more ani- were sometimes belittled by the press would go down on the record. We mals, rather than evidence of their or open-admission shelters as exces- are trying to clean up all that insensitivity or cruelty. One hopeful sive, and better than facilities provid- junk. . .trying to make a big dis- no-killer said these animals were a ed for some homeless people. One no- tinction between when a dog play- challenge to rehabilitate, and her kill “Q and A” included a question bites versus really bites. We are goal was to make ever sicker animals asking how it could justify such a giving people who do the report- into adoptable ones: “We are raising “beautiful” and expensive shelter ing a multiple-choice form rather the bar for what we can handle med- with “luxury suites for animals, than letting them editorialize ically or behaviorally. We’ve got ani- replete with toys, TVs, and play- about it. [One choice is] “dog mals with chronic health conditions. rooms,” when “most humans don’t play-bit hard with bruising.” We’ve got aggressive dogs. We are try- have quarters like these.” The reply, In any case keeping compromised ing to rehabilitate them so they can in short, claimed these “amenities” animals alive or warehousing them be made adoptable.” By “raising the were not excessive but “important for was not as bad as killing them, bar,” no-kill workers felt they were the animals” to reduce their stress according to no-kill respondents. attempting to reduce suffering in ani- and make them “healthier and happi- They countered criticism with the mals rather than increase it through er. So the toys and playrooms are not charge that euthanasia itself was prolonged caging. For the most part, frivolous. They’re just what the doc- often cruel by definition, if not by they denied the latter happened. For tor ordered.” practice, because most shelter ani- example, when discussing a highly

78 The State of the Animals II: 2003 aggressive dog who had been shel- no-kill shelters sometimes debated This dissent can become a building tered for eighteen months, a no-kill the appropriateness of their facility’s block for establishing a common worker said the animal was not a can- stance on euthanasia when that issue ground. Although twenty years ago didate for euthanasia because that was raised for certain animals. As they individuals in shelters expressed “means you are ending suffering, and discussed the fate of these animals, doubts about their shelter’s policies, he is quite enjoying his life.” workers mulled over the various argu- these questions were unlikely to have ments now associated with the no-kill credibility because they were coming or open-admission perspective. Work- from a single person having no larger Toward a ers at one no-kill facility were sharply voice. Instead of having their objec- divided over the proposed euthanasia tions considered seriously, dissenters Common of several dogs with threatening probably risked being seen as “prob- behavior who had been sheltered for lem children,” “difficult employees,” Ground several months. Most strongly not “team members,” or the like, Unearthing the manifest and latent opposed the death of these animals, with the expectation that they needed tensions behind the open-admission believing that their quality of life was to adjust to the job, become silent, or and no-kill perspectives suggests that satisfactory and that their risky leave. With the growth of the no-kill a large and perhaps insurmountable behavior was modifiable, while some movement and crystallization of the gulf exists between the camps. How- supported it on the grounds that open-admission identity, dissenters ever it would be wrong to portray their lengthy caging adversely affect- now can name, and thereby attach these differences as antithetical. Situ- ed them and that they were danger- their individual doubts to, something ations exist where each camp’s ous to adopt out. Those in the dis- larger and more legitimate. When defenses are down, vulnerable to con- senting minority espoused a view that they speak it is from a position of cession or change. This offers hope of at times was closer to the open- strength. Giving voice to both per- a common ground between camps admission than the no-kill stance, spectives provides an opportunity for that would improve dialogue, en- since it saw euthanasia as an accept- healthy, albeit critical, debate and hance cooperation, and mollify ten- able alternative to the deleterious discussion at the ground level. Such sions. Four bases exist that auger well effects of long confinement. The two empowered discussions within shel- for such change, including internal factions within the shelter were ters make it possible for previously dissent, shared values, mutual identi- engaging in a meta-discussion about defensive workers to hear the other fication, and maturation and change. the proper handling of all shelter ani- camp’s views. mals who faced a similar quandary. At Internal Dissent this general level, they were debating Shared Values Far from public posturing that yields and considering the merits of both While internal dissent over the man- rigid ideological distinctions, there no-kill and open-admission stances; agement of specific cases permitted was internal dissent within the open- this process allowed for the possibili- the expression of opposing views with- admission and no-kill camps over the ty that features of these perspectives in each camp, there also was more proper handling of specific shelter might be merged. general evidence of mutual subscrip- animals—a dissent that mirrors the Open-admission shelters also had tion to fundamental sheltering goals. same criticisms made between the their share of internal dissent. Tradi- When their guards were down, many camps.5 It was common to find some tionally, workers who became respondents spoke about their work workers within open-admission and attached to individual animals quietly in ways that were far less polarized no-kill shelters who were uneasy with resisted the euthanasia of their than the sheltering oral culture and their own shelter’s ideology but “favorites” or, over time, quit because literature suggested. Linguistic flash- remained on the job because they of “burnout” from the routine of points used for public consumption strongly believed in the importance of killing. Perhaps empowered by the no- and for posturing by spokespersons voicing an alternative view in their kill movement and seepage of its were not necessarily accurate reflec- own shelter, even if this marginalized ideas into the open-admission camp, tions of the feelings and actions of them from peers. In larger facilities, these workers were more willing than everyday workers. If workers were there were cliques devoted to such in the past to express doubts about confronted about their use of these dissent, but they, too, felt alienated the rationale for euthanasia and to terms, stark and inflammatory dis- from their own shelter’s dominant garner support for such resistance tinctions started to blur or fade. In outlook on these issues. Whether from fellow workers. At these times, fact, there was some agreement as to individuals or cliques, the concerns of workers and shelter managers, much the meaning of important language these workers came to a head over like those in no-kill shelters, debated that typically divided the camps. In the handling of particular shelter the appropriateness of euthanasia in this regard people in both camps cases. ways that echoed sentiments from demonstrated common rather than For example workers within some both camps. The No-Kill Controversy: Manifest And Latent Sources of Tension 79 conflicting values about basic issues ers need the bond. . .[of] some- versus when they went out or were and concerns faced by all. thing or someone, and sitting in put to sleep, and they get worse not To some degree both camps had that kennel is not the same for better. Shelters aren’t always great similar views of what constituted “suf- them. They just can’t hack it. places for dogs. And the longer they fering” and what conditions justified Members of both camps also saw are here, the more likely we are to euthanasia. Despite what open admis- almost all shelter animals as poten- make them worse.” sionists assumed about no-killers, tially adoptable and not requiring Recognition of shared values is an many of the latter were willing, in euthanasia, despite their physical and important tool for building common principle, to euthanize animals when emotional limitations. Sounding ground. Most workers in both camps their “fates were worse than death,” a quite like a no-kill advocate, one are not absolutists; they neither position championed by open admis- open-admissionist explained: “Most of unthinkingly carry out every euthana- sionists. As one no-kill advocate the animals we kill are to us adopt- sia nor rigidly oppose every possibili- claimed: “I haven’t heard one person able. That’s why we don’t use the ty. Despite such overlap in values, [at the no-kill facility] saying, ‘Yeah, I word adoptable in any of our litera- however, most workers believed that think it is much better if we let the ture. A kitten with two legs who is members of the other camp did not animal go on the highway then euth- four weeks old is adoptable to a per- share their own broad, if not ambigu- anize them....Better the animal is son who wants to adopt her. Adopt- ous, perspective toward fundamental free and roaming around with mange ability is only about who wants this animal sheltering issues. This think- and starving to death than to be animal. We had a thirteen-year-old ing served only to polarize further the killed.’ I think that’s nutty. [Is that dog with no front legs. She gets no-kill controversy because it empha- cruel?] Absolutely. Absolutely. I would around. She kisses everyone. And she sized differences in values and exag- pick euthanasia over that.” Another was placed.” Of course, some open- gerated the ideological distance no–kill proponent, agreeing with this admission respondents did not work between the two camps. Discovering, view, likened the plight of some ani- in shelters that had resources to treat noting, and acknowledging shared mals whose suffering merited death or keep such compromised and diffi- values would help proponents and to that of humans facing dire situa- cult-to-adopt animals. But they clung workers “see” their common inter- tions. This no-kill worker criticized just as strongly as their no-kill peers ests and change their current think- “sanctuaries” that kept animals alive to the hope that almost every shelter ing and practice. to the point where they suffered, animal, regardless of disability, age, arguing that humans do not let that or unattractiveness, could be placed Mutual Identification happen to each other. In her words, if given sufficient time. Although public posturing toward If you are not being humane, and Most respondents from both camps and stereotyping of the no-kill and the animal is in mental or physi- saw shelters—even the “best” of open-admission approaches common- cal distress, that may be consid- them—as unhealthy, if not destruc- ly occurred, when individuals aired ered a ‘sanctuary’ [living out tive, environments for animals. Every- their thoughts in private, they some- their lives until they end natural- one agreed that, in an ideal world, times identified with those in the ly]. Technically we don’t even do shelters would not exist or, if they did, opposing camp. Research on pro-life that for humans anymore. If would serve only as temporary way and pro-choice supporters also has someone is in pain, they usually stations to rehabilitate and home found their differences to be less pro- are put on a morphine drip with needy animals. One no-kill worker nounced than their public rhetoric the dosage slowly increased to admitted that even her own “nice” (Dworkin 1993; Kaufman 1999). reduce their discomfort. The real- shelter was “still” a shelter, as she Among shelter workers, mutual iden- ity is morphine suppresses the questioned the “quality of life” of one tification was evident when respon- respiration. animal who had been in her shelter dents spoke informally with peers or Other no-kill respondents also spoke for more than five hundred days. “I with the author; at these times, polit- of euthanasia as a humane option by don’t care how wonderful we make it ical and rhetorical guards were low- comparing the plight of some shelter for them, they are still institutional- ered enough to reveal more overlap in animals with that of humans isolated ized. Caretakers are there for thirty humane identities than many might from society. As one said, minutes to an hour and then the dog realize or admit. What happens when you confine is alone, not able to do any of the For example, there were occasional humans? What happens when you innate things that a dog is supposed expressions of empathy for workers in put humans in mental institu- to be doing.” Another no-kill worker the other camp. No-killers, as seen tions? You can make it acceptable agreed with this sentiment, saying, earlier, reported pity for open-admis- for some time for some dogs. “We’ve had dogs here for a year or two sion workers who had to euthanize Some can handle kenneling. Oth- and you look at when they came in animals, or even work in a shelter

80 The State of the Animals II: 2003 that did this, because of the emotion- doing well in the shelter environ- role of euthanasia and to see that dis- al toll such actions were believed to ment.” Workers who shared this comfort as a sign of correctly manag- take. One no-kill worker felt that thinking felt that their peers in the ing a complex and subtle issue. open-admission shelter staff might other camp were forced to go through As the no-kill issue matures, other resent the greater resources available the same excruciating decision mak- organizational changes are likely to to the few well-endowed no-kill shel- ing to decide the fate of shelter ani- reduce the distance between camps. ters. She explained, mals. Because they did this too, they Some no-kill groups will become insti- It’s a horrible thing to have to felt collegial and cohesive rather than tutionalized over time, if they have euthanize animals every day. I confrontational and competitive. not already, moving them closer to a feel fortunate that I am working Identifying and acknowledging humane centrist position. As this hap- in an organization where we mutual identification can help to pens, they will reject, with the same don’t have to do that. I can un- lessen the present polarization that conviction and vehemence as tradi- derstand them [open-admission leads to overgeneralization and blan- tional humane groups, “fringe” or shelters] being resentful that we ket assumptions about those in the “lunatic” groups also claiming to be have the resources that we do opposite camp. In such a hostile envi- no-kill. Some no-kill leaders have and are able to run things the ronment, people are likely to feel acknowledged the existence of these way we do. And that is where this unfairly and negatively judged by oth- marginal “shelters,” and the need for [tension] is coming from. They ers, and certainly unappreciated for them to be improved or eliminated. have the same amount of com- their emotional and ethical labors. More centrist no-kill organizations passion that we do have, but be- Sympathy can be the starting point will move to some degree toward the cause they have fewer resources, that opens lines of communication open-admission camp. To wit, there they can’t do what we do. and support for different, but not nec- has been some response to the open- Open admissionists sometimes essarily antagonistic, ways of manag- admission plea for less provocative pitied no-kill workers who had to say ing shelter animals. language and to stop using the label “no” to people wanting to drop off “no kill” or inflammatory terms that their pets, only to tell them there was Maturation compare open admissionsts to Nazis, no room or a very long waiting list criminals, or other killers. Aware that and that they either had to take their and Change the no-kill language hurts or angers animals to some other shelter, go to a New common ground will be discov- others, some in the movement sympa- veterinarian for euthanasia, or find a ered over time as the “no-kill issue” thize with this concern and have cur- neighbor or friend to adopt the ani- matures in the humane community. tailed use of such terms. In one mal. One respondent said that he This is likely to happen as more peo- instance the director of a major no-kill thought it was at least as upsetting ple reject simplistic characterizations shelter publicly acknowledged that, for no-killers to tell many people “no” of the no-kill “debate” or “controver- because the term no-kill can offend as it was to euthanize animals “eight sy” that pit one camp against the others, he consciously tries to stop hours a day.” How hard, he conjec- other, even though the present study using it when speaking publicly. And tured, it must be to turn away people could be faulted for doing so. several shelters whose policies were who sometimes are pleading for their Although many people consider the no-kill in practice and principal animals to be taken. He even comput- no-kill controversy to be highly polar- refused to label themselves as no-kill ed the number of people who are told ized, it is more accurate to think of it because they had various problems “no” at a prominent sanctuary, esti- as a range of views about the appro- with the term’s meaning and its effect mating many thousand each year, and priateness of killing shelter animals. on open-admission shelters and staff. finding the thought of doing this to While some tension no doubt occurs In one case, the president of a no-kill be mind boggling. as these differences are negotiated, a shelter claimed that she did not Mutual identification was manifest- working order probably will be creat- “tout” her organization as no kill: ed in ways other than pity. There was ed that, despite occasional bumpi- The only reason we are “no kill” is recognition by some that, in the end, ness, allows most shelters to draw on because, unlike animal shelters, both camps resorted to a similar and be comfortable with different per- we have the ability to turn people process for deciding the fate of ani- spectives toward euthanasia. This away....Just because one organi- mals when space became limited. At diversity of views should be seen as a zation is not killing does not mean these times, said one respondent, healthy form of organizational con- that animals are not dying en “You go through your populations and flict that allows both perspectives to masse. The animals we unfortu- you are going to try and euthanize exist under the same roof. Such a nately must turn away very likely the animals that are the least place- plan means that the humane commu- end up at the end of a needle in a able. . . the ones with the worst nity will have to live with some resid- shelter. (Stinson 1997) health, or the oldest, or the ones not ual uneasiness about the nature and Finally, the organizer of the national

The No-Kill Controversy: Manifest And Latent Sources of Tension 81 no-kill conference decided to drop “no will be dropped by the wayside gling to respond to the difficult situa- kill” from the name of this meeting, because they lack this broad interest. tions of everyday life. Workers see for so as to include rather than exclude The result will be a new humane ide- themselves that within their world people from the open-admission per- ology that can be embraced by no-kill views is a shared concern for animals. spective. The organizer renamed it the and open-admission advocates alike. Certainly there are many other “Conference on Homeless Animal This change will require refashion- notions, long familiar to shelter work- Management and Policy.” ing the meaning of familiar concepts ers, that can be infused with new More progressive open-admission or creating entirely fresh ones that meaning to connect rather than sepa- groups, in turn, are likely to rethink bridge tensions rather than create rate open-admission and no-kill sup- their mission and identity, moving them. The very ambiguity of such porters. Indeed, entirely new concepts somewhat closer to the no-kill camp terms as shelter, humane, and unfamiliar to the shelter world may be by adopting more aggressive adoption euthanasia frustrates people, but this brought into this community to policies; questioning long-standing vagueness can benefit those who want bridge its camps. Whether old ideas definitions of what constitutes to give them new meanings that res- are being reinvented or new ones are “acceptable” rates of euthanasia; and onate for all shelter workers. To being imported, to succeed they must trying to lower these rates. Some bridge the tensions, superordinate be based on common ground between open admissionists also have shown a concepts must draw from common camps. The challenge facing the willingness to embrace a no-kill iden- ground between camps—shared prac- American sheltering community is to tity in their speaking. For instance at tices, values, and identities—so that discover additional bases for this com- one shelter that has had great success most workers can agree with and mon ground and to articulate a new in controlling dog overpopulation, a extol them in professional and public language to reaffirm it. senior staff member commented, “We arenas. are no-kill with puppies.” Even if said The notion of welfare could serve Acknowledgements tongue in cheek, his language sug- aptly as one superordinate concept to I wish to thank Kathy Savesky, Natalie gests a recognition that no-kill is a unite rather than divide the shelter DiGiacomo, and Anne Lindsay for worthy aim and a sign of success. A community. Although somewhat providing advice and criticism. I am few open admissionists are even tricky to reinvent because of its pre- also grateful to the Edith Goode Trust styling themselves as “no-kill advo- sent political connotations in the and the San Francisco Society for the cates,” although this is laughable to general animal community, the term Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for no-kill workers. Perhaps there is more nevertheless has the potential to their support of this research. substance to this claim; certainly, no bridge tensions underlying the no-kill shelter worker wants to euthanize debate, just as others have suggested Notes animals. If these organizational using the concept of welfare to quell 1My use of the term kill, except when specifically changes take place, friction between the abortion controversy (Kaufmann discussing its meaning to shelter workers or quot- camps will subside, leaving a small 1999). Concern for the welfare of ani- ing them directly, is made without symbolic or political connotation. number of marginalized humane mals deeply motivates both no-kill 2Throughout this report the terms open organizations outside the boundaries and open-admission advocates. It is a admission and no kill are used because most of mainstream shelter culture. major area of common ground, lead- members of the respective camps accept these labels as self descriptions, while rejecting other ing virtually all shelter workers, terms for themselves. Open-admission advocates regardless of their camp, to preserve reject the label “kill shelter,” and even the less and improve the quality of life for ani- sensitive language of “full service” or “tradition- Conclusion al” are received ambivalently. Similarly no-kill Maturation and change in the no-kill mals. When threads of common proponents reject the term limited admission for controversy is likely to lead to new ground surface in dialogue between their facilities. members of the two camps, workers 3Open-admission advocates use the same argu- language and ideology for speaking ment against no-kill proponents when they con- and thinking about issues facing all can understand how the same con- tend, in so many words, that “all that money and shelter workers. This will happen as cern for animals triggers one person’s effort on keeping animals alive keeps them from decision to be no kill, the other’s to their mission of preventing births in the first the humane community chooses not place.” to fan the fires of current tensions, or be open admission. The lifework 4While this piggybacking on the pro-life move- even focus on them, but rather to inspired by this motivation is differ- ment’s symbolism offers cachet to the no-kill ent for the two camps, but it is work identity, it also escalates the controversy because look upon them as an opportunity to it confuses two reasons for believing that redefine to shelter workers and the that both parties can admire. Focus- euthanasia is often, if not always, wrong. Like the public its identity and mission. Some ing on this common ground can fos- pro-life movement’s ideological confusion over ter mutual respect, as the enemy whether it is wrong to abort a fetus because the divergent ideas from both camps will fetus has a right to live or because all life has become synthesized and appeal to image is replaced by the actual pres- intrinsic value (Dworkin 1993), the no-kill move- most shelter workers, while others ence of another shelter worker strug- ment’s confused ideology argues both that the unwanted or undesirable shelter animal has a

82 The State of the Animals II: 2003 right to live and that euthanasia as commonly Foster, J.T. 2000. A fate worse than practiced shows disrespect for animal and human life. death: Are “no-kill” shelters truly 5It is important to be cautious about the sig- humane? Reader’s Digest, July 20. nificance of such dissent, especially when it Gilyard, B. 2001. Out of gas. Showing involves a new social movement. Rather than serving as a common ground, internal diversity Animals Respect and Kindness, and emotional fervor can divide and weaken August: 6–7. camps. Hints of this can be seen in tensions Ginsburg, F. 1986. Contested lives: between behavior/training staff and adoption staff in some no-kill shelters or, at a different The abortion debate in the American level, between doctrinaire no-kill advocates and community. Los Angeles: University other no-kill proponents who occasionally resort of California Press. to euthanizing their animals. Hess, B. 1998. Shelter skelter. New York Magazine, October 19. Hicks, J. 1993. A.S.P.C.A. plans to Literature Cited give up job killing New York strays. Bogue, G. 1998a. Readers climbing New York Times, March 26: B14. on the no-kill bandwagon. Contra Hughes, E. 1964. Good people and Costa Times, n.d. dirty work. In The other side, ed. H. ———. 1998b. Shelters need to join Becker, 23–26. New York: Free forces to stop killing. Contra Costa Press. Times, n.d. Kaufmann, A. 1999. The pro-choice/ Caras, R. 1997a. Letter to Richard pro-life conflict: An exploratory Avanzino, July 9. study to understand the nature of ———. 1997b. Letter to Val Beatty the conflict and to develop con- and Bonney Brown, August 21. structive conflict intervention ———. 1997c. Viewpoints. Animal designs. Ph.D. diss., George Mason Sheltering Sept./Oct.: 16–17. University. Cubrda, E. 1993. Letter to Mark Luker, K. 1984. Abortion and the poli- Hamilton from the California tics of motherhood. Berkeley: Uni- Humane Society, Los Angeles versity of California Press. SPCA, October 15. Milani, M. 1997. The no-kill contro- Donald, R. 1991. “The No-Kill Con- versy. Journal of the American Vet- troversy,” Shelter Sense September: erinary Association 210: 26–27. 3–6. Miller, P. n.d. “Chain Reaction: ‘No- Doyle, M. 1982. In-house rhetoric of Kill...’ or ‘You Kill?’” California pro-life and pro-choice special Humane Action and Information interest groups in Minnesota: Moti- Network Letter 4: Fall. vation and alienation. Dissertation Paris, P. 1997. HSUS animal shelter Abstracts International 43 (11): no-kill article. Interoffice memo. 3454. (University Microfilms No. New York: American Society for the AAC83-08038.) Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Dworkin, R. 1993. Life’s dominion: An September 24. argument about abortion, euthana- Savesky, K. 1995a. Letter to James sia, and individual freedom. New Chimera, May 25. York: Alfred A. Knopf. ———. 1995b. The door remains Foro, L. 1997. Viewpoints. Animal open. Paw Prints, 2–3. Sheltering Sept./Oct.: 16–17. Sheeran, P. 1987. Women, society, the ———. n.d.a. Know the thrill of no state, and abortion: A structuralist kill—Retreat, Hell! Online Doing analysis. New York: Praeger. Things for Animals. Stinson, P. 1997. Letter to Roger ———. n.d.b. Vegetarianism and no Caras, June 25. kill. Online Doing Things for Ani- mals.

The No-Kill Controversy: Manifest And Latent Sources of Tension 83 Religion and Animals: A Changing Scene 6CHAPTER

Paul Waldau

n 1903 W.E.B. Du Bois predicted, ties regarding the importance of the mals as beings possessing integrity “The problem of the twentieth cen- human individual. Various positive and value wholly independent of hu- Itury is the problem of the color signs at the end of the twentieth cen- man needs? line” (1969). One hundred years tury suggested that religions may yet However believers and their leaders later, we can hope that the twentieth play an important role in dispelling answer these questions, religions will century achieved important advances the dismissive caricatures of nonhu- play a decisive role in humans’ for human liberation—not only racial mans animals that prevail in, for encounters with the nonhuman others but also sexual and political. Will that example, industrialized societies. One in and near our communities. And moral trajectory—the expansion of of these signs was that religions’ role whatever choices any particular reli- fundamental protections now easily in the origin and persistence of both gious tradition and its believers make, seen as the hallmark of the last cen- negative views and positive evalua- a central problem inside and outside tury—continue? Will the problem of tions of other animals finally was well religion will be, without doubt, the the twenty-first century be the prob- described. Another was that many problem of the species line. lem of the species line? believers began the difficult task of For protections to evolve to include engaging their fellow believers in dia- nonhuman species, religions— logue regarding religions’ strengths 1900–1950: through their leaders, their institu- and weaknesses in addressing the tions, and above all their believers— issue of the value of the nonhuman The Dismissal must take seriously the important lives around them. role that they have played, and cer- Where will this vital discussion go of Nonhuman tainly will continue to play, in in the new century? Will it help peo- humans’ engagement with the lives ple see the myriad ways in which reli- Lives beyond our species line. Religions gious traditions have been vitally The science establishment of the have such a central role in the trans- involved in developing the often-dis- western industrialized countries mission of basic images and values missive views of nonhuman lives? Will began in the early twentieth century regarding living beings that, without the discussion bring to the fore- to recognize that nonhuman pri- their help, the problem of the species ground the animal-friendly features mates were subject to many of the line will not be solved in this century. found in every code of religious same diseases as were humans. The A central question for this century is ethics? Will religious leaders and remarkable physical (and, it was later whether influential religious institu- scholars fully delineate the contribu- recognized, psychological and social) tions will continue to convey images tions of religion—both good and similarities of nonhuman primates to that radically and absolutely dismiss bad—to people’s ability to take other humans, however, did not lead scien- nonhumans, or will religions offer animals seriously? Will many religious tists, on the whole, to recommend support for the broadening move- leaders continue to claim that it is similar ethical protections for these ment to include nonhuman animals only human lives that really matter? evolutionary cousins. in humans’ moral scope. Will religious traditions be formed An irony in the thoroughgoing dis- If religions notice other species and not solely by theologians but also by missal of all nonhuman lives so char- take them seriously, ethical sensibili- grassroots believers attempting to acteristic of the first half of the twen- ties regarding nonhuman animals commit their religion’s resources to tieth century was that turn-of- may blossom as fully as did sensibili- the fullest possible recognition of ani- the-century scientists had inherited a resurgent interest in the importance

Religion and Animals: A Changing Scene 85 and complexities of nonhuman ani- in crucial ways and in important insti- explain actions of a living being by mal lives. The 1859 publication of tutions, scientific attitudes toward means of higher level functions than Darwin’s pivotal Origin of Species had other animals were about to go by behaviorism’s simplified stimulus- spurred much new interest in nonhu- through a regressive narrowing in the response paradigm. In biology intelli- man lives. In some quarters at least, twentieth century’s first fifty years. gence and other “higher level” cogni- commitments to take other animals tive functions often are far more seriously flowered relative to the The Narrowing economical as explanations than are absolute dismissal and caricature of John Watson (1913) published an explanations that rely on long chains nonhuman lives that had prevailed in essay that was to set the tone of sci- of stimulus-response relations. western scientific and religious cir- entific research into other animals’ When the minds of other animals cles before Darwin’s groundbreaking cognitive abilities for the next half- are ignored, it becomes easier to achievement. century. Watson’s approach, which treat them as mere machines or inan- Curiosity about other animals’ lives involved a denial of the mental life of imate things. The result of such a rad- manifested itself in many ways, from other animals, was unusual in several ical dismissal of the more complex increased observation to invasive senses. First, a denial of mental life features of other animals’ lives is that studies such as those done in the begs obvious questions. As the Oxford humans use them as experimental 1870s by the British physician David historian Keith Thomas has noted, tools or unfeeling resources. Such Ferrier, who looked at the relation- “That there are some footsteps of use, and in particular its problems ship of humans to other primates reason, some strictures and emissions from the standpoint of both (Blum 1994). Ferrier’s idea of a sys- of ratiocination in the actions of informed, sensitive science and ethi- tematic study of primate-human rela- some brutes, is too vulgarly known cally integrated religion, is well sym- tionships was to take apart the brains and too commonly granted to be bolized by Tom Regan’s film We Are of nonhuman primates in order to say doubted” (1984, 124: n.8). All Noah (1986b), which refers to the something about the similarity of Second, from the scientific per- use of thousands of nonhuman ani- humans to other primates. Whole spective, Watson’s views, which were mals as experimental subjects on a lives in context, which of course must the foundation of behaviorism, left boat dubbed “the Atomic Ark” in the be part of any truly systematic study, much to be desired. Behaviorism, U.S. military’s 1946 Bikini Island also were engaged increasingly, as which in its strictest form emphasizes nuclear test in the Pacific. exemplified by R.L. Garner’s study in the stimulus-response model and the 1890s of free-living chimpanzees holds that all behavior is learned The Opening (Wrangham et al. 1994). The exten- through either classical or operant Of course not every development in sive works of George Romanes —Men- conditioning, is very ideological, in science in the first half of the twenti- tal Evolution in Animals (1885) and the narrowest sense of that term. eth century reflected a dismissal of Animal Intelligence (1886)—went Many contemporary scientists hold other animals from humans’ ethical through multiple editions. While that behaviorism involves an explana- horizon. R.M. Yerkes published The often based on anecdote rather than tory monism—that is, an unnecessar- Great Apes in 1927, but, when doing the rigorous observation standards of ily narrow attempt to provide an his research, he was astonished to find late twentieth century ethology, exhaustive causal account of even the only travelers’ accounts (Galdikas Romanes’s work and that of others most complex living organism built 1995). Garner’s attempt in the 1890s reflected deep interest in the lives of arbitrarily upon stimulus-response to study nonhuman great apes in the the animals described and an open- generalizations drawn solely from an field was to be the only real attempt ness to the possibility that some non- isolated part of that being’s complex- before Nissen’s attempt in 1930— humans were, like humans, possessed ity. In this regard, behaviorism can in which lasted all of four months of social, cognitive, and individual fact be unscientific, because the (Goodall, in Wrangham 1994). Thus complexities. explanatory monism neglects a signif- for Yerkes the available sources of As Ferrier’s work shows, by no icant range of data. information were travelers’ tales means all of what was happening in Historically behaviorists drew their [S]uch as those by T.S. Savage and the study of nonhuman animals at the inspiration from the philosophical J. Wyman in the Ivory Coast in end of the nineteenth century was of paradigm of positivism, which led it 1842....[These] provided almost a moral or otherwise sensitive nature. to be unnecessarily reductive. Behav- everything that was known of Darwin’s co-originator of the notion iorism’s explanatory monism violates chimpanzee behavior in the wild of natural selection, A.R. Wallace, both observation and such cherished (although the African peoples who shot orangutans in order to study methodological principles as that of lived in or near the forests could them—and sadly this was typical of parsimony. Sometimes it is simply have told us more) until the flurry Victorian naturalists (Galdikas more consistent with observation and of field studies began after the Sec- 1995). Such insensitivity was perhaps considerations of parsimony to ond World War in the early sixties a harbinger of attitudes to come, for

86 The State of the Animals II: 2003 (Goodall, in Wrangham, xv). entific study for the subsequent tradi- The first successful study of a wild ape tion of careful observation was that of Religion and took place in Asia in the 1930s when Jane Goodall on the chimpanzees of C.R. Carpenter studied white-handed Gombe. Begun in 1960 this effort con- Other Animals gibbons in Thailand. His work was tinues today (see van Lawick-Goodall In neither 1900 nor 1950 would reli- important because Carpenter identi- 1971). Through a series of National gious believers in North America, fied such crucial features of gibbon Geographic television specials, Europe, and other parts of the indus- adaptation as territoriality and Goodall’s work, though initially con- trialized, “developed” world have monogamy. But afterwards all the troversial, stimulated a new genera- been well described as “concerned” gibbons were shot, and it was almost tion to pursue careful, observation- about the earth’s nonhuman animals. thirty years until another study (that based studies of animals of all kinds. Some believers were compassionate, of Goodall) was launched (see Stephen Jay Gould of Harvard, refer- no doubt, but institutions and reli- Galdikas 1995). ring to Goodall as “one of the intellec- gious rhetoric were, on the whole, From the late 1930s to the late tual heroes of this century” (1995, insensitive to nonhuman animals’ 1940s, a modern version of Darwin’s 23), described her study as “one of the interests. Indeed, the vast majority of views, sometimes referred to as “the Western world’s great scientific religious believers were not only evolutionary synthesis,” became the achievements” (in Miller 1995). unconcerned but also ignorant and consensus view among established bio- The fundamental change from the blind insofar as nonhuman animals 1 logical scientists. This development first half of the century to the second were concerned. “settled numerous old arguments half also is epitomized by the change In the succeeding half-century, once and for all, and thus opened the in thinking known as the “Cognitive however, developments within specif- way for a discussion of entirely new Revolution.” In this recent revolution ic religious traditions have revealed problems” (Mayr 1982, 569). in psychology, information processing that religious traditions offer many A foreshadowing of much broader has been emphasized and the behav- perspectives, ethical values, and other concerns appeared in 1946 when the iorists’ exclusive focus on condition- resources for engaging all animals, International Whaling Commission, ing through stimulus-response mod- human and otherwise, far more sensi- an association of more than two hun- els has been de-emphasized (see tively than occurred in the first half of dred members from forty nations, was Gardner 1985; Griffin 1992). the twentieth century. In the world of formed under the International Con- Because of this revolution, there is academic study of religion, the “Cau- vention for the Regulation of Whal- a much richer evaluation of the mech- cus on Religion, Animals, and Ethics” ing. Although committed not to the anisms of any animal, human or oth- first met in 1998 and has been for- elimination of the killing of cetaceans erwise, that are involved in modifica- malized by the American Academy of but instead to the management of tion of behavior during growth and Religion. In 1999 the Center for resources, this international effort after experience, as well as the rela- Respect of Life and Environment paved the way for both conservation tionships among cognition, learning (affiliated with The Humane Society and abolitionist efforts that devel- and development, information pro- of the United States) sponsored a oped later in the century, such as the cessing, representation, imitation, major conference of international 1986 ban on commercial whaling. and problem solving generally. scholars at Harvard University. This In the 1950s and 1960s, there were This important change has not conference was part of the follow-up significant developments in various life solved all problems. According to to the groundbreaking series of ten sciences regarding a fuller engage- Griffin, there remains a reluctance to conferences organized by Mary Evelyn ment with other animals on the basis attribute subjective states to nonhu- Tucker and John Grim that estab- of their realities. Some of these devel- man animals: “This antipathy to con- lished the now flourishing field of reli- opments came at the prompting of var- sideration of consciousness threatens gion and ecology. ious ethical traditions (though in vir- to become a sort of self-inflicted These developments, along with the tually every case an ethical tradition paralysis of inquiry, and obsolete hin- seminal theological work of Linzey outside religion). Many came from a drance to scientific investigation” (1987, 1994b), Cohn-Sherbok (1997, reassertion of basic scientific values, (1992, viii). with Linzey), and Masri (1987, 1989), such as the importance of humble, Yet the bottom line is that science have led to the emergence of a group patient empirical observation. In the now has delivered evidence that some of scholars who now pursue the new early 1960s, careful fieldwork was nonhuman animals’ cognitive abilities field of religion and animals systemat- commenced (Kortlandt in eastern are far richer than ever imagined in ically for the first time in history. Zaire; Goodall in Gombe, Tanzania; the western scientific establishment Thus in the last fifty years the state Itani and others in Kabogo, Tanzania; and, arguably, in the theological and of animals in religion has, at least in and Nishida in what is now Mahale philosophical establishments as well. some respects, changed significantly. Mountains National Park, Tanzania). The radical change from the first half Undoubtedly the most important sci- of the twentieth century to the sec-

Religion and Animals: A Changing Scene 87 ond half, described more specifically cruel acts were wrong because they (Waldau 2001a). Yet they, like Chris- below, stimulates many to speculate might lead weak-minded humans to tianity, have moderating sub-tradi- on what additional changes may be harm other humans in some way.3 tions that allow adherents to be both seen in both the new century and, Religious traditions hold, of “true believers” and respectful of indeed, in this new millennium. course, that humans are special nonhuman animals’ interests. In such because of their remarkable moral sub-traditions, considerable respect abilities. But from 1900 to 1950, reli- has been accorded to both other ani- Pre-1950 gion in many places, including most mals’ place in the moral circle and circles in North America and Europe, their status as living beings with Religion actively advanced the view that hu- whom we share the earth. mans, when using their considerable and Animals moral abilities, need focus only on In 1888 the influential Catholic the- members of the human species. Such Mid-Century ologian Joseph Rickaby summed up a a view is sometimes referred to as view that in many different ways has “ethical anthropocentrism,” and it Winds of dominated the Christian tradition on frequently is accompanied by an the issue of the moral status of non- instrumentalist view of other animals Change human animals: as mere things rightfully excluded From the midpoint of the twentieth Brutes are as things in our regard: from the moral circle. century onward, certain develop- so far as they are useful for us, It is important to note, however, ments have pushed many religious they exist for us, not for them- that the combination of anthropocen- traditions to become more sensitive selves; and we do right in using tric ethics with instrumentalist views to nonhuman animals as candidates them unsparingly for our need of other animals is not the only view for moral concern. These develop- and convenience, though not for of other animals found within reli- ments include increasing interfaith our wantonness (1988, 250). gious traditions. Within Christianity, dialogue; greater historical awareness While neither Christianity nor the for example, more compassionate of the traditions’ own pro-animal sub- other Abrahamic traditions (Judaism views such, as those espoused by St. traditions and the irrational preju- and Islam) are exhaustively represent- Francis of Assisi, long have represent- dices against nonhumans within and ed by such a bald assertion (as will be ed a significant, though often subor- across traditions; increasing interest shown by what follows), the underly- dinated, sub-tradition regarding the in the relationship of human ethical ing mentality that nonhuman animals value of other animals. In general, abilities to environmental issues; and, are on the earth for humans’ use is however, even if the list of Christians above all, better information about representative in two respects of the who have advocated compassion for nonhuman animals. ways in which most religious believers nonhuman animals is long and distin- Such developments have enhanced in these traditions viewed nonhuman guished, it is far shorter, and charac- the ability of religious believers to animals before the mid-point of the terized by far fewer major figures, “see” other animals better. This, of twentieth century. than is the list of those who have course, is relevant to how those First and foremost such a claim is advocated an anthropocentric stan- believers’ ethical abilities might be grounded in what often is referred to dard. On the longer list is, for exam- engaged, for, as the English philoso- as an instrumentalist view, which ple, Pope Pius IX, who led the pher Stephen Clark has said, “One’s holds that other animals can, unlike Catholic tradition from 1846 to ethical, as well as one’s ontological humans, be used in good conscience 1878. He is reported to have said to framework is determined by what for an individual human’s own bene- the anti-vivisectionist Anna Kings- entities one is prepared to notice or fit.2 Second, as Rickaby’s quote ford, “Madame, humankind has no take seriously. . . ” (1977, 7). reflects, there was a limiting factor, duties to the animals,” and then An essay written by C.S. Lewis namely the injunction not to act “cru- backed this up by opposing the estab- (1963) at mid-century can be used to elly” or “wantonly.” Such a concern lishment of a society for the protec- highlight dormant possibilities within reflects, no doubt, the deep concern tion of animals in Rome (see Gaffney religious institutions, especially of some Jews, Muslims, and Chris- 1986; Kalechofsky 1991). because it reveals that even those tra- tians for the welfare and lives of non- Apart from its dominant position in ditions thought not to be “animal human animals. Interestingly, howev- the hierarchy of Christian institutions friendly” have resources for a full er, in the Christian tradition some and in the mainline theology of the engagement with nonhuman lives. very prominent official objections to tradition, ethical anthropocentrism This is so because each of the tradi- acts of wanton cruelty did not argue in one form or another can also be tions is, in fact, an extraordinarily that the problem was the ensuing found in other religious traditions rich cumulative tradition within harm to nonhuman animals. Rather, which many past believers have rec-

88 The State of the Animals II: 2003 ognized the relevance of human ethi- of human beings will be lacking in cal abilities to nonhuman lives. the beasts. “Soulessness,” in so Traditional and Apparent in the re-emergence of far as it is relevant to the question these oft-subordinated possibilities at all, is an argument against vivi- Compassionate are the beginnings of an important section.5 Views series of changes that continue to Lewis then appeals to a fundamen- Lewis’s essay exemplifies both typical this day in the established religious tal claim at the very heart of the and unusual features of the religion traditions in North America. Christian and many other religious and animals landscape at mid-centu- Lewis’s essay first appeared in 1947 positions, namely, the belief that ry. His arguments are typical in that, in the journal of the New England humans alone among the earth’s despite his obvious compassion for Anti-Vivisection Society. Later it creatures are moral beings. He uses pain in other animals, he reflects appeared in other publications.4 This this important claim to challenge what amounts to a dismissal of other seminal article appeals to core beliefs facile Christian acceptance of instru- animals’ complex lives as relevant to of Christians about the special quali- mental uses of nonhuman animals: their moral standing. In the passages ties of humans’ moral abilities. Thus [W]e may feel that though objec- quoted above, he implies very nega- even though the arguments are stat- tive superiority is rightly claimed tive images of nonhuman animals. In ed in terms of the dualism “humans for man, yet that very superiority particular, his argument assumes that and animals” that Lewis was trained ought partly to consist in not because humans understand that to use by his own religious and cul- behaving like a vivisector—that some nonhuman animals act in ways tural traditions, the article reveals we ought to prove ourselves bet- that humans see as cruel, all nonhu- that the Christian tradition has much ter than the beasts precisely by man animals are cruel. This involves to offer those who care enough to the fact of acknowledging duties not only the obvious fallacy of over- engage the realities of other animals’ to them which they do not generalization, but also the standard actual lives. acknowledge to us. (1963, 154)6 caricature of nonhuman animals that Lewis lures the reader into engag- Relying relentlessly on common has dominated western cultures since ing the issue openly by observing that sense, logic, and frank appraisals of the classical Greeks. it is “the rarest thing” in the world to the general nature of instrumental Thus because Lewis knew virtually hear “a rational discussion of vivisec- uses of other living beings, Lewis adds nothing of the behaviors of the more tion.” He then argues that a rational many other creative arguments. He complex nonhuman animals and discussion must begin with whether suggests that it was non-Christian val- existed at a time when his culture pain is an evil. If pain is not an evil, ues that promoted the argument to sanctioned such ignorance, in an Lewis suggests, then the cases both allow vivisection, and he reminds us important sense his arguments mere- for and against vivisection fail. He rea- that, at least in England, Christian ly perpetuate the following culturally sons that if pain is not an evil, its society in the eighteenth and nine- significant stereotypes: (1) of the infliction on nonhuman animals need teenth centuries had many resources earth’s denizens, only humans are not be opposed, but, also, if pain is for seeing the anti-vivisectionist as a complicated beings; (2) nonhuman not an evil, there is no reason to look religious person.7 Lewis’s principled animals live without any kind of moral for ways to ameliorate it in humans. and, most relevantly, fully Christian or social regard for each other; (3) for The discussion, then, must begin with engagement with a facile acceptance all intents and purposes, all other ani- recognition that pain is an evil. of contemporary instrumental uses of mals lack intelligence in any signifi- Focusing on the standard Christian living beings pushes him to repudiate cant sense. position “in the Latin countries. . .that completely any casual acceptance of When seeking to understand either we are entitled to do anything we instrumental uses of other animals: the history or the future possibilities please to animals because they ‘have The victory of vivisection marks a of religion on the issue of nonhuman no souls’” (1963, 154), Lewis notes great advance in the triumph of animals, it is crucial to recognize that that if this is the case then infliction ruthless, non-moral utilitarianism not all religions have dismissed non- of pain on them is “harder to justify,” over the old world of ethical law, a human animals in this way. Indeed, at [f]or it means that animals can- triumph in which we, as well as certain times and places some reli- not deserve pain, nor profit animals, are already the victims, gious believers have had significant, morally by the discipline of pain, and of which Dachau and Hiroshi- empirically based knowledge of other nor be recompensed by happiness ma are the more recent achieve- animals. Accordingly they could be in another life for suffering in ments. (1963, 155) called upon to point out the carica- this. Thus all the factors which tures and ignorance that underlie the render pain more tolerable or generalities used by Lewis. The fallacy make it less totally evil in the case

Religion and Animals: A Changing Scene 89 is, of course, that the absence of evi- connect him to life generally, and he this standard of sensitivity to other liv- dence has been taken as evidence of thus finds a way to assert that other ing things as individuals that Lewis absence. The prevailing ignorance is animals should matter to Christians names in this essay as the proper not dispelled because no one is look- as moral agents. It is as a Christian Christian standard. Even if such sensi- ing for complexities, and hence none that Lewis speaks of the value of tivity is not altogether new, but rather is found. other animals’ lives, and his concern a reaffirmation of a sub-tradition that Lewis’s own religious tradition, clearly is to reach Christian col- has existed in Christian and other reli- along with the other traditions that leagues as Christian, as well as the gious traditions all along, it provides a have had a significant influence in the Christian establishment that had challenge to contemporary mainline industrialized world, has lost much of been quiet about humans’ instrumen- Christianity. This is a formidable and the experienced-based knowledge of talist uses of other animals. This is identity-threatening challenge, for the the natural world and its nonhuman precisely why Lewis emphasizes the mainline Christian tradition, not animals that is found, among other cherished senses of (1) human unlike mainline interpretations of places, in certain religio-cultural tra- uniqueness and (2) human moral other religious traditions, has in its ditions now classified among the abilities that lie at the center of ancient, medieval, and contemporary “indigenous” traditions. Similarly, Christianity and all other religious theology promoted anthropocentric, the Christian culture into which traditions. Through a focus on our exclusivist views and practices among Lewis was born was not characterized important ability to care about oth- its believers and churches. by any ethically developed sense of ers, be they human or not, Lewis humans’ continuity with other ani- questions the facile, absolute dis- mals, although examples of this can missal of all nonhuman animals that Competing be found throughout the Hindu, Jain, dominated his own religious tradi- and Buddhist traditions.8 In fact the tions during his lifetime (he died in Tensions negative views and radical dismissal 1963). In making this challenge, The tension in Lewis’s article between of other animals’ lives that underlie Lewis reflects the internal resources elements of the traditional view that Lewis’s failure to engage any specifics established religion has available for humans are superior to all other ani- of the nature and abilities of nonhu- the task of reexamining modern mals, on the one hand, and those man animals relative to humans are industrialized societies’ radical mar- morality-based implications so cre- characteristic of many of the most ginalization of other animals. atively argued by Lewis, on the other influential institutions and voices In reflecting both the traditional hand, can be used to frame not only within those religious traditions that and more compassionate sides of con- the issues that faced religion at mid- have the most influence in the indus- temporary religious traditions, Lewis century on the issue of the status and trialized world. In effect these institu- reflects well the dilemma regarding importance of nonhuman animals, tions and loud voices, as it were, have nonhuman animals faced by religion but also the issues facing today’s reli- drowned out the voices of the more in the twentieth century. His essay, gious communities, churches, syna- compassionate sub-traditions from particularly as it highlights the very gogues, mosques, and other places of within their own circle that have been un-Christian (in Lewis’s view) features worship or meditation. willing to promote the moral signifi- of the modern practice of vivisection, First, tension is occasioned by the cance of nonhuman animals. sets the stage well for understanding very questions Lewis and other believ- Nonetheless Lewis’s essay has some the complex trajectory of develop- ers ask concerning modern practices features that begin to bring to light ments within religious traditions in an environment where religious the additional Christian possibilities since 1950 on the issue of “animals.” communities and believers promote a for seeing nonhuman animals. In this During the last half of the twentieth status quo dominated by anthro- respect Lewis foreshadows some of century, informed religious believers pocentrism in ethics as well as in pol- the developments seen in other tradi- had to come to terms with the conse- itics, economics, law, and even acade- tions’ believers, engaging insights quences of the modern world’s mia. Lewis’s modeling of possibilities sometimes buried deep within the increasingly radical, virtually absolute of extending concern and compassion religion and animals landscape at dismissal of all nonhuman animals as can easily be based on passages in the mid-century. For example, it is worth valued individuals deserving protec- Qur’an, the Hebrew Bible, the Christ- noting that Lewis is arguing as a tion as individuals. It is noteworthy, ian New and Old Testaments (in their Christian and that he reaches his con- for example, that Lewis does not original and translated forms), the clusions even though he adheres to, argue the Christian’s duty is to Vedas from Hinduism, any of the Bud- and in some ways promotes, aspects species, and he never alludes to the dhist canons, or the astonishingly rich of Christianity’s traditional, igno- issue of loss of species. His concern is stories of indigenous religious tradi- rance-based appraisal of other ani- with individuals who are harmed by a tions that support the extension of mals. Thus, in spite of his traditional specific practice, not the qualitatively deep concern to nonhuman animals. views, his profound religious beliefs different concern for biodiversity. It is These stories have remained a part of

90 The State of the Animals II: 2003 even the main line, anthropocentric genetic engineering of animals to from achieving a better understand- interpretations of those religious tra- model human diseases were basically ing of their place in the ecological ditions that predominate in the indus- unknown to Lewis. These uses, some webs that link all lives. White, in a trial world. Thus even if the dominant of which are described elsewhere in piece that has become one of the stories in Christianity and other reli- this volume, now dominate humans’ most notorious of modern essays, gions take an instrumentalist ap- relations with other animals. argued that the Christian doctrine of proach to “humans and animals” and Yet even if the Christian and other creation, particularly as it was elabo- confine their believers’ focus to hu- Abrahamic traditions have not yet rated in medieval times, forms “the mans alone, believers still can find ele- given Lewis’s reasoning any real historical roots of our ecological cri- ments of compassion that can be standing in the debate over the pro- sis,” and that “orthodox Christian extended to nonhuman animals. If priety of the widespread contempo- arrogance toward nature” thus “bears they do so, they are likely to find ten- rary practices that so obviously a huge burden of guilt” for present sion between that choice and the stan- inflict pain and suffering on nonhu- problems. White’s thesis was based on dard assumptions made in their own man living beings, Lewis’s and other the premise that our increasing abili- community or place of worship. similar arguments continue to mark ty to control and harness natural Second, merely naming the possi- the possibilities of religious believers forces is flawed by the assumption bility of a more compassionate view as being open to the significance of that “we are superior to nature, con- the truest Christian (or Jewish, Mus- other animals’ lives. Since Lewis temptuous of it, willing to use it for lim, etc.) position creates tension. wrote this essay as a Christian argu- our slightest whim” (1967, 1206). Lewis was extraordinarily popular in ment for other Christians, his work This led White to comment: his native England, and he remains an continues to suggest that Christiani- Especially in its Western form, icon in many conservative Christian ty and other religions can use their Christianity is the most anthro- circles in the United States. Yet own internal resources to provide pocentric religion the world has despite the fact that Lewis is widely insights into the importance of the ever seen....Christianity, in abso- held by conservative Christians to be lives of other animals. lute contrast to ancient paganism a person of vision, his conclusions in and Asia’s religions. . . not only this essay remain unrealized. What’s established a dualism of man and more, they are rarely, if ever, cited. The Image nature but also insisted that it is The latter fact suggests that, God’s will that man exploit na- although certain concerns for nonhu- of God and ture for his proper ends. (1205) man animals that are grounded in the White’s analysis can be seen, upon Christian tradition’s most basic val- Dominion even superficial consideration, to be ues have been and continue to be Ethical anthropocentrism character- in important respects a rhetorical brought to the forefront by some istically is driven by the notion that and unfair overstatement, for a wide major voices heard in contemporary humans are different from “animals.” variety of factors other than religious circles, they have had but a limited That humans are different in signifi- ones, such as economic, social, polit- effect. There are, without question, cant respects is, of course, both ical, and historical, underlie contem- very strong competing values in the important and true, though this point porary environmental practices (see Christian tradition that negate con- often is overstated in the extreme. As also Merchant [1980] for the change cern for nonhuman animals. Still, Radner and Radner note: from an organically oriented mentali- Lewis’s gambit remains a constant Obviously there are differences ty to a mechanically oriented mental- challenge on explicitly Christian between humans and other ity between 1500 and 1700). grounds to the practice of vivisection. species. Every species is different White’s thesis has been very valu- His arguments can be seen as a fore- from every other species: this able, however, in raising awareness of shadowing of the contemporary much is plain biology. The ideolo- how profoundly religious values have debates both within and without reli- gy lies not in the search for differ- influenced the ways believers gious circles on the issue of nonhu- ences, but in the unwavering approach living beings. Jeremy Cohen man animals’ moral significance. belief that humanity is defined by (1989), among others, has argued Third, even greater tension now is attributes that have absolutely no persuasively that White’s claims are evident on the issues Lewis precedent in the rest of the bio- wrong in some important specifics, addressed, for when he published this logical world. (1989, 8) since the dominion charge of Genesis essay instrumental uses of nonhuman In many contemporary forms of 1:28 (relied on heavily by White) was animals were just beginning to religious traditions, in particular the not taken by ancient and medieval increase. The extraordinarily harsh Abrahamic traditions, as well as in readers as any sort of license “selfish- features of intensive, or factory, farm- many secular traditions, the separa- ly to exploit the environment or to ing; widespread use of nonhuman ani- tion of humans from other animals is undermine its pristine integrity” mals in experiments; and, of course, one of the forces that prevent humans (309). Cohen notes, however, that the

Religion and Animals: A Changing Scene 91 language of Genesis 1:28 (which ers often exhibit far more mutual status of nonhuman animals now reads, in the Revised Standard Ver- understanding now and better aware- abound, as they do in the ever-prolif- sion, “Be fruitful and increase, fill the ness of each other. In general the erating forest of biological sciences. earth and subdue it; and have domin- leadership of religious institutions Awareness of nonhuman animals in ion over the fish in the sea, over the has become much more willing to tol- recent decades has not, however, been birds of the air, and over every other erate, talk to, and even respect, led by religious traditions. It has been living thing that moves on the earth”) believers of other religious traditions, led more by two forces: (1) primarily was consistently taken as a divine call though, of course, many well-known secular forces in industrialized coun- to rule over other animals. This analy- problems involving religious tolera- tries, and (2) various life sciences sis provides an interesting example of tion remain unsolved.9 Nonetheless such as primatology and marine mam- the how “environmental” issues and pluralism has become an accepted malogy under the guidance of such “animal” issues are by no means iden- phenomenon, grounded institutional- recognized authorities as Goodall tical and do not overlap perfectly, ly, politically, and philosophically by (chimpanzees), Roger and Katy Payne even though they are obviously relat- the open-minded work of the World (whales), and Cynthia Moss, Joyce ed. Conflating them under the rubric Council of Churches and such pio- Poole, and Katy Payne (elephants). In “environmental concerns” can, inter- neers as John Hick, Masao Abe, Nin- philosophical circles a broad discus- estingly, make many nonhuman ani- ian Smart, Sallie McFague, Rosemary sion has been taking place concerning mals disappear from the moral land- Radford Ruether, Karl Rahner, John ethical issues as a secular matter; this scape altogether. This happens, for Cobb, Huston Smith, and Wilfred has been especially prominent since example, when the exclusive focus is Cantwell Smith. Their work has been the 1975 publication of Animal Liber- on species conservation and not on advanced by other philosophers, com- ation, by Peter Singer. treatment of individuals from species parativists, theologians, and religious The emergence of widespread inter- that are not threatened. The upshot leaders, including Diana Eck, Arvind est in protecting nonhuman animals is that many morally relevant issues Sharma, Sulak Sivaraksa, Keith Ward, in some manner or another has led regarding nonhuman animals some- Jonathan Smith, Karen Armstrong, to a complex social movement, times disappear in environmental David Tracy, Langdon Gilkey, Mary often misleadingly labeled “animal discourse even if those who employ Evelyn Tucker, Dan Cohn Sherbok, rights.”10 This broad movement is a language that is eminently “environ- and Jay McDaniel. Such believers particularly forceful manifestation of mental” have the best of intentions reflect well the openness that reli- many humans’ concern to include at and are obviously in earnest about the gious belief can stimulate when it least some animals as “others” whom relevance of the lives of nonhuman notices and takes other perspectives their ethical values address. Environ- animals to us as moral agents. seriously. mental interests, though often exceedingly anthropocentric, also were part and parcel of the industrial- The Realities The Prevailing ized world’s expansion of the moral circle in the late twentieth century of Change Context and and surely will continue to be relevant Of great relevance to understanding to the protection of nonhuman ani- the possibilities of change in reli- Reality mals. Of particular significance is the gious views of nonhuman animals is The changes discussed here in the development and popularization of the fact that religion at the start of vast and diverse realm of religion science-based information regarding the twenty-first century is, as it were, took place in the late twentieth cen- nonhuman animals. This has oc- a different animal from what it was in tury, and continue in the new centu- curred in such fields as ethology, con- the middle of the twentieth century. ry, at the same time as an extraordi- servation biology, animal behavior, Negative factors pushed such a nary ferment concerning perspectives and cognitive science. change, including astonishing eth- on the diverse group of living beings These developments are powerful nic, political, religious, and econom- referred to as “animals.” One influen- supports for the burgeoning social ic oppression, widespread ecological tial philosopher describes the chang- concern for nonhuman animals. Of damage, and a proliferation of ref- ing values regarding nonhuman ani- perhaps even greater importance, ugee crises brought on by countless mals, especially as these values are however, is the dramatic change in wars. Positive factors pushing this enshrined in federal protections of attitudes and values, described else- change included increased communi- laboratory animals, as a changing where in this volume, regarding com- cation, changing demographics, and social ethic (Rollin 1999). panion animals. This phenomenon interfaith dialogue. These important changes have been alone is pushing remarkable changes The result of these and other fac- manifested in countless ways outside in awareness (see Rowan 1988; Man- tors prompting change has been that of religious traditions. In media and ning and Serpell 1994), as evidenced religious traditions and their believ- literature, discussions regarding the in the changing landscape of veteri-

92 The State of the Animals II: 2003 nary medicine and values (see Rollin pocentric ethics that dominated of religion and religious studies 1999; Tannenbaum 1995). Western daily and intellectual life, remain, these domains in some The changes in values and attitudes and which had roots in both the Abra- respects are advanced relative to the toward nonhuman animals have been hamic traditions and classical Greek discussions now going on in the legal, so rapid and dramatic that even some presuppositions about the special political, and business worlds. The of the most conservative realms of nature of human minds. academic world reflects openness to industrialized societies, including A consensus is emerging in which the study of religions but remains major religious institutions, now many humans now understand that quite conservative on the issue of reflect such changes, though often in humans cannot continue to destroy moral value beyond humanity. Discus- only small ways. In the United States, the ecological niches they occupy; sions in academic circles remain lawyers have been instrumental in that the earth itself needs to be the uneven and as yet without much pushing the legal system to consider beneficiary of human ethical sensitiv- impact on politics and business prac- whether moral standing for nonhu- ities; and that at least some nonhu- tices. But in some realms—including man animals should be enshrined by man living beings are complex beings the academic study of religion and of way of legal rights in legislative and worthy of ethical consideration in law—concerns for other animals now litigation arenas.11 Law is, of course, their own right. This consensus is the surface in interesting ways. The 1999 an area of society whose discourse is foundation for a change in perspec- conference “Religion and Animals” often “privileged,” that is, legal dis- tive on nonhuman animals that is and the emergence of “animal law” cussions and terminology often are pushing religious traditions to re- classes at leading law schools are but given a special level of respect by soci- vamp their conceptuality and dis- two examples of the ways in which the ety at large and by media. Thus law course. world of education reflects an in- has a profound effect on many other To be sure the changes in attitudes creased profile for the interests of areas. Other privileged areas are poli- toward nonhuman animals that have nonhuman animals. tics, economics, academics, and, taken place since 1950 have not all The upshot of such profound, com- importantly, religious discussions. been positive. In some senses nonhu- plex, and widespread change is that Debates, media, and other ongoing man animals are treated worse than many people perceive other animals conversations in any one of these ever before. This certainly is true in differently now from how they did in realms can affect many outside that terms of numbers killed for human 1950. This is particularly true not realm. Ferment in these areas can, use and in terms of the environmental only of companion animals, who have thus, be of extraordinary significance destruction that affects so much non- become significantly more important in fostering cultural changes. human life. Hence there remains ten- in private lives, but also of wild ani- sion of many kinds—over wildlife in mals and experimental animals. backyards, the use of nonhuman ani- Noticeably absent, though, are food Animals at mals for experiments, the destruction animals, who in the vast majority of of so many unwanted companion ani- cases remain without effective legal the End of mals by shelters, genetic engineering protections of even a minimal sort. of nonhuman animals, captivity of Such changes create additional the Twentieth animals in zoos, and experimenta- pressure on religious traditions, for tion. These tensions were, at the end they remain the primary source of Century of the twentieth century, being ethics and world view for the majority The second half of the twentieth cen- addressed by more than 10,000 orga- of the human race. As might be tury and the beginning of the twenty- nizations in more than 130 countries expected, in such a context of change first have manifested an extraordinary (de Kok 1999).12 noteworthy concern has emerged in increase in humans’—and thus reli- religious communities. They, like so gious believers’—interest in animals. many other communities in contem- This has been promoted by better The Complex porary society, reflect the profound observations, a phenomenon helped changes at many different levels and along by the fact that assessments of Terrain at in many different ways. This is appar- other animals no longer are dominat- ent in the daily activities of believers ed by (1) the ideology of narrow, dis- Century’s Dawn as well as at the most learned levels, missive views that, in large part, orig- The ferment in the fields studying such as contemporary theological inated in religious traditions; (2) the religion and in those engaging non- thinking on the environment (see, for equally narrow-minded ideology of human animals will, no doubt, pro- example, the website of the Forum on early twentieth-century science (in duce extraordinary challenges—and Religion and Ecology). the form of behaviorism and its dis- opportunities—for the emerging In assessing how religious tradi- missive, Cartesian premises); or (3) study of religion and animals. As con- tions have responded, it is good to the longstanding tradition of anthro- servative as many parts of the worlds recall that concern for nonhuman

Religion and Animals: A Changing Scene 93 animals is a venerable tradition that 1993). The meeting took place a cen- right, is the human species. The dec- reaches well back into all religious tury after the original Parliament of laration does not really engage the traditions (see Regan 1986; Masri World Religions, which did so much deeply meaningful proposition that 1987, 1989; Salisbury 1994; Linzey to promote interfaith dialogue there can be value and integrity in and Cohn-Sherbok 1997; Grant 1999; throughout the twentieth century. A nonhumans completely independent and Waldau 2001b). Some of the best- careful reading of the document of exclusively human interests. known concerns are those manifested signed at the 1993 meeting reveals Major figures in contemporary the- in the religions that originated in that it perpetuates the traditional, ology manifest this anthropocen- India, such as the Hindu traditions, harmful prejudice in favor of all trism. J. Moltmann, whose Gifford the Jain religion, and various forms of humans to the exclusion of all other Lectures in 1984–1985 were pub- Buddhism. In addition many indige- animals (Waldau 1995). This continu- lished under the inspiring title God In nous traditions, including those of ing shortsightedness causes a failure Creation: An Ecological Doctrine of the original inhabitants of North to see those other animals as the Creation (1985), spends a great deal America, often are cited for their ani- diverse and sometimes complex crea- of time on arguments about human mal-friendly concerns. Such concerns tures they are. arrogance, which he calls “anthro- also abound in the ancient strata of To be sure, the 1993 document has pocentrism,” and this naturally leads Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and some inclusive features. Addressing the reader to expect that his broadly often are cited when the importance the important needs of all humans titled text will engage the possibility of other animals is discussed. and giving prominence to environ- of seeing other animals. Yet tellingly, Despite the availability of these pro- mental concerns, the introductory nonhuman animals are ignored in the found resources, the situation is, in paragraphs are dominated by themes book, as there is no mention of any many respects, one of continuing of inclusion, consideration, protec- nonhuman animals that carries any myopia. There is a certain irony in tion, and involvement. Within its significance. Similarly the highly this, since White argued that even opening sentences, the declaration respected theologian Wolfhart Pan- though acknowledges that global problems nenberg published Toward a Theology [w]e shall continue to have a wor- affect all life on earth. The introduc- of Nature: Essays on Science and sening ecological crisis until we tion goes on to mention “life” several Faith (1993). This text is more of the reject the Christian axiom that more times, the “ecosystems,” “com- same, as it in no way engages the nature has no reason for exis- munity of living beings,” “animals,” extraordinarily rich perspectives tence but to serve man. . . [b]oth “plants,” “preservation of Earth, the developed in such biological sciences our present science and our pre- air, water and soil,” and “nature- as primatology and marine mammal sent technology are so tinctured friendly ways of life” (Küng and studies (Waldau 2001b). with orthodox Christian arro- Kuschel 1993, 13–16). Catholic documents from the end gance towards nature that no Despite this auspicious beginning, of the twentieth century continue to solutions for our ecologic crisis these seemingly inclusive references reflect the fact that anthropocen- can be expected from them alone. are bracketed by at least eleven trism in ethics has important and still . . . [S]ince the roots of our trou- explicit references to human inter- powerful strongholds in established ble are so largely religious, the ests alone. There is an irony in this, religion. The 1995 encyclical Evan- remedy must be essentially reli- given that many nonhuman individu- gelium Vitae is not nearly as broad as gious, whether we call it that or als possess considerable complexity its beautiful title (translated as “the not. (1967, 1207) and, in important ways, share identi- gospel of life”) suggests, for its lan- White’s main hope was a refocused cal, similar, or comparable interests guage and arguments continue to Christianity rather than a wholesale as a matter of biology and/or person- promote an unabashed ethical an- repudiation of it; he suggested a ality (see, for example, Parker and thropocentrism—the only “life” it return to the alternative Christian Gibson 1990: Cavalieri and Singer focuses on is human life. None of the views of humans’ relation to the 1994). But by and large, at the end of twenty references to nonhuman living earth, especially as such alternatives the twentieth century, religions had beings gives any hint of, let alone are exemplified by St. Francis’s failed to engage such specifics. The makes serious reference to, the value respect for the living world. declaration’s preoccupation with the of the lives of any living beings out- Yet a contemporary example sug- interests of the human species to the side the human species. What makes gests how shallow and incomplete the effective exclusion of the interests of for a certain irony in this approach changes within religious communi- all other species is an imbalance that is the extremely heavy concentration ties have been on essential issues. In threatens to perpetuate the tradition- in the document on humans before 1993 the Parliament of the World’s al view that, of all the species on they are born. As noted by the femi- Religions held a meeting in Chicago, earth, the only one of real signifi- nist whose work most fully engages the end product of which was a short cance, because its individuals are dis- the moral significance of nonhuman declaration (Küng and Kuschel tinctive and of value in their own animals,

94 The State of the Animals II: 2003 The speciesism of Homo sapiens ing, of course, ‘all nonhuman ani- is perhaps nowhere more pro- mals’], like plants and inanimate Prospects in nounced than in the protestation things, are by nature destined for the about the fate of the human con- common good of past, present, and the Twenty-first ceptus and zygote, while the sen- future humanity” (para. 2415). Century tiency of the other animals is As C.S. Lewis might have argued in One could fairly conclude, then, that declared morally irrelevant be- 1950, approaches to creation (to use religions can rise above the obviously cause they are not human beings. Moltmann’s 1985 term), nature (Pan- anthropocentric concerns that have (Adams 1994, 60) nenberg’s 1993 term), and life (the dominated so many religious tradi- Noting this irony is not meant to term so central in the 1995 encyclical tions in the twentieth century. The suggest that “the fate of the human Evangelium Vitae) that continue to manifest lack of church, synagogue, conceptus and zygote” should be ignore nonhuman animals completely mosque, and other religious commu- unimportant, subordinate, or in any are in some ways contrary to a core nity involvement in challenging the way treated as irrelevant. The lives of message and value found in religious most egregious abuses of nonhuman future humans are, by almost total traditions. Acting on this intuition or animals remains a principal feature of consensus in contemporary societies, value is a central feature of a moral the contemporary religious scene. extremely important to all humans and/or religious life generally. And That this is true in North America is even if the right of a future human to even if a specific religious tradition suggested by respected sociologists be born conflicts dramatically with makes claims about human superiori- when they comment, “The animal the obviously important issue of an ty, that message does not excuse, as rights movement [is] a new social individual woman’s need to make her Andrew Linzey (1987, 1994b) has so movement noted for its participants’ own moral decision about what is well shown, complete failure to take lack of ties to traditional Judeo-Chris- happening within her own body. But any nonhuman animals’ lives into tian religion” (Peek, Konty, and Fra- the absence of any meaningful refer- account. zier 1997, 429). Changing this reality ence to nonhuman animals in a major Indeed it is virtually impossible to is, no doubt, the principal challenge doctrinal statement that by its own argue that any religious tradition’s facing religion in North America, title purports to deal with the impor- core message is that other life is dominated as it is by what is some- tance of “life” suggests that nonhu- unimportant, although this is admit- times referred to as the Judeo-Christ- man animals are not yet an important tedly a subtext or “meta-message” of ian tradition.13 Traditions do not nec- concern for the hierarchy of this large the rhetoric of many well-respected essarily need to reach outside and influential religious tradition religious leaders. Religious believers themselves to solve the current within Christianity. may be heirs to the claim that dilemma for, as Lewis’s essay sug- Such lack of references to the real- humans are theologically more signif- gests, religious traditions can have ities and importance of nonhuman icant than any other animals, but that “core” or fundamental values that are animals is ironic, given that some ani- claim has nothing to do with the logi- both relevant and buried and which, mals have the very traits that we value cally distinguishable claim that the once “unearthed,” as it were, can be in ourselves as the basis of our own religion authorizes humans to ignore brought to bear on the prevailing moral significance—such as family the realities of other animals. indifference toward nonhuman ani- connections and loyalty, intelligence, The great value of Lewis’s essay is mals. There is evidence of this kind of communication, emotions, social its suggestion that it is part of the movement, but it remains marginal- structure, and even cultural transmis- Christian view of humans’ theologi- ized. Linzey and Cohn-Sherbok have sion. The daily realities of nonhuman cally superiority that religious believ- written often and eloquently of the animals are addressed in ethology ers be responsible for, and learn values manifest in both theological and related sciences; of particular about, the consequences for nonhu- and historical parts of their traditions interest in recent years has been the man animals of humans’ current (respectively, Christian and Jewish) development of “cognitive ethology,” manner of living. This same kind of (see, for example, Linzey and Cohn- which is providing much more infor- reasoning, so reliant on the internal Sherbok 1997). Similar analyses exist mation about the mental, emotional, resources of each religious tradition, for Islam (for example, Masri 1987, and social dimension of nonhuman is available to any religious believer 1989), and of course for Hindu, Jain, lives (see, for example, Allen and when the issue is the suffering, death, Buddhist, and many indigenous tradi- Bekoff 1997.) That the Catholic and other material effects—including tions in Africa, Asia, South America, Church is likely to continue to ignore environmental consequences—that a North America, Australia, and various such realities and espouse what above believer’s consumer choices and island cultures (see Suzuki and has been called an instrumentalist political decisions have on nonhuman Knudtson 1992; Grim 2001). Indeed view is confirmed by the following individuals. plumbing the conservative views of pronouncement in the 1994 revised the Catholic hierarchy reveals that Catholic Catechism: “Animals [mean-

Religion and Animals: A Changing Scene 95 there is some movement within that by the vast majority of the religious insights of virtually all religious tradi- tradition. For the first time ever, the establishment and its leaders. This tions. Thus humane reforms, as is the Catholic Catechism issued in 1994 means that the “on the ground reali- case with ecological reform, can find included an official statement from ties” in ordinary churches remain homes in the cosmologies, stories, the Catholic Church that believers anthropocentric in the extreme. and communities of contemporary have more than indirect obligation to One hope, of course, is the bur- religions. nonhuman animals.14 A required geoning concern in religious tradi- But will religious traditions contin- “religious respect for the integrity of tions for the “environment.”15 This ue to promote anthropocentric ethics creation” is explained in paragraph reflects the increasingly inclusive alone, or will they enlarge their moral 2416, which states: nature of ethics today, as well as the circles? One important factor in the Animals are God’s creatures. He implicit theological dimensions of future trajectory of religious con- surrounds them with this provi- any ethical discussion. Holistic, envi- cerns for nonhuman animals will be dential care. By their mere exis- ronmental themes increasingly are the continuing revolution in values in tence they bless him and give him found in works by religious believers developed world societies, for as the glory. Thus men owe them kind- as religious believers, examples of philosopher Bernard Rollin suggests ness. We recall the gentleness which include Christian thinkers such (1999, 3), “Most now realize...that with which saints like St. Francis as Thomas Berry, Dieter Hessel, and society is in the process of changing of Assisi or St. Philip of Neri treat- Jay McDaniel; Muslim thinkers such its view of animals, and of our obliga- ed animals. as Mawil Y. Izzi Deen and B. A. Masri; tion to animals.” Before celebrating this important Buddhists such as Sulak Sivaraksa Religious traditions can advance or movement, it is important to and the Dalai Lama; and numerous retard such changes, or they can take acknowledge that, while this first-ever representatives from Judaism, Hindu- a unique leadership role in this Catholic Church admission indicates ism, and a wide range of indigenous process because of their profound that humans owe duties directly to traditions. commitment to the ethical abilities some nonhuman animals (thus imply- The state of current literature, of humans. ing that the lives of these nonhuman however, is a signpost of how little has Today the fundamental questions animals have a moral dimension), the been done regarding other animals, for religions, as for all humans, are concession is extremely limited. Para- even though other animals often are these: Who are the “others?” Will the graph 2415, in addition to the pas- mentioned in studies of symbolism. “others” protected by human, reli- sage already quoted, includes various These studies form, however, classic gious, and ethical sensibilities be only factors that override Paragraph examples of what Adams (1994) calls humans? Will religions cross the 2416’s historically new concern for the “absent referent”—in other species line in the twenty-first centu- direct duties to nonhuman animals. words, the animals themselves are ry? The verdict remains out on just These factors include our duties to nowhere to be found. At the dawn of what kind of force religious traditions “neighbors” and “future genera- the new millennium, there still was will become in this important area of tions,” both of which, predictably, no systematic work on the topic of human existence. refer to humans alone even though religion and animals, although the the terms “neighbors” and “future papers from the “Religion and Ani- Notes generations” on their face apply to mals” conference were close to publi- 1Religions were also, to be sure, blind to many nonhuman animals. In other words, cation. humans, as evidenced by both widespread reli- gious intolerance and the all too cozy relation- the primary concern of the revised ship between established religious institutions Catholic Catechism is the traditional, and oppressive regimes, imperialist foreign pow- exclusive focus on members of the ers, and capitalist corporations. The major theo- A Continuing logical movement known as “liberation theology” human species alone. describes the latter; see, for example, Brown It is fair to ask whether this really is Role for (1993). much movement, and what will hap- 2Because this attitude focuses on the useful- ness of nonhuman animals for human purposes, pen in the future given the new abili- Traditions such views sometimes are described as “utilitari- ties of humans to use nonhuman ani- Any member of any of the major world an” (for example, by C.S. Lewis in a passage quot- mals under the power of such religions, including Muslims, Jews, ed below). If such a description is used, however, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, as well one must be careful not to confuse this attitude technologies as genetic engineering. with the very distinctive, animal-friendly theory of On the whole such complex specific as adherents of indigenous and other ethics called “utilitarianism” historically associ- problems, including widespread and religious traditions, can fully embrace ated with the eighteenth-century philosopher nonhuman animals and remain com- Jeremy Bentham and the nineteenth-century uncontrolled experimentation on philosopher John Stuart Mill and exemplified nonhuman animals for humans’ bene- pletely faithful to their own tradition. today by the works of Peter Singer. See, for exam- As with ecological insights, compas- ple, Singer (1990). fit or profit, and the cruel conditions 3 sionate concerns for other animals This is the traditional Catholic position. See, of intensive rearing conditions (see for example, Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theolo- Regan 1986a), remain unaddressed are well grounded in the ethical giae, 2a, 2ae, q. 64. art. 1, ad. 3; Summa Contra

96 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Gentiles Bk. 3, Pt. 2, ch. 112, art. 13. 15A Harvard series on “religion and ecology” Finsen, L., and S. Finsen. 1994. The 4The original title was simply “Vivisection.” (the individual titles can be found at http://envi- Clyde Kilby reports (1995) that the article was ronment. harvard.edu/religion, the website of the animal rights movement in Ameri- published in 1948 in London for the National Forum on Religion and Ecology) includes many ca: From compassion to respect. Anti-Vivisection Society. As late as 1963 it decidedly positive estimates of how local religious New York: Twayne. appeared in The Anti-Vivisectionist (March/April, communities already are undertaking environ- 154–5), where it has the longer title “Can Chris- mentally sensitive programs that affect many Forum on Religion and Ecology. tians Support Vivisection?” The page numbers nonhuman animals in favorable ways. http://environment.harvard.edu/re given here are from the 1963 version. ligion (accessed March 16, 2003). 5As a technical matter, this is the position of only some Christians. The leading theologian of Gaffney, J. 1988. The relevance of Catholicism, Thomas Aquinas, followed Aristotle Literature Cited animal experimentation to Roman in holding that all living beings have a soul. The Catholic ethical methodology. In practical consequences of this are not significant, Adams, C.J. 1994. The sexual politics however, in that Catholic theology, as noted of meat: A feminist-vegetarian criti- Animal sacrifices: Religious per- below, has always asserted humans’ complete cal theory. New York: Continuum. spectives on the use of animals in superiority to nonhuman animals. science, ed. T. Regan, 149–170. 6Lewis also makes another argument as to why Allen, C., and M. Bekoff, 1997. the standard Christian position is troubling: “We Species of mind: The philosophy and Philadelphia: Temple University may find it difficult to formulate a human right of biology of cognitive ethology. Cam- Press. tormenting beasts in terms which would not Galdikas, B.M.F. 1995. Reflections of equally imply an angelic right of tormenting bridge: Bradford/MIT Press. men” (154). Aquinas, T. Latin text and English Eden: My life with the orangutans of 7It is interesting to contrast this with today’s trans. by T. Gilby et al. 1964–1981. Borneo. London: Victor Gollancz. general view that the animal rights movement is Gardner, H. 1985. The mind’s new a secular phenomenon. See, in particular, the Summa theologiae. New York: comment at the end of this chapter made by soci- McGraw-Hill. science: A history of the cognitive ologists Peek, Konty, and Frazier (1997) regard- ______. Trans. and with an introduc- revolution. New York: Basic. ing the non-involvement of the Judeo-Christian Gould, S.J. 1995. Animals and us. The tradition. tion and notes, by A.C. Pegis, J.F. 8It would be misleading to infer from this com- Anderson, J.Bourke, C.J.O’Neil. New York Review of Books, August ment that these other traditions have been with- Summa contra gentiles. 1975. 19. out problems in the many ways in which they have Grant, R.M. 1999. Early Christians seen and otherwise engaged nonhuman animals. Notre Dame. (Originally published On the limitations in the views and values regard- as Saint Thomas Aquinas, On the and animals. London and New ing other animals in various other traditions, see truth of Catholic Faith, New York, York: Routledge. Waldau (2000 a,b,c; 2001a). Griffin, D. 1992. Animal minds. 9The term interfaith dialogue frequently is used 1955–57.) to describe the many conversations now taking Blum, D. 1994. The monkey wars. Chicago: University of Chicago place. The journal World Faiths Encounter, in New York: Oxford University Press. Press. which Waldau (1995) was published, is a good ______. 1998. From cognition to example of the breadth and depth of this phe- Brown, R.M. 1993. Liberation theolo- nomenon. gy: An introductory guide. consciousness. Animal Cognition 1: 10The term is misleading because not all pro- Louisville: Westminster/John Knox. 3–16. ponents seek either moral or legal rights. For the Grim, J., ed. 2001. Indigenous tradi- history of the animal protection movement in the Cavalieri, P., and P. Singer, eds. 1994. twentieth century, see Jasper and Nelkin (1992) The Great Ape Project: Equality tions and ecology: The interbeing of and Finsen and Finsen (1994). beyond humanity. New York: St. cosmology and community. Cam- 11There now are many courses on “animal bridge: Harvard University Press. law,” the most publicized of which is the Harvard Martin’s Press. Law School class that began in 2000. The trend Catechism of the Catholic Church. Jasper, J.M., and D. Nelkin. 1992. The toward inclusion of this topic continues, with Yale 1994. London: Geoffrey Chapman. animal rights crusade: The growth Law School most recently offering an animal law of a moral protest. New York: The study group in spring 2003. The best-known leg- Clark, S.R.L. 1977. The moral status islation is the Animal Welfare Act, first enacted in of animals. Oxford: Clarendon. Free Press. 1966 and regularly amended thereafter. Cohen, J. 1989. “Be fertile and John Paul II. Sollicitudo Rei Socialis. 12In the United States alone, more than 1987. Available at http://www.vat- 10,000 animals per day are killed for want of a increase, file the earth and master home. Details are available at the website of The it”: The ancient and medieval career ican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/e Humane Society of the United States, of a Biblical text. London and Itha- ncyclicals. www.hsus.org. ———. Evangelium vitae. 1995. Lon- 13Some scholars, such as Kimberley Patton of ca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press. Harvard Divinity School, observe that this is a Darwin, C. 1859. On the origin of don: Catholic Truth Society. very misleading phrase, for it fails to signal that species by means of natural selec- Kalechofsky, R. 1991. Autobiography the Jewish and Christian traditions are much less of a revolutionary: Essays on ani- alike than, say, the Islamic and Jewish traditions. tion. London: Murray. 14Andrew Linzey (1994a) has noted that these de Kok, W., ed. 1999. World animal mal and human rights. Marblehead, 1994 statements of the Catholic Church go net directory, Edition 1.1. Boston: Mass.: Micah Publications. beyond the pre-1994 official position of the Kilby, C. 1995. The Christian world of Catholic Church, which Linzey has described as World Animal Net. “we [humans] do not have direct duties” (1987). Du Bois, W.E.B. 1969. The souls of C.S. Lewis. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Linzey also refers to some limitations on humans’ black folk. New York: Signet/New Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. “stewardship” in the 1987 encyclical Sollicitudo Rei Socialis. American Library.

Religion and Animals: A Changing Scene 97 Küng, H., and K.J. Kuschel. 1993. A bridge: Cambridge University ______. 2000a. On breadth and global ethic: The declaration of the Press. exclusion in concepts of nonvio- parliament of the world religions. Peek, C.W., M.A. Konty, and T.F. Fra- lence. Philosophy East and West 50: London: SCM Press. Preface and zier. 1997. Religion and ideological 3 (July): 468–471. commentary translated by J. Bow- support for social movements: The ______. 2000b. Buddhism and ani- den from Erklärung zum Weltethos. case of animal rights. Journal for mals rights. In Contemporary Bud- Die Deklaration des Parlementes the Scientific Study of Religion dhist Ethics, ed. D. Keown, The Cur- der Weltreligionen. 1993. Münich: 36(3): 429–439. zon Critical Studies in Buddhism R. Piper GmbH and Co. KG. Radner, D., and M. Radner. 1989. Ani- Series, 81–112. Richmond, Surrey, Lewis, C.S. 1963. Can Christians sup- mal consciousness. Buffalo, N.Y.: England: Curzon Press. port vivisection? The Anti-Vivisec- Prometheus. ______. 2000c. The question of non- tionist (March/April) 154–155. Regan, T., ed. 1986a. Animal sacri- violence in Hinduism and other tra- Linzey. A. 1987. Christianity and the fices: Religious perspectives on the ditions. International Journal of rights of animals. New York: Cross- use of animals in science. Philadel- Hindu Studies 4:1: 104–106 (review road. phia: Temple University Press of Subverting hatred: The challenge ______. 1994a. Why Catholic teach- ———, director and narrator. 1986b. of nonviolence in religious tradi- ing perpetuates cruelty. The AV We are all Noah. Raleigh: Culture tions). Magazine 102 (9): 8–11. and Animals Foundation. ______. 2001a. The specter of ______. 1994b. Animal theology. Rickaby, J. 1888. Moral philosophy. speciesism: Buddhist and Christian London: SCM Press; and Chicago: London: Longmans, Green. views of animals. New York: Oxford University of Illinois. Rollin, B.E. 1999. An introduction to University Press. Linzey, A., and D. Cohn-Sherbok. veterinary medical ethics: Theory ______. 2001b. Religion and which 1997. After Noah: Animals and the and cases. Ames: Iowa State Uni- sciences? Science and which com- liberation of theology. London: Mow- versity Press. munity? The Journal of Faith and bray. Tannenbaum, J. 1995. Veterinary Science IV: 115–142. Manning, A., and J. Serpell, eds. ethics: Animal welfare, client rela- Watson, J.B. 1913. Psychology as the 1994. Animals and human society: tions, competition, and collegiality. behaviorist views it. Psychological Changing perspectives. London and St. Louis, Mo.: Mosby. Review 20: 158–177. New York: Routledge. Romanes, G.J. 1885. Mental evolution White, L., Jr. 1967. The historic roots Masri, B.A. 1987. Islamic concern for in animals. London: Kegan Paul, of our ecologic crisis. Science 155: animals. Petersfield, England: The Trench. 1203–1207. Athene Trust. ______. 1886. Animal intelligence. Wrangham, R.W., W.C. McGrew, ______. 1989. Animals in Islam. London: Kegan Paul, Trench. F.B.M. de Waal, and P.G. Heltne, Petersfield, England: The Athene Rowan, A., ed. 1988. Animals and eds. 1994. Chimpanzee cultures. Trust. people sharing the world. Hanover, Cambridge: Harvard University Mayr, E. 1982. The growth of biologi- N.H., and London: University Press Press. cal thought: Diversity, evolution, of New England. and inheritance. New York: Belknap Salisbury, J.E. 1994. The beast within: Press. Animals in the middle ages. New Merchant, C. 1980. The death of York and London: Routledge. nature: Women, ecology and the sci- Singer, P. 1990. Animal liberation. entific revolution. San Francisco: Second edition. New York: Avon. Harper and Row. Suzuki, D., and P. Knudtson. 1992. Miller, P. 1995. Jane Goodall. Nation- Wisdom of the elders: Honoring al Geographic 188.6: 102–129. sacred native visions of nature. Moltmann, J. 1985. God in Creation: New York: Bantam. An ecological doctrine of Creation. Thomas, K. 1984. Man and the natur- London: SCM. al world: Changing attitudes in Eng- Pannenberg, W., T. Peters, ed. 1993. land 1500–1800. London: Penguin. Toward a theology of nature: Essays van Lawick-Goodall, J. 1971. In the on science and faith. Louisville: shadow of man. Boston: Houghton Westminster/John Knox Press. Mifflin. Parker, S.T., and K.R. Gibson, eds. Waldau, P. 1995. Interfaith dialogue 1990. “Language” and intelligence needs an inclusive global ethic. in monkeys and apes: Comparative World Faiths Encounter 11: 58–65. developmental perspectives. Cam-

98 The State of the Animals II: 2003 The Evolution of Animal Law since 1950 7CHAPTER

Steven M. Wise

ver the last half century, the nineteenth century, Radford explains penalties for violating state anti-cru- law has assumed an increas- that “while this legislation imposed elty statutes have gotten tougher Oingly important place in ani- restrictions on how animals could be and tougher, but the statutes them- mal protection even as it has begun treated, none of it—nor, indeed, any selves apply to fewer and fewer per- to point in the direction of true legal enacted subsequently—change [sic] petrators of nonhuman animal pain rights for at least some nonhuman the traditional legal status accorded and suffering. animals. In this chapter I briefly dis- to animals by the courts.”2 That sta- First, there has been a stiffening of cuss five aspects of the law: anti-cru- tus was as property3, and property penalties for conviction. In 1950 the elty statutes; the necessity of obtain- generally lacks rights. barest handful of state legislatures ing standing to litigate on behalf of There is no federal anti-cruelty had enacted anti-cruelty statutes that the interests of nonhuman animals; statute in the United States. But, were felonies or that even provided evolving protections for great apes; according to American law professor for a maximum penalty exceeding the movement toward legal rights for David Favre, the anti-cruelty statutes one year of imprisonment.8 The prob- at least some nonhuman animals; and of the fifty states “are so similar in lem of low penalties, Favre says, “is the state of legal education concern- nature and the issues so fundamental the ultimate weakness of most ing animal protection. that there is very little variation in [anti]cruelty statutes, for no matter judicial outlook around the coun- how expansive the language, if the try.”4 In 2002 these statutes strongly punishment is not sufficient, then no Anti-cruelty resembled not just each other, but real deterrent against the acts also the anti-cruelty statutes that exists.”9 The maximum penalty that a Statutes existed in 1950, in 1900, and, indeed, criminal statute allows is an impor- “Anti-cruelty” is not necessarily syn- in 1850.5 Radford says that, in both tant benchmark. It signals to a judge onymous with “animal welfare.” the United States and the United how opposed legislators think a soci- British law professor Mike Radford Kingdom, “(t)he gist of the offense” ety actually is to a particular wrong, notes that to today is as it has been for nearly two for it sets the stiffest penalty that a cause an animal to suffer unnec- hundred years, “the infliction of wrongdoer who commits a crime in essarily, or to subject it to any unnecessary abuse or unnecessary or the most unimaginably horrific way— other treatment which amounts unjustifiable pain and suffering upon or who commits it repeatedly—can to an offence of cruelty, is self-ev- an animal.”6 In neither country, suffer. Because a judge usually will idently detrimental to its welfare. explains the leading American legal not impose a penalty near the maxi- To that extent, there is a degree encyclopedia, has it been “the pur- mum for a first or “run-of-the-mill” of affinity between cruelty and pose of such statutes to place unrea- offense, the typical penalty for cruel- welfare, but the two are far from sonable restrictions upon the use, ty will remain low so long as the max- being synonymous: prejudicing enjoyment, or possession of animals imum penalty remains low. This prob- an animal’s welfare does not of or to interfere with the necessary dis- lem has begun to ease. While most itself amount in law to cruelty.1 cipline or government of animals.”7 anti-cruelty statutes continue to be “Anti-cruelty” is also not synonymous The last half-century has seen two misdemeanors, or lesser crimes, by with “animal rights.” Speaking of the significant changes in American anti- 2002 thirty-four American states and entire body of legislation in the area cruelty statutes, and they are rapidly the District of Columbia had enacted of nonhuman animal welfare in the trending in opposite directions. The at least one felony anti-cruelty

99 statute. Felonies generally are under- ically exempting customary hus- of “standing.” It allows persons to sue stood to be graver crimes that carry bandry practices indicate that, but for to redress an injury that they, and longer sentences of imprisonment.10 the exemption, such practices would only they, have suffered as a result of The second trend has been more be determined to be cruel.”15 an illegal act. Their remedy may indi- ominous for nonhuman animals, The same problem exists for the rectly protect nonhuman animals because many of the humans who millions of nonhuman animals forced who are being injured at the same commit forms of institutionalized cru- to be subjects of biomedical research. time. And that is all the protection elty have been exempted from the The only American biomedical re- that nonhuman animals ever get from reach of anti-cruelty statutes. The searcher convicted under an anti-cru- the civil law. most notorious example is that of non- elty statute—perhaps the only one I limit my discussion of standing to human animals raised and killed for ever charged—was Edward Taub. Even how it operates in America’s federal food. According to the U.S. De- his conviction for failing to provide courts and focus on common ways in partment of Agriculture’s National necessary veterinary care to a monkey which it has an impact on litigation Agricultural Statistics Service, in 1998 named Nero was reversed on appeal, that seeks to protect the interests of approximately 9,443 million nonhu- on the ground that the Maryland anti- nonhuman animals. Bear in mind man animals were killed for food in the cruelty statute under which he was that the struggle of judges with what United States; these include cows, charged was addressed to “unneces- may appear to be a straightforward pigs, sheep, chickens, turkeys, and sary” or “unjustifiable” pain or suffer- standard has led to a federal law of ducks.11 Yet twenty-five American ing, and pain or suffering inflicted standing that has been rightly states exempt common farming prac- pursuant to biomedical research was accused of “suffering from inconsis- tices entirely from cruelty prosecution. not that kind.16 Thirty states, along tency, unreliability, and inordinate Five others exempt some of them.12 As with the District of Columbia, now complexity.”21 of 2002 eighteen of these thirty states exempt nonhuman animals used in The source of federal judicial power had amended their anti-cruelty biomedical research from the reach of is Article III, section 2 of the U.S. statutes to add these exemptions with- their anti-cruelty statutes.17 Many of Constitution. Federal judges may only in the previous thirteen years, seven in these statutes, however, condition decide “cases” and “controversies.” the previous eight years.13 More states their exemptions upon compliance In order to surmount the constitu- are likely to follow. with the minimal dictates of the fed- tional obstacle of standing, a plaintiff In the famous English “McLibel” eral Animal Welfare Act, enacted in in a federal court must allege and case, two plaintiffs—McDonald’s Cor- 1966. However the Animal Welfare Act prove that he or she has suffered what poration and its English subsidiary— itself exempts the great majority of has come to be called routinely an sued for defamation for, among other nonhuman animals actually used in injury-in-fact. It was not until 1970 things, statements that they engaged biomedical research.18 that the U.S. Supreme Court adopted in cruelty toward the nonhuman ani- this relatively lenient standard.22 mals whom they served for food. The Before then, one could obtain stand- corporations urged the trial judge to Standing ing only if one could show that one’s rule that in England, as in most Lacking legal personhood and legal legal right had been invaded.23 An American states, customary farming rights, nonhuman animals are essen- injury-in-fact must then be “fairly practices should be deemed accept- tially invisible to civil judges. This traceable to . . . allegedly unlawful able. He refused, observing that a means that no one can file lawsuits conduct and likely to be redressed by farming practice could be both cruel directly on their behalf. Their inter- the requested relief.”24 and legal, and rejected the McDon- ests can be protected only indirectly. But injury-in-fact, traceability, and ald’s request, saying that not “to do This can happen when a legal person, redressability are just the constitu- so would be to hand the decision as to who has legal rights (usually an adult tional requirements. There may be what is cruel to the food industry human being) files a lawsuit either to others. The most common of the so- completely.”14 stop an illegal act or to seek compen- called prudential requirements for That is precisely what the majority sation for injuries already inflicted. standing is that a plaintiff’s claim of American states do. Professor David Not just any legal person can sue to “must fall within the zone of interests Wolfson has observed that the “effect protect animals. American courts protected by the law invoked.”25 This of this trend of amendments cannot generally prohibit a litigant from requirement arises when plaintiffs be overemphasized. The trend indi- asserting the legal rights of another seek review of the decision of a feder- cates a nationwide perception that it person.19 Judges, federal and state, al agency under the federal Adminis- was necessary to amend anti-cruelty usually restrict those able to obtain a trative Procedures Act.26 It guides a statutes to avoid their possible appli- judicial decision to plaintiffs with a court in deciding whether the partic- cation to animals raised for food or sufficient large stake in the outcome ular plaintiff who has challenged an food production. Amendments specif- of a controversy.20 This is the doctrine agency’s decision should be heard.27

100 The State of the Animals II: 2003 If the court decides that the plain- the psychological well-being of pri- tiff’s interests are “so marginally mates. This time an ape language Toward related to or inconsistent with the researcher was said to lack standing purposes implicit in the statute or because it was his university, and not Protection for that it cannot be reasonably assumed he, who might have suffered an injury, Great Apes that Congress intended to permit the while a business that sold primate In Rattling the Cage: Toward Legal suit,” it will not hear the claim of the housing that could be used if valid Rights for Animals (2000), I argued particular plaintiff.28 standards had been issued lacked that, under the common law, entitle- In the 1990s the Animal Legal standing because it fell outside of the ment to legal rights turns on the Defense Fund (ALDF) brought a land- zone of interests. nature of an animal’s mind; that mark trio of cases in the federal In 1996 the ALDF tried a third numerous scientific investigations courts in Washington, D.C., to try to time, claiming once again that the have demonstrated that at least two obtain standing to litigate in the Secretary of Agriculture had failed to great apes, chimpanzees and bono- interests of nonhuman animals. issue the minimum standards re- bos, possess minds so extraordinary Three times ALDF won in the District quired to promote the psychological that they tower above the minimum Court and three times these victories well-being of primates. One plaintiff, sufficient for rights; and that the day were overturned by a three-judge Marc Jurnove, was alleged to have vis- has come to grant basic legal rights panel of the Court of Appeals. On the ited a zoo repeatedly and seen pri- to these apes. In Drawing the Line: appeal of the third decision to the full mates kept in inhumane conditions Science and the Case for Animal bench of that court, ALDF achieved a whom he intended to continue to visit Rights (2002), I made the same argu- singular success. regularly. For the third time, a panel ment on behalf of the other two great In the first case, Animal Legal of the Court of Appeals reversed a apes, gorillas and orangutans. Defense Fund v. Espy (I),29 an inactive lower court victory for the Animal That day in which the great apes researcher and a lawyer-member of an Legal Defense Fund. This time a fur- obtain legal rights will cap a long animal oversight committee, as well ther appeal was requested before all legal and political process. Among its as two animal protection organiza- the judges of that Appeals Court, and first fruits were the 1985 amend- tions, complained that the Secretary they ruled, 7 to 4, that Jurnove had ments to the Animal Welfare Act. of Agriculture had excluded 90 per- standing.32 The majority said that There the Secretary of Agriculture cent of the nonhuman animals who people have a protected aesthetic was directed to “promulgate stan- were used in biomedical research— interest in observing animals free dards to govern the humane han- rats, mice, and birds—from the defin- from inhumane treatment. It turned dling, care, treatment, and trans- ition of “animal” in the regulations back arguments that the dissent portation of animals by dealers, he was required to issue under the embraced that a plaintiff could obtain research facilities, and exhibitors. . . federal Animal Welfare Act.30 A three- standing only if he alleged that ani- [and to] include minimum require- judge panel of the Court of Appeals mals whom he wished to observe ments. . . [for] a physical environment for the District of Columbia found the faced extinction, not just suffering; adequate to promote the psychologi- researcher had not suffered the that causation did not exist because cal well-being of primates.”34 This required injury-in-fact because it was the Department of Agriculture had amounted to a recognition by Con- not immediate, while the lawyer was not authorized the inhumane treat- gress that primates had a psychology said to be improperly trying to com- ment, but had just not acted to pre- that could be in good health or poor. pel a general executive enforcement vent it; and that one could only spec- Britain was next to step in the of the law. The organizations were dis- ulate that any changes in the direction of legal rights for great missed from the suit, for although treatment of the primates would apes. In 1997, on its own initiative, they met the three constitutional actually satisfy Jurnove’s aesthetic the British government’s Home Sec- requirements for standing, they did sensibilities. In 2000 other plaintiffs retary banned the use of all four not fall within the zone of interest of used this victory to obtain standing species of great apes, not just chim- the Animal Welfare Act. in, and finally to win, another lawsuit panzees and bonobos but orangutans In a second case, Animal Legal that complained that the Secretary of and gorillas, too, as biomedical re- Defense Fund v. Espy (II),31 the same Agriculture had illegally excluded search subjects.35 This ban on the use Court of Appeals turned aside for lack rats, mice, and birds from the defini- of great apes, he wrote, “was a matter of standing a challenge to the suffi- tion of “animals” to be protected by of morality. The cognitive and behav- ciency of the standards that the Sec- the Animal Welfare Act.33 Unfortu- ioural characteristics and qualities of retary of Agriculture had issued for nately, in 2002 Congress enacted an these animals mean that it is unethi- the exercise of dogs used in biomed- exemption to the definition of ani- cal to treat them as expendable for ical research and to promote a physi- mals that nullified this win. The research.”36 Under current British cal environment adequate to meet standing victory remains, however. legislation, there must be a weighing

The Evolution of Animal Law since 1950 101 of the cost to a nonhuman animal of Zealand Parliament did not grant all the countries of the world, but a biomedical procedure with the ben- legal rights to the great apes. Instead especially the so-called range coun- efit to human beings. Only when the it prohibited research, testing, and tries, embrace an international Decla- human benefit outweighs the nonhu- teaching involving the use of a great ration for the Protection of Great man cost may the procedure be ape without approval of the director- Apes and a subsequent Convention licensed. Steve Wilkes, head of the general who, in granting approval, for the Protection of Great Apes that Home Office’s Animal Procedures must be satisfied that use of the ape name the great apes as “World Her- Section, said that the benefit to a is in his or her best interests or in the itage Species.” This is a new category human being could never outweigh best interests of his or her species, roughly modeled on the existing the cost to a great ape.37 and that the benefits to be derived are treaty that allows for the designation In New Zealand a 1998 attempt led not outweighed by the likely harm to of World Heritage Sites. If this decla- to formal Parliamentary hearings that the ape.40 ration materializes, the new category were highly publicized around the In the United States, at least chim- of World Heritage Species would world. Prominent New Zealand advo- panzees, but likely all the great apes, tighten the protection of great apes cates of legal rights for great apes, appear to be edging toward a de facto under international law and under including lawyers, professors, scien- “right” to life. If not the most expen- the domestic law of range countries tists, and philosophers, sought to sive nonhuman animals to maintain and provide special protections under build upon an idea that had been the in biomedical research, chimpanzees international law. focus of a powerful book, The Great certainly are among the most expen- Ape Project: Equality Beyond Human- sive. In 1995 it was estimated that it ity.38 Animal Welfare Bill No. 2, which cost between $113,000 and $321,000 Toward Legal sought to streamline and modernize to maintain a captive chimpanzee Kiwi animal protection law, was pend- used in biomedical research over his Rights for ing before the New Zealand Parlia- or her natural lifespan.41 That it 44 ment. The submitters sought to have would doubtless be far cheaper to kill Animals it amended as proposed by the group them the way mice and rats routinely The ancient Greek and Roman worlds Great Ape Project (New Zealand) in are killed when their usefulness has were dominated by the belief that the order to grant great apes three basic ceased was forcefully etched in a universe was designed for human legal rights. These were the rights not minority statement appended to a beings. Small wonder that from these to be deprived of life, not to be sub- report of the National Research Coun- worlds emerged the jurisprudential jected to torture or cruel treatment, cil, an arm of the National Academy idea that, in the words of the early and not to be subjected to medical or of Sciences, in 1997. The statement Roman jurist Hermogenianus, “All law scientific experimentation. They also firmly opposed the use of public was established for men’s sake.”45 sought to provide for the appoint- money to support chimpanzees in Why should law not have been estab- ment, when necessary, of human retirement sanctuaries, “since there lished just for the sake of men? guardians to defend these great ape is no potential return on research dol- According to the early Greeks and rights.39 lars invested in chimpanzees perma- Romans, everything else was. In In their Submission to Parliament, nently removed from the research Roman law, “persons” had legal the submitters argued that pool,” and urged that they be eutha- rights, while “things” were the [b]eing fellow hominids, the nized.42 The majority, however, reject- objects of the rights of persons. And great apes are more closely relat- ed euthanasia as a method of popula- all those beings who were believed to ed to humans than to any other tion control of captive chimpanzees lack free will—women, children, animals. They share many of our on the grounds that slaves, the insane, and nonhuman ani- characteristics including some the phylogenetic status and psy- mals—were at some time classified as that we thought were uniquely chological complexity of chim- property. ours, such as self-awareness, the panzees indicate that they should Roman law has had a tremendous ability to reason and the ability to be accorded a special status with effect upon Western law as a whole, imagine what others are thinking regard to euthanasia that might and especially upon property law. The and feeling. In humans, these not apply to other research ani- law of nonhuman animals in the Unit- traits are often cited as a basis for mals, for example, rats, dogs, or ed States at the beginning of the sec- ascribing basic legal rights. We some other nonhuman primates. ond millennium is nearly identical to believe that a strong case now Simply put, killing a chimpanzee the Roman law of nonhuman animals exists for giving basic legal rights currently requires more ethical as it existed when the first millenni- to the other members of the and scientific justification than um turned. While all humans are Hominidae family. killing a dog, and it should con- legal persons, all legal persons are not The Animal Welfare Act of 1999 tinue to do so.43 human beings. Some are artificial that eventually cleared the New In 2002 a move was afoot to have persons, like corporations and ships.

102 The State of the Animals II: 2003 However, all of the more than one mil- broke legal rights into their lowest and comprehensive principles, found- lion species of nonhuman animals— common denominators, using terms ed on reason, natural justice, and chimpanzees, cheetahs, cats, and that judges commonly employ, such enlightened public policy, modified cockroaches—are not legal persons as privilege, claim, duty, immunity, and adapted to all the circumstances but are legal things. disability, power, and liability, but he of all the particular cases that fall Some may confuse being the object never formally defined them. Instead, within it.”48 of legal protection with having legal he spelled out how the common Why the common law over legisla- personhood. They may point to the denominators relate to each other. tion? The common law is created by criminal anti-cruelty statutes, which I According to Hohfeld, legal relation- English-speaking judges while in the briefly discussed, that have existed for ships can exist only between two legal process of deciding cases. Unlike leg- well over a century in every American persons and one thing. One of the two islators, judges are at least formally jurisdiction as evidence that nonhu- persons always has a legal advantage bound to do justice. Properly inter- man animals are legal persons with (or right) over the other. The other preted, the common law is meant to legal rights. But they would probably person has the corresponding legal be flexible, adaptable to changes in be wrong. Criminal statutes are pro- disadvantage. Just as a man can’t be public morality, and sensitive to new hibitions enacted by legislatures. a husband without a wife and a scientific discoveries. Among its chief Sometimes they protect persons, as woman can’t be a wife without a hus- values are liberty and equality. These when legislatures make it a crime to band, neither a legal advantage nor a favor common law personhood, as a assault a fellow human being. But disadvantage can exist all by itself. matter of liberty, at least for those they may also commonly protect The legal rights of nonhuman ani- nonhuman animals, such as chim- things. For example, in Massachusetts mals might first be achieved in any of panzees, bonobos, gorillas, orang- it is a felony, punishable by imprison- three ways. Most agree that the least utans, dolphins, and whales, who pos- ment for up to five years, to destroy a likely will be through the re-interpre- sess such highly advanced cognitive cemetery shrub. It also is a crime to tation or amendment of state or fed- abilities as consciousness, perhaps smash the windshield of your neigh- eral constitutions, or through inter- even self-consciousness; a sense of bor’s automobile or set his dog afire. national treaties. For example, the self; and the abilities to desire and act Violate these prohibitions and you Treaty of Amsterdam that came into intentionally. In other words, they may be charged with a crime by the force on May 1, 1999, formally have what I call a “practical autono- state, convicted, and punished. But acknowledged that nonhuman ani- my,” which is, I argue, sufficient, neither the shrub nor the automobile mals are “sentient beings” and not though not necessary, for basic legal nor the dog has thereby been given merely goods or agricultural prod- rights.49 An animal’s species is irrele- any legal rights. ucts. The European Community and vant to his or her entitlement to lib- What are legal rights? Potter Stew- the member states signatory to the erty rights; any who possesses practi- art, a twentieth century justice of the treaty are required “to pay full regard cal autonomy has what is sufficient United States Supreme Court, to the welfare requirements of ani- for basic rights as a matter of liber- famously observed about pornogra- mals.” In 2002 the German Parlia- ty.50 And as long as society awards phy, “I know it when I see it.”46 Simi- ment amended Article 26 of the Basic personhood to non-autonomous larly, people have an intuitive “feel” Law to give nonhuman animals the humans, such as the very young, the for what legal rights are, even if they right to be “respected as fellow crea- severely retarded, and the persistent- can’t quite define them. Some of the tures” and to be protected from ly vegetative, then it must also award most important rights, such as bodily “avoidable pain.” Half of the sixteen basic rights, as a matter of equality as integrity and bodily liberty, act like a German states already have some sort well, to nonhuman animals with prac- suit of legal armor, shielding the bod- of animal rights provisions in their tical autonomy. ies and personalities of natural per- constitutions.47 sons from invasion and injury. These In the United States, most believe rights are so important that they usu- that gaining personhood is much ally are enshrined in the bills of rights more probable through legislative of state and federal constitutions. enactment than through a constitu- For most of the last century, legal tional change. But a change in the scholars, judges, and lawyers often common law (which Germany does classified legal rights in the way that not have) may be the most likely of Wesley Hohfeld, a professor at Yale all. What is the common law? Lemuel Law School, proposed during World Shaw, the nineteenth century chief War I. Hohfeld said that a legal right justice of the Supreme Judicial Court was any theoretical advantage con- of Massachusetts, provided this good ferred by recognized legal rules. He definition: it “consists of a few broad

The Evolution of Animal Law since 1950 103 more arcane subjects of animal pro- succeed. (As of 2002 a second animal Legal Education tection law and animal rights law lay law review, this one a Northeast nearly forty years in the future. regional publication, was in the plan- in Animal Law There were no animal law confer- ning stages.) It is important that gen- I have written that an animal rights ences in 1950. In the 1980s the Ani- eral law reviews have begun publish- lawyer should not expect a judge to mal Legal Defense Fund held sporadic ing animal law articles, including appreciate the merits of arguments in conferences. By 2002 four state bar those written by such prominent legal favor of the legal personhood of any associations (in Washington, Texas, academics as Cass Sunstein of the nonhuman animal the first time, or Michigan, and Washington, D.C.) had University of Chicago School of Law the fifth time, he or she encounters formed animal law sections, as had and Anthony D’Amato of the North- them. While a sympathetic judge the New York City and San Diego western University School of Law. might be found here and there, no County bar associations. Several Oxford University Press has just pub- appellate bench will seize the lead states (Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, lished a series of groundbreaking until the issue has been thoroughly and Oregon) appeared to be in the essays edited by Sunstein and Martha aired in law journals, books, and con- process of forming animal law sec- Nussbaum in Animal Rights: Current ferences. Law reviews discussing ani- tions. Since 1995 the Committee on Debates in New Directions. mal legal rights must be established Legal Issues of the Association of the The first American law school class around the country in order to pro- Bar of New York City has held a con- in animal law was offered by the Pace vide an important scholarly forum in tinuing series of educational semi- University School of Law in White which the relevant legal issues can be nars on animal issues, and annual full- Plains, New York, in the mid-1980s. explored. Legal conferences must be blown legal conferences. This series The instructor was adjunct professor organized, law school courses devoted of programs was capped by “The Jolene Marion, a pioneer in animal to educating students on animal law Legal Status of Non-Human Ani- rights law. Though it lasted just a few issues must be established, animal mals,” a 1999 conference that years, it paved the way for every ani- rights lawyers and law professors attracted speakers from three conti- mal law class that followed. In 1990 I must reach out to acquaint the pro- nents and hundreds of participants.53 began teaching a law school class at fession with the importance of their The Center for the Expansion of Fun- the Vermont Law School, again as an work and the power of their argu- damental Rights has begun a pro- adjunct. This course, entitled “Animal 51 ments. gram to take the issue of animal Rights Law,” focused on whether non- Legal education, in every sense of rights law directly to the judges who human animals should be eligible for that term—law reviews, legal confer- will be making the decisions, by offer- basic legal rights. ences, and law school courses—is ing to send speakers to judicial con- In 2002 animal law classes were critical to the legal changes that ani- ferences throughout the United being offered at nineteen American mal rights lawyers seek. As of 2002 States. law schools, including Harvard, much work remained. In 1950 it had Precisely a quarter century after Georgetown, UCLA, Hastings, and not even begun. The wildlife legal Environmental Law was founded, Ani- George Washington universities. scholar Michael Bean has written mal Law joined it as a sister publica- Courses were being offered in the that, even in 1977, “the very term tion. David Favre wrote in the pre- United Kingdom, Holland, and Aus- ‘wildlife law’ was novel, for few had miere issue that, tria. Most of these courses were seen fit to distinguish such a body of [i]n the tradition of the prior stu- taught by practitioners acting as law from the broader categories of dents at Lewis and Clark, a sub- adjunct professors or lecturers on law. ‘environmental law’ or ‘natural stantial number of present stu- They offered such an intellectual 52 resources law.’” dents have focused upon what will smorgasbord that a student might In 1950 no law reviews—those be a cutting area of scholarship attend several and encounter little scholarly journals published by the for the next generation of law stu- repetition. students of every American law dents—animal related legal Most focused on “animal law” and school—were devoted exclusively to issues. In the 1970s the new area surveyed either the statutes and case even environmental (much less ani- of jurisprudence was environmen- law in which the nature of nonhuman mal rights) law. That gap was not tal law. In the 1990s there is a animals is important, or “animal pro- plugged until 1970, when Environ- growing interest in animal tection law,” which addresses how mental Law began to be published by issues.”54 attorneys can protect the interests of students of the Northwestern School Animal Law is important because nonhuman animals within a legal sys- of Law of Lewis and Clark College in it was, and remains, both a cause and tem that considers them to be legal Portland, Oregon. In the middle of an effect of the intensifying interest things. Some courses, however, con- the twentieth century no law school in animal law within the legal profes- centrated on “animal rights law,” in classes solely addressed environmen- sion, an interest that must continue which the arguments are explored for tal law, much less wildlife law. The to build if animal rights lawyers are to and against having judges recognize

104 The State of the Animals II: 2003 that at least some nonhuman animals ture and the systemic abuse of animals raised for panzees in U.S. research institutions,” 37 Ameri- food or food production 27 Watkins Glen, N.Y.: can Journal of Primatology 25. possess at least some basic legal Farm Sanctuary, Inc. 42Chimpanzees in research: Strategies for their rights. All classes were given a boost 13Id. ethical care, management, and use. 1997. 66–67 by the publication in the year 2000 of 14McDonald’s Corporation v. Steel, Washington, D.C.: National Research Council. http://www.mcspotlight.org/case/trial/verdict/ 43Id. at 28. Animal Law, the first casebook exclu- _jud2c.html, at page 5 (High Court of Justice, 44This section has been adapted from S.M. sively concerned with animal law Queen’s Bench Division June 19, 1997), rev. in Wise, Rattling the cage: Toward legal rights for ani- issues.55 As its authors noted, “There part on other grnds (Court of Appeals, March 31, mals (Perseus Books 2000); S.M. Wise, Hardly a 1999). revolution: The eligibility of nonhuman animals has been a reticence in many legal 15Wolfson, D.L., note 12, supra, at 31. for dignity: Rights in a liberal democracy, 22 Ver- quarters to teach, learn, or practice 16Taub v. State, 443 A. 2d 819, 821 (Md. mont Law Review 793 (1998); S.M. Wise, Legal in the area specifically because of the 1983). rights for nonhuman animals: The case for chim- 17P.D. Frasch et al., note 10, supra, at 76–77 panzees and bonobos, 2 Animal Law 179 (1996); absence of meaningful assistance and and note 31. S.M. Wise, The legal thinghood of nonhuman ani- coverage.” The authors’ hope that 18Id. at 76–77. mals, 23(2) Boston College Environmental Affairs their casebook will “serve as a valu- 19Allen v. Wright, 468 U.S. 737, 751 (1984); Law Review 471 (1996); and S.M. Wise, How Warth v. Selden, 422 U.S. 490, 499 (1975). nonhuman animals were trapped in a nonexistent able guide to students and professors 20Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727, 731 universe, 1 Animal Law 15 (1995). stepping onto this new frontier and (1972). 45Momsen, T., P. Krueger, and A. Watson, eds. provide more law schools with a tem- 21Davis, K.C., and R.J. Pierce, Jr. 1994. Admin- 1985. Dig. 1.5.2 Hermogenianus, Epitome of law, istrative Law Treatise, (3rd. ed.) sec. 16.1. Book 1. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania plate for animal law courses” has Boston: Little, Brown and Company. Press. been fulfilled.56 22Barlow v. Collins, 397 U.S. 159 (1970); 46Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184, 197 The last fifty years—and especially Association of Data Processing Service Organiza- (1964)(Stewart, J., concurring). tions v. Camp, 397 U.S. 150 (1970). See Tribe, 47Koenig, R. 2000. Animal rights amendment the last ten—have seen tremendous L.H. 1999. American Constitutional law (third defeated. 288 Science: 412. April 21. strides in the evolution of animal pro- edition) 393 New York: Foundation Press. 48Norway Plains Company v. Boston and tection law, both in its teaching and 23Tennessee Electric Power Co. v. Tennessee Maine Railroad, 67 Mass. (1 Gray ) 263, 267 Valley Authority, 306 U.S. 118, 137–139 (1939). (1854). in the laying of the foundations for 24Allen, note 19, supra, at 751. 49S.M. Wise (Rattling the cage), note 44, supra, true animal rights law. The first seri- 25Id. at 243–248. ous attempts to gain legal rights for 265 U.S.C. 702. 50Id. at 63–87, 243–270. 27Clarke v. Securities Decision Association, 51S.M. Wise. 1999. Animal thing to animal at least some nonhuman animals will 479 U.S. 388, 399 (1987). person: Thoughts on time, place, and theories. 5 likely be upon us in this decade. 28Id. Animal Law 61: 66–67. 2923 F. 3d. 496 (D.C. Cir. 1994). 52Bean, M. 1983. The Evolution of National 30Compare 7 U.S.C. 2132(h) with 36 Fed. Reg. Wildlife Law. Revised and expanded edition 1. Notes 24, 917, 24, 919 (1971). New York: Praeger Publishers. 1Radford, M. 2001. Animal welfare law in 3129 F. 3d. 53The proceedings were published in 8 Animal Britain—Regulation and responsibility 261. New 32Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Glickman, 154 Law (2002). York: Oxford University Press. F. 3d 426 (D.C. Cir. 1998)(en banc), cert. den. 54Favre, D. 1995. Time for a sharper legal 2Id. at 99. 119 S.Ct. 1454 (1999). For an excellent treat- focus. 1 Animal Law 1: 1. 3Id. at 99–100, 101. ment of the case, see R.R. Smith, “Standing on 55Frasch, P. et al. 2000. Animal law. Durham, 4Favre, D., and V. Tsang. 1993. The develop- their own four legs: The future of animal welfare N.C.: Carolina Academic Press. ment of anti-cruelty laws during the 1800s. litigation after Animal Legal Defense Fund, Inc. v. 56Id. at xviii. Detroit College of Law Review 1, reprinted in D. Glickman.” 1999. 29 Environmental Law: 989. Favre and P.L. Borschelt, 1999, Animal Law and 33Alternatives Research & Development Foun- Dog Behavior 251, 264 Tucson, Ariz.: Lawyers and dation v. Glickman, 101 F. Supp. 2d 7 (DDC Judges Publishing Co., Inc. 2000). 5Id. at 251. 347 U.S.C. sec. 2143(a)(2)(B)(1985). 6Radford, M. 1999. ‘Unnecessary suffering’: 35Personal communication from S. Wilkes, The cornerstone of animal protection legislation head of Animal Procedures Section, Home Office, considered, Criminal Law Review 702; Annota- Constitutional and Community Directorate to tion, “What constitutes statutory offense of cru- Steven M. Wise, March 26, 1998; Supplementary elty to animals,” 82 ALR 2d 794, 798. Note to the Home Secretary’s response to the 7Annotation, note 6, supra, at 799. Animals Procedures Committee—Interim report 8Leavitt, E.S. 1968. Animals and their legal on the review of the operation of the Animals rights: A survey of American laws from 1641 to (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 para. 10 1968. Washington, D.C.: Animal Welfare Insti- (November 6, 1997). tute. 36Supplementary Note to the Home Secre- 9Favre, D.S., and M. Loring. 1983. Animal law tary’s response to the Animals Procedures Com- 127 Westport, Conn.: Quorum Books. mittee—Interim report on the review of the oper- 10Personal communication from Pamela ation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act Frasch, April 16, 2002; P.D. Frasch et al. 1999. 1986, note 35, supra, at para. 11. State anti-cruelty statutes: An overview, 5 Animal 37PACE News. 1998. at 8:1 (January–March). Law 69: 69. 38The Great Ape Project: Equality beyond 11USDA/NASS “Meat Animal Production, Dis- humanity. 1993. Cavalieri, P., and P. Singer, eds. position, & Income(1998); USDA/NASS “Broiler New York: St. Martin’s Press/Griffin. Hatchery” (October 1999); USDA/NASS “Chick- 39Submission of David Penny and 37 others to en and Eggs (October 1999); USDA/NASS Turkey the Parliamentary Select Committee on Primary Hatchery (October 1999); USDA/NASS Livestock Production concerning the Animal Welfare Bill Slaughter 1998 Summary (March 1999); No. 25, 14 (October 27, 1998). USDA/NASS Poultry Slaughter 1998 Summary 40New Zealand Animal Welfare Act of 1999, (February 1999). sec. 76A. 12Wolfson, D.L. 1999. Beyond the law: Agricul- 41B. Dyke et al. 1995. “Future costs of chim-

The Evolution of Animal Law since 1950 105 The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting 8CHAPTER Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain

John W. Grandy, Elizabeth Stallman, and David W. Macdonald

Introduction etween the late nineteenth and within rapidly shifting political and toward whole-ecosystem management early twenty-first centuries, cultural areas). (Dasmann 1964; Decker et al. 1992; Bboth the rationale for and per- While hunting was once necessary Woolf and Roseberry 1998; Bolen ception of hunting shifted in the Unit- for the survival of European colonists 2000; Peyton 2000). Despite the shift ed States, coinciding with demograph- and Native Americans, the number of in the focus of wildlife management, ic changes in the U.S. population people reliant upon subsistence hunt- as well as a steady decline in the pop- (Duda 1993). Similar changes in atti- ing in the United States and Western ularity and acceptance of hunting, tude, though largely undocumented, Europe is now small. For the general the generally dwindling stakeholder probably occurred in the United King- public in both the United States and group associated with sport hunting dom. (For example, foxhunting did Europe—including non-hunters and continues to exert a strong influence not emerge as a substantial sport until hunters—the acceptability of hunting on wildlife management (Bissell the second half of the eighteenth cen- today hinges on ethical considera- 1993; Woolf and Roseberry 1998), tury; before that, foxes were widely tions such as “fair chase”; whether often encouraging the production of perceived as pests and killed whenever the hunt is conducted primarily for “harvestable surpluses” of favored the opportunity arose [Marvin 2000]). sport, recreation, trophy, or food; and game species for the sake of providing Our purpose in this chapter is to com- perceived effects on conservation or recreational hunting opportunities pare these two countries in order to animal welfare (e.g., Kellert 1996). (Holsman 2000; Peyton 2000). Con- reveal some of the science and the Paralleling changes in public atti- sumptive users of wildlife (hunters, sociology relevant to hunting (the lat- tudes, the discipline of wildlife man- trappers, and anglers) have a finan- ter just one of many interacting envi- agement in the United States has cial—and perhaps, therefore, influen- ronmental issues about which human shown evidence of a gradual evolution tial—impact on wildlife management society faces complicated judgments away from “game” management and via the purchase of hunting and fish-

107 ing licenses and duck stamps, and often covering a defined area of land payment of federal excise taxes (Gill 1990; Myrberget 1990; Stroud U.S. Wildlife on sporting arms, handguns, ammu- et al. 1999). Of course, management nition, and archery equipment of mammalian wildlife in the United Management (Schmidt 1996; Holsman 2000). This Kingdom is perhaps less complex and Hunting potential influence of hunters on than elsewhere in Europe or in the Early European colonists considered management decisions has three United States because there are no wildlife on the North American conti- potential effects: it may (1) promote remaining populations of large preda- nent to be essentially infinite in abun- the killing of wildlife as a form of pub- tors and only a handful of larger her- dance (e.g., Mighetto 1991; Posewitz lic recreation; (2) reduce the empha- bivores. 1999). There was no need to justify sis by wildlife agencies on non-game In the United Kingdom, most avail- hunting to the public. Hunting for species; and (3) affect the movement able data on public attitudes toward subsistence was a way of life and was toward ecosystem management. wildlife management are collected believed to be justified by the desire In contrast to the United States, through opinion polls for political to conquer the wilderness of the New mammalian wildlife populations in purposes, and these generally are World. Thus, little need was seen for the United Kingdom exist almost scientifically wanting (Macdonald et restraint in hunting and trapping entirely on privately owned land and al. 2000). However, one particular those wildlife species whose meat are managed by individual landowners aspect of hunting that certainly causes could be used or whose hides or fur within the constraints of European great public concern is the use of could be traded within the colonies or and U.K. legislation regarding sea- dogs to chase and kill wild mammals sold to financiers in Europe. Euro- sons, permitted methods of killing or such as foxes, deer, and hares (Min- pean colonists saw many wildlife hunting, use of firearms, and protected istry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and species, as well as the wilderness species (Macdonald et al. 2000). The Food 2000). A number of European itself, as hostile and a deterrent to organization of wildlife management countries, including Germany, Swe- progress. In Connecticut, for exam- is much less institutionalized in the den, and Denmark, have banned or ple, the first restriction on hunting United Kingdom than in the United partially banned hunting with dogs deer, in the form of a closed season, States. For example, provided that (Burns et al. 2000). Although hunting was not in place until 1698, by which permitted methods are used, strict with dogs is an ancient occupation in time deer had been nearly wiped out firearms regulations are followed, and the United Kingdom (Macdonald in that area (Conover and Conover closed seasons recognized, the deci- 1987; Macdonald and Johnson 1996), 1987). Bounties on wolves and sion as to how many deer to cull lies the longstanding and fierce debate as cougars—placed only partly for the almost entirely within the control of to whether it should be allowed to sake of protecting livestock—suc- individual landowners. No hunting li- continue recently culminated in a ceeded in extirpating large predators cense is required (although individual ban in Scotland; it is not yet resolved from the East and later from much of landowners may charge a fee for the in England and Wales. The Scottish what was to become the forty-eight right to hunt on their land) and, legislation abolished mounted fox- contiguous states (Leopold 1933; except for deer in Scotland, there is hunting and hare coursing and pre- Conover and Conover 1987; Mighetto no requirement for hunters to report vents the hunting of deer, boar, and 1991; Paquet and Hackman 1995). the number of animals killed. There is mink with dogs. In 2002 ministers of By the late 1800s, however, some no legally enforced regulation in the Parliament voted overwhelmingly to hunters began to write about the United Kingdom, although landown- ban hunting with dogs in England and need for conservation of declining ership and informal groupings (e.g., Wales, but progress was blocked by populations of game species—most deer management groups, fox the House of Lords. Following a period notably the bison and the passenger destruction clubs, and shooting syn- of consultation, new legislation pro- pigeon—and to increase public dicates) may achieve a similar effect. posed in late 2002 was again support- awareness of the loss of wildlife to Very recently, and as a significant ed by the House of Commons but was market hunting (Mighetto 1991). change, many organizations hunting also likely to face opposition from the Deer, beaver, wolves, bears, cougars, with dogs have submitted themselves Lords when it was to be voted on in and other animals killed by hunters to voluntary regulation by the Inde- late 2003 or 2004. The proposed bill, or trappers had been nearly extirpat- pendent Supervisory Authority for as amended in committee, bans hunt- ed from most of their range in North Hunting. However, the U.K. situation ing with dogs unless two tests are America, and many waterfowl species generally contrasts sharply with the passed: first, that the hunting is nec- were in serious decline (Nichols, situation elsewhere in Europe, where essary to prevent serious damage of Johnson, and Williams 1995; Paquet wildlife culling is subject to a statuto- some kind and, second, that the dam- and Hackman 1995; Woolf and Rose- ry licensing system and/or cull plans age cannot be prevented using a berry 1998). Massachusetts was the approved by government authorities, method involving less suffering.

108 The State of the Animals II: 2003 first state to close deer hunting for a ry of natural selection may have been sent day, as has the wildlife manage- number of years; by 1880 state game a catalyst for the concern of humani- ment strategy of producing wildlife laws became widespread throughout tarians for animal welfare, because for hunters to kill, in spite of the fact the country, imposing bag limits, rest the theory clearly indicated that that Leopold’s (1933) embrace of days, closed seasons, and buck laws, humans and other animals share a cropping wildlife came at a time when the latter of which prohibited the common origin. production of wildlife seemed a shooting of anterless deer (Leopold During the early 1900s, increasing responsible alternative to the 1933; Conover and Conover 1987; populations of some wildlife species exploitation of scarce wildlife popula- Woolf and Roseberry 1998). Restric- allowed wildlife managers to move tions. Some authors now suggest that tions on waterfowl hunting were away from a strategy of simply continuation of the cropping strategy nonexistent until passage of the restricting hunting to recover scarce as a primary goal of wildlife manage- Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) in wildlife populations, adopting instead ment may hinder progress toward 1918 authorized the federal govern- a strategy in which the “cropping” of whole-ecosystem management (Pey- ment to implement hunting regula- game species was emphasized. (Crop- ton 2000). Even in those regions tions (e.g., Nichols, Johnson, and ping, as a management technique, where some wildlife populations, such Williams 1995). involves encouraging the reproduc- as white-tailed deer, are considered Hunters and anglers around the tion and survival of animals so that too abundant, state wildlife agencies turn of the twentieth century fre- many will be available to be killed by often respond to pressure from sport quently are credited with kick-starting recreational hunters without decreas- hunters by continuing to manage the early conservation movement that ing the population beyond the capa- habitat to provide increased food and eventually led to passage of the Lacey bility of the next reproductive cycle to cover for deer so that hunter satisfac- Act of 1900, the MBTA, and associated replenish the population.) This strat- tion remains high (Woolf and Rose- treaties, and an end to destructive egy was accomplished through berry 1998). In areas where native market hunting (Leopold 1933; Mig- attempts to limit the negative impact predators have returned (e.g., hetto 1991; Schmidt 1996). Critics on wildlife of hunting, as well as to cougars in the West) or have been point out that these sport hunters- mitigate the effects of disease and replaced by others (e.g., coyotes turned-conservationists acted for the habitat degradation. Refuges and replacing wolves in Maine), hunting “selfish” purpose of providing “abun- parks were also established on which and trapping seasons for these preda- dant sport for themselves” (Grinnell, hunting was prohibited or restricted tors often are established or liberal- in Mighetto 1991, 41). Regardless of (Leopold 1933). Sport hunters in the ized under the generally untested the motives of the hunters of the past, early and mid-1900s were provided assumption that this will increase their actions resulted in the initiation with hunting opportunities and in populations of popular game species. of early wildlife conservation. turn provided a means to limit now- The American public, including While hunters of this era pushed for increasing deer herds which, though wildlife managers and some hunters, laws and regulations that would pro- still limited by food and disease, were has begun to question more critically tect the game species they found no longer being held in check by large the emphasis of state wildlife agen- valuable, they simultaneously refined predators such as wolves and cougars cies on satisfying the desires of the “sporting” aspects of hunting by (Woolf and Roseberry 1998). Sport hunters (e.g., Williams 1986). In emphasizing particular ethical stan- hunters became a self-designated response to this and other criticisms, dards, such as the concept of fair “tool” for wildlife management and hunters’ organizations in several chase and self-imposed restrictions began funding state and federal states have lobbied for passage of leg- on the number of animals killed to wildlife management agencies islation establishing their “right” to allow wildlife populations to rebuild— through a tax in the form of fees for hunt (Table 1). It is not yet clear what and, ultimately, be used by future the purchase of hunting licenses and effect this will have on wildlife man- generations of hunters (e.g., Posewitz duck stamps (Migratory Bird Hunting agement strategies or hunting regu- 1999). The need to hunt for subsis- Stamp Act, 1934) and via excise taxes lations. tence was rapidly diminishing, and imposed on purchases of sporting humanitarians concerned for the wel- arms and ammunition (through the fare of individual animals began to Pittman-Robertson Federal Aid in pay attention to the suffering of at Wildlife Restoration Act of 1937). least some hunted wildlife species. The notion of hunters as the Mighetto (1991) suggests that the “clients” of U.S. state wildlife agen- publication in 1859 of Darwin’s theo- cies has largely persisted to the pre-

The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain 109 Table 1 States that Currently Have a Constitutional Amendment Guaranteeing the Right to Hunt for All Citizens

State Bill or Amendment Highlights of Text

Alabama Alabama Constitution, “All persons shall have the right to hunt and fish in Amendment No. 597(2002) this state in accordance with law and regulations.”

Florida Section 8, Section 372.002, “The legislature recognizes that hunting, fishing, and the Florida Statutes (2002) taking of game are a valued part of the cultural heritage of Florida and should be forever preserved for Floridians….”

Minnesota Minnesota Constitution, “Hunting and fishing and the taking of game and fish are Article XIII, Section 12 (2001) a valued part of our heritage that shall be forever preserved for the people….”

Missouri Title XXXVIII. Crimes “It is the intent of the general assembly of the state and Punishment; Peace Officers of Missouri to recognize that all persons shall have and Public Defenders the right to hunt, fish and trap in this state….” Chapter 578.151

New Hampshire Title XVIII. Fish and Game Chapter “…The general court further finds that it is in the best of 207 General Provisions as to Fish the state and its citizens that the fish and game recognize, and Game Jurisdiction. 207:58 preserve, and promote our special heritage of hunting, (2001) fishing, trapping, and wildlife viewing by providing opportunities to hunt, fish, trap, and view wildlife….”

North Dakota North Dakota Constitution, “Hunting, trapping, and fishing and the taking of game Article 11, Section 27 (2002) and fish are a valued part of our heritage and will be forever preserved for the people....”

Virginia Virginia Constitution, Article XI, “The people have a right to hunt, fish, and harvest game….” Section 4 (2002)

Hunters in the Table 2a United States Percentage of the United States Absolute numbers of hunters (paid Population Holding a Hunting License license holders) in the United States have decreased over the past two 1980 1990 2000 decades, from approximately 16.3 million in 1980 to 15 million in 2000. The popularity of hunting, measured Number of Paid Hunting 16,257,074 15,806,864 15,044,324 1 by the proportion of the U.S. popula- License Holders tion that purchases hunting licenses, U.S. Population 2 226,542,199 248,709,873 281,421,906 has declined steadily, from an esti- mated 7.18 percent in 1980 to 5.35 Percentage of Population 7.18 6.36 5.35 Holding a Hunting License percent in 2000 (Table 2a) ( U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1981; U.S. Cen- 1Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, based on data provided by state wildlife agencies. A paid sus Bureau 1996; U.S. Census Bureau license holder is one individual regardless of the number of licenses purchased. Some states do not 2001; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service require the purchase of a hunting license by senior citizens, youth, or disabled individuals; some 2001). Trends in most states follow unprotected species, such as prairie dogs or marmots, may be shot without a license in some states. the national trend, though there 2Source: U.S. Census Bureau is substantial variation in hunting

110 The State of the Animals II: 2003 participation among states (Table 2b). Between 1980 and 2000, nine- Table 2b teen states showed a decrease of 2 States Showing an Increase or Decrease percent or more in the percentage of the population that purchased licens- of 2 Percent or More in Hunting es; however, a few states (Montana Popularity, 1980, 2000 and the two Dakotas) showed an increase of at least 2 percent in the Percent of State Population percentage of paid license holders. (It Holding a Hunting License is not clear the extent to which non- resident trophy hunters may affect 1980 2000 state-by-state variation in these trends.) These recent trends contrast Hunting Popularity Increases with the period 1955–1975, during Montana 27.64 31.46 which the number of paid license holders in the United States in- North Dakota 15.33 19.23 creased 46 percent, from 11.7 million to 14.0 million (U.S. Department of South Dakota 20.66 30.23 the Interior 1997). Another measure of participation in hunting is the average number of Hunting Popularity Decreases days hunted per year. Between 1991 Alaska 17.96 15.55 and 1996, hunters spent, on average, approximately 17 percent fewer days Arizona 7.31 3.83 hunting annually than in 1975, 1980, Colorado 10.81 7.85 and 1985 (U.S. Department of the Interior and U.S. Department of Com- Georgia 7.03 4.03 merce 1997). Enck, Decker, and Idaho 25.21 19.26 Brown (2000) point out that most of this decrease can be accounted for by Kansas 10.51 7.80 a decrease in time spent hunting Louisiana 9.14 6.23 small game (a 40 percent decrease in days spent hunting); days spent hunt- Maine 21.28 16.37 ing big game and waterfowl actually Mississippi 11.45 8.86 increased by 28 percent and 5 per- cent, respectively, between 1980 and Nevada 6.53 3.02 1996 (see also U.S. Department of the Interior and U.S. Department of New Hampshire 9.07 6.17 Commerce 2002). These authors sug- New Mexico 11.08 6.00 gest further that the reduced interest in small-game hunting may be indica- Oregon 14.98 9.09 tive of reduced participation by Pennsylvania 10.73 8.37 younger hunters, for whom small- game hunting is often part of the Utah 19.68 7.69 introduction to hunting (Enck, Deck- Vermont 26.86 16.70 er, and Brown 2000). Perhaps for this reason, hunter recruitment efforts by Virginia 8.78 4.45 state wildlife agencies and non- Washington 8.73 3.65 governmental hunting associations often focus on encouraging young Wyoming 41.21 29.90 people to begin or continue hunting, though efforts to recruit minority Popularity of hunting is indexed as the number of paid hunting license holders divided by the total U.S. population. groups and women are also becoming Sources: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, based on data provided by state wildlife agencies more common (e.g., Matthews 1993; and the U.S. Census Bureau. A paid license holder is one individual regardless of the number Mangun, Hall, and O’Leary 1996). of licenses purchased. Some states do not require the purchase of a hunting license by senior citizens, youth hunters, or disabled individuals; some unprotected species of wildlife, such as prairie dogs or marmots, may be shot without a license in some states.

The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain 111 Several factors may be contributing opposed to rural, settings. Other fac- wildlife conflict or to provide food), to the apparent decline in the popu- tors correlated with decreasing hunt- and whether hunters respect laws and larity of hunting in the United States, ing participation included a declining regulations (Duda 1993; Posewitz but urbanization is the factor most percentage of the white population 1994; Kellert 1996). For example, in a frequently cited. The trend toward and increasing average education survey Kellert (1988) found that more an increasing concentration of the level (Heberlein and Thomson 1991). than 80 percent of the general public human population in urban areas was Related factors affecting declining approves of Native American subsis- recognized and lamented by hunters hunting participation may include a tence hunting as well as any hunting and outdoors enthusiasts in the lack of a family mentor who hunts done exclusively to obtain meat. Hunt- late 1800s. For example, Theodore and isolation from social systems that ing for sport or recreation is accept- Roosevelt in 1893 complained that support hunting (e.g., Decker, Pro- able to most Americans (64 percent) American society was becoming too vencher, and Brown 1984; Brown et only if the meat is used. However, 60 civilized and was in danger of losing al. 1987; Applegate 1991; Organ and percent of those surveyed indicated an the toughness—or “vigorous manli- Fritzell 2000). Other wildlife-depen- opposition to hunting done solely for ness”—that only dangerous and phys- dent activities, such as bird watching, recreation or sport, and 80 percent ically demanding experiences such as appear not to be predominantly rural were opposed to trophy hunting (Fig- hunting could provide (Roosevelt (McFarlane and Boxall 1996). ure 1). Results of other surveys have 1900, 7–8). John Muir, on the other mirrored these findings, indicating hand, observed that the trend toward that public approval of hunting is urbanization and the “deadly apathy Public stronger when the motivation for of luxury” had at last awakened in hunting is not solely for recreation or Americans an appreciation for nature Acceptance of a trophy (Bissell, Duda, and Young (1901, 1). Wildlife management pro- 1998; Minnesota Department of Nat- fessionals today complain that an Hunting in the ural Resources 1992). increasingly urbanized and suburban- Urban vs. rural residency is corre- ized America is losing touch with na- United States lated with public opinion on hunting ture and holds idealized notions of Public acceptance of hunting in the in the United States (as elsewhere, see wildlife populations that can exist United States hinges on ethical con- Macdonald and Johnson 2003) and free of human intervention (e.g., siderations such as fair chase, the per- with attitudes toward wildlife and Organ and Fritzell 2000), an idea sup- ceived humaneness of the hunting other animals in general. In survey ported by Kellert (1996). On the method, whether hunting is conduct- studies, Kellert (1996) found that other hand, however, Kellert (1996) ed primarily for sport/recreation, the people who own large amounts of land asserts that attitudes of rural resi- extent to which hunting is viewed as or reside in open country areas tend dents are biased in another direction: necessary (e.g., to resolve a human- to hold a more utilitarian view toward these residents are more likely to value wildlife and the land pri- marily because of their usefulness to humans, rather than through an appreciation of their role in natural 100 ecosystems. Hunting is, in fact, more popular in 80 rural populations, as indicated by the fact that rural residents are more 60 likely to hold hunting licenses or to have hunted at least once (Duda 40 1993). In a regression analysis of fac- tors associated with hunting partici- 20 pation, Heberlein and Thomson 0 (1991) found that declining partici- pation was associated with a decreas- ing percentage of individuals who spend their teens in rural communi- ties, and, in general, an increasing number of people living in urban, as

112 The State of the Animals II: 2003 nature and animals compared with those who live in large cities, own lit- tle or no land, or are college-educat- ed, and compared with younger adults. Relatively “urban-oriented” people in the United States tend to express a greater concern for the pro- tection of wildlife and wildlife habitat, and exhibit levels of knowledge about nature that are not significantly dif- ferent from those of rural residents. Similarly, Manfredo and Zinn (1996) found that urban Coloradoans are more likely than rural residents to have positive value orientations toward wildlife rights or welfare, and are less likely to value wildlife use, including hunting (Figure 2). Perhaps because of changing demo- graphics, the prevalence of Kellert’s (1988, 143) “utilitarian” attitude, defined as the “practical and material exploitation of nature” for the pur- pose of “physical sustenance/security,” appears to have declined substantially between 1900 and 1976 (Figure 3). This analysis was based on the fre- quency of occurrence of the utilitarian attitude in newspaper articles from two rural and two urban newspapers. Interestingly, the decline in utilitari- an attitudes depicted by Kellert (1988, 1996) would be more substan- tial if Kellert had accounted for the fact that the proportion of the human population living in rural areas had changed from 60 percent in 1900 to 25 percent in 1976. In addition to the urban-rural split, several researchers have found opin- ions of hunting in the United States that vary with age. Kellert (1996) suggests that changing values of young children may reflect, at least in part, a developmental process similar motivated by more than just the pos- adults and older individuals. In par- to Kohlberg’s (1984) stages of moral sibility of being punished for harming ticular, elderly Americans tend to development in children. For exam- other creatures” (Kellert 1996, 49). have less interest in and affection for ple, very young children view animals Utilitarian aspects of children’s atti- animals and for nature in general. in egocentric, exploitative ways. How- tudes toward animals decrease by Manfredo and Zinn (1996) also found ever, by age nine, children appear to their late teens, while attitudes re- differences between young adults “develop a conscience toward the flecting support for conservation or and older age groups in Colorado: nonhuman world, recognizing ani- an interest in animal welfare increase. younger adults (ages 18–30) tended mals and nature as having the right Kellert (1996) also found that views to view wildlife rights or welfare more not to be selfishly manipulated, a view toward wildlife differ between young positively and wildlife use (e.g., hunt-

The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain 113 Attitudes of U.S. Wildlife Management 80 70 Professionals 60 Changes in both attitudes and cur- 50 riculum also are evident in the pro- fessional wildlife management com- 40 munity. Organ and Fritzell (2000) 30 conducted a survey of university fish- 20 eries and wildlife programs in the 10 United States to assess changes in 0 student interests and attitudes and in the curriculum and course content. Senior faculty members from the twelve programs responding to the survey estimated that approximately 25 percent of fisheries and wildlife program undergraduates participate ing) more negatively compared with accidents that kill or injure humans. in hunting. Faculty estimated that as older adults (Figure 4). Manfredo and Many members of the American many as 24 percent of the undergrad- Zinn interpreted these age-related public are concerned with animal suf- uate students in this discipline are differences in values as a generational fering and the unnecessary killing of likely have “anti-hunting” views, change. Kellert (1996), however, wildlife, particularly if it occurs as though this ideology was attributed implies that these differences may part of a recreational activity. Some more often to fewer than 10 percent also reflect continuing moral develop- types of hunting may be viewed as of the students. Over the past twenty ment in adulthood. Longitudinal more purely recreational, even if the years, the numbers of students who studies, in which the same individuals animals killed are sometimes used for hunt were estimated to have de- are followed for several years, will be food or other purposes. Waterfowl creased by 10 to 60 percent, while the required to determine the extent to hunting, dove hunting, varmint (or numbers of students opposed to hunt- which age-related differences in opin- “pest”) hunting, and traditional ing may have increased by 30 to 50 ions toward wildlife and acceptance of British fox hunting from horseback percent. Changes in course content hunting indicate a developmental (see page 119) are examples of more at the universities surveyed by Organ change within an individual versus a purely recreational forms of hunting and Fritzell (2000) include a greater generational change reflective of the for which justification as a form of emphasis on conservation biology changing values of American society. “management” frequently is weak. and rare-species conservation and Clearly, not all non-hunters are Predator hunting is another practice reduced time devoted to harvest man- “anti-hunter.” However, even people that is less likely to be defended for agement. These estimates and trends who are not strictly opposed to hunt- population management purposes or are based solely on the perceptions of ing may be concerned with the suffer- as a way to provide food. Public atti- senior faculty members at a small ing of individual animals that can tudes toward predator hunting indi- number of universities and should be occur as a result of hunting. Based on cate that this practice may be viewed interpreted with caution. However, group interview sessions with individ- as less justifiable, especially when this brief survey suggests that the uals claiming to have a neutral opin- hounds are used. For example, Teel, ethical views of students going into ion toward hunting, Rohlfing (1978) Krannich, and Schmidt (2002) found the wildlife management field are identified and ranked 115 problems that Utah residents showed general changing along with those of the pub- associated with hunting and hunters. opposition to bear and cougar hunt- lic as a whole. Of the top ten most bothersome prob- ing. Though rural residents were less Among members of professional lems, five were related to the opposed than urban residents to bear associations of wildlife biologists suffering of wounded animals left and cougar hunting in general, a and wildlife managers in the United to die a “slow,” “painful,” or “horri- majority of both rural and urban resi- States, Muth et al. (1998) found that ble” death. Two of the ten most both- dents was opposed to the use of 49.4 percent considered themselves ersome problems, including the num- hounds to hunt cougars and black to be hunters; as one would expect, ber one problem, involved hunting bears. this is a much higher percentage than

114 The State of the Animals II: 2003 is found in the public as a whole (see philosophy. Finally, there is a growing 1980). Kellert (1996) estimates that Table 2a). Surprisingly, however, only number of people who consider them- nature hunters make up 10 to 20 a bare majority—52.5 percent—of selves to be both animal protection- percent of all hunters in the United those surveyed agreed with the state- ists and conservationists. States. Another category, “meat ment that “[w]ildlife and fish species Divisions among hunters in terms of hunters,” includes those whose pri- are resources to be harvested in a sus- their concern for conservation, ani- mary motivation for hunting is ob- tainable way and used for human ben- mal welfare, or other ethical consider- taining food. These hunters are more efit.” This suggests that one of the ations have certainly existed since the likely than nature hunters to be older foundations of the wildlife manage- late 1800s and early 1900s. Mighetto and male and to live in rural areas. ment discipline (Leopold 1933) has (1991) provides several illustrations of Meat hunters, according to Kellert not prevailed in the seventy years or so interpersonal differences among (1996), make up around 40 percent since its establishment. Organ and hunters. For example, one may con- of all hunters. Of course, most of Fritzell (2000) cite unpublished data trast Roosevelt’s writings, which Kellert’s meat hunters are not true suggesting that wildlife managers who focused on the excitement of pursuit subsistence hunters in that they do had been in the profession for five and of the kill, with those of Ernest not depend upon meat obtained in years or fewer are much less likely to Thompson Seton. Roosevelt particu- this way to survive. It is conceivable support consumptive uses of wildlife larly relished hunting dangerous that some meat hunters use the meat (e.g., hunting, trapping, and fishing) predators and, in general, revealed of the animals they kill as a source of compared with veterans of twenty through his writings a “streak of protein in much the same way that years or more. Thus, individuals now bloodthirstiness” (Mighetto 1991). they would use farm animals; howev- entering the wildlife management dis- Seton was also a hunter, but in his er, it is likely that the use of wild meat cipline in the United States appear to writings, such as Wild Animals I Have as a substitute for farm animals is represent a change in ethical views. Known, he portrayed animals as indi- decreasing in the United States. This shift may be reflected in growing viduals and showed concern for their Finally, “sport hunters,” who account consideration for the humaneness of suffering, in part by using anthropo- for around one-third of all hunters, management actions and for manage- morphism as a literary device. Anoth- hunt primarily for recreation rather ment actions that benefit non-game er contrast can be seen between Aldo than for food or to be close to nature. species. Leopold and those hunters who vexed These hunters primarily cite reasons him through their increasing depen- for hunting that are related to social dence on “gadgets” as a means of companionship and a chance for com- Divisions facilitating hunting (Leopold 1966, petition. Sport hunters differ from originally 1949). Interestingly, Leo- nature hunters in that they tend Among U.S. pold started off with a Rooseveltian not to have exceptional knowledge disrespect for wolves and other preda- regarding wildlife. Moreover, unlike Hunters tors; his attitude toward wolves later meat hunters, they are less concerned In 1913 Theodore Roosevelt identi- changed with his realization of the for the usefulness of the animals they fied three groups of people concerned important role of predators in an kill (e.g., for meat). Hunting purely to with wildlife conservation: “the true ecosystem (Leopold 1966). obtain a trophy is included in this sportsman, the nature-lover,” and More recently, several authors have category (Kellert 1980; Kellert “the humanitarian” (Roosevelt 1913, attempted to differentiate types or 1996). Other studies have generally 161). Today these categories may still subgroups of hunters based on differ- supported these or similar categoriza- approximate, respectively, the subset ent motivations for hunting and/or tions (e.g., Brown et al. 1987; Allen of hunters concerned with conserva- the degree of specialization (Duda 1988; but see Causey 1989). Some tion; non-hunting conservationists 1993). Kellert (1980, 1996) charac- authors suggest that a temporal pro- such as bird watchers; and animal terizes the attitudes and values of gression often occurs in a given indi- protectionists. However, the distinc- three main types of hunters. “Nature vidual’s motives for hunting that tions among these categories often hunters” include those who emulate essentially leads from a sport hunter are blurred and each could be further Aldo Leopold in their desire to be a perspective to one of a nature hunter subdivided. For example, only some part of nature, filling a role that they (e.g., Decker et al. 1987). Others sug- hunters actively participate in conser- consider to be much like that of a gest that, when changes in attitude vation, beyond the now-involuntary nonhuman predator. Nature hunters occur over a hunter’s lifetime, this contributions to wildlife conservation include a greater proportion of women often can be characterized as an through the purchase of licenses or compared with other categories and increase in specialization, in terms of equipment (Holsman 2000). Bird are, on average, more likely to be col- either the species hunted or the hunt- watchers and other naturalists may lege educated and to engage in non- ing method employed (e.g., Bryan be hunters or may lean more toward consumptive wildlife activities such as 1979; Ditton, Loomis, and Choi an animal welfare or animal rights wildlife watching or hiking (Kellert 1992). Some of the more specialized

The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain 115 Data and Observations on Duck Hunting in the United States For nearly a century, wildlife managers have pointed to waterfowl conservation, an ambitious effort designed to preserve an abundance of ducks across the length and breadth of a continent, as the crown jewel of North American wildlife management. It began in 1916 with the signing of the North American Migratory Bird Treaty between the United States and Canada. A second treaty with Mexico in accompanied by the establishment of Figure A. 1936 extended these protections south waterfowl refuges across the middle The number of ducks counted each of the Rio Grande. This allowed each and southern United States to provide spring across the North American waterfowl breeding grounds has re- North American nation to ban the com- wintering habitat and give ducks a mea- mained essentially stable during the sure of protection from hunters. The mercial sale of wild waterfowl and years 1955–2000, as shown by the solid restrict the sport kill to prevent over- protection was accomplished via both trend line. The populations are five-year shooting. public and private efforts that continue averages (Wilkins and Otto 2002). A second initiative began in the to this day. 1930s when severe drought seized the But it was not until the latter half of northern prairies, the major breeding the twentieth century that the focus across the Canadian Prairie provinces ground of North America’s continental shifted to attempts to develop a scientif- and boreal forest to the Beaufort Sea. flocks. Duck populations plummeted. ic management approach, based on data The wintering grounds extend across This prompted a drive to protect breed- collection and mathematical analysis. the middle latitude and southern United ing wetlands in both the northern Unit- The 1950s witnessed the first conti- States into Mexico. ed States and prairie Canada. Protec- nental surveys of the breeding and win- These surveys were (and are still tion of breeding grounds was tering grounds. The breeding grounds today) unprecedented in scope. extend from South Dakota northward Although they are still incomplete, they represent the longest-running continen- tal wildlife surveys in the world. The breeding-ground survey tallies eleven species—mallards, northern pintails, gadwalls, shovelers, wigeon, green- winged teal, blue-winged teal, canvas- backs, redheads, and scaup (both less- er and greater). The survey data are the basis for the government analysis used to judge whether populations are

Figure B. The northern pintail, once the second most abundant North American duck, has dropped from an average popula- tion of 7.4 million in 1955–1960 to 3.0 million in 1996–2000, a 59 percent decline according to the plotted trend line (Wilkins and Otto 2002).

116 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Figure C. Wintering-ground surveys disclose that the average number of black ducks has fallen from 603,000 in 1955–1960 to 274,000 in 1996–2000, a decline of 56 percent (Fronczak 2002).

breeding-ground survey suggests that, despite weather-related population fluc- tuations, the overall numbers of ducks have remained essentially stable in the past half-century. Critics argue that the monolithic “total-duck” argument avoids the central issue of whether wildlife managers have really learned how to manipulate water- fowl populations. They point to declining numbers of those species most prized by hunters—northern pintails, black increasing or decreasing. ing hunting regulations, that should lead ducks, scaup, and mallards—as evi- In 1961 biologists began gathering to an increase in the breeding popula- dence that management is not achieving additional data designed to give them tion of a species in decline or to a reduc- what it claims. Some indication of the greater insight into the population tion in the numbers of an overabundant trend line for duck populations from the dynamics of various species. These species. late 1800s through the early 1900s data include counts of nesting potholes However, the enormous amounts of might have helped support or refute on the northern-prairie breeding data have not yet led to a general agree- management claims. Unfortunately, no grounds; age-ratios of ducks taken by ment on what determines spring breed- data are available prior to the 1950s. hunters (which index annual reproduc- ing success and whether changing Two primary causes for the pintail’s tive success); numbers of hunters; and hunting regulations have any significant losses are given by wildlife managers— the number of each species killed by impact (see Grandy 1983). the loss of short-grass prairie nesting hunters. In addition, a number of ducks Those who assert that waterfowl habitat on the western plains and over- each year are captured and fitted with management has succeeded in main- shooting, especially in recent years. leg bands. When hunters return these taining an abundance of waterfowl cite Unlike prairie-nesting species, the bands, the data are used for statistical as evidence the overall breeding-ground black duck has not suffered extensive estimates of annual mortality from nat- counts. A look at the average numbers loss of its eastern-forest nesting habi- ural causes (disease, predation, etc.) of all species counted during the spring tat. Its decline is attributed largely to and sport hunting. These data are designed to allow biologists to create a population model that will allow waterfowl managers to predict and control numbers of ducks. They permit wildfowl managers to make decisions, largely based on chang-

Figure D. Biologists remain baffled over the decline of scaup, medium-sized diving ducks whose populations have dropped from an average of 6.4 million in the period 1976–1980 to 4 million in the period 1995–2000, a decline of 38 percent (Wilkins and Otto 2002). The primary cause of their decline remains unknown, although some believe over-shooting in the 1970s and early 1980s played a sig- nificant role (Allen et al. 1999).

The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain 117 Continued from previous page

over-shooting, although some argue that mallards have displaced black ducks from portions of their range. Restrictive hunting regulations have been imposed for nearly a quarter-cen- tury, but these restrictions have not allowed the species to rebuild its num- bers. In recent years, in spite of the low population levels, hunting regulations have been liberalized, permitting an even greater kill of black ducks by hunters. A detailed analysis and critique are provided in Grandy (1983). The remaining species—gadwall, shovelers, wigeon, green-winged teal, and blue-winged teal—make up approximately another 12 million wild- fowl but have not been subjected to much analysis. Half a century of data collection and able nesting habitat for any species is Figure E. associated scientific analysis does not filled to capacity. Indeed, the evidence The beleaguered canvasback, once the appear to have brought the authorities suggests—and several studies have most celebrated duck in North America, much closer to their goal of under- found—that there is more habitat than has so far not responded to a forty-year effort to increase its breeding numbers, standing the factors affecting duck pop- ducks to occupy it, especially for mal- although the last ten years have produced ulations. lards and pintails (Bethke and Nudds an upward trend. This increase may not The debates continue unabated. 1995). However, few studies have continue because hunting of this species Some blame the loss or degradation of attempted to determine the carrying was closed in the 2002 season when breed- northern-prairie breeding habitat. How- capacity of available nesting habitat in ing numbers dropped to 487,000 (Wilkins ever, no study has shown that all avail- the northern prairies or whether carry- and Otto 2002). hunters may include those who come birds, sometimes within forty-eight Schmidt (2002) found that, although to rely on those gadgets to which hours of their release. Other authors a majority of Utah hunters approve of Leopold (1966) was so opposed (Pey- have expressed concern over the cougar and black bear hunting (66 ton 2000), which would seem to dis- ethics of some hunting activities, and percent and 57 percent approval, qualify them from the ranks of nature what the activities mean for the respectively), most hunters (64 per- hunters. future of what they consider legiti- cent) disapprove of the practice of Evidence of the divisions among mate forms of hunting. Peyton (2000, bear baiting. This study also indicates general types of hunters also has been 777), for example, criticized some that a surprising number of hunters manifested in criticisms directed hunters’ “overzealous attitudes in Utah have negative views toward toward hunters by their peers, or by toward wildlife as a crop,” such as the use of hounds to hunt predators: other writers who generally support those individuals who frequent game one-third of Utah hunters disapprove hunting. For example, Williams farms that resemble a “barnyard” of the use of hounds to hunt cougars (1986) sharply criticizes hunters who more than a hunting opportunity. and nearly half oppose the use of shoot the pheasants who are raised in Similarly, Peyton states that hounds to hunt black bears. captivity and released by state wildlife landowners in Michigan (and else- In a similar vein, some authors agencies to provide a put-and-take where) who feed free-ranging deer assert that hunters often display opin- (i.e., release and kill) recreational have essentially created game farms ions and behaviors that are not in the hunting opportunity. Williams ques- without fences. Varmint hunters, who best interests of conservation or the tions the ethic—on the part of both shoot ground squirrels, prairie dogs, environment, despite the prevailing the pheasant shooters and the wildlife and other rodents, often purely for claim to the contrary by modern-day managers—in promoting this artifi- sport, are sometimes viewed by other hunters. In particular, Holsman cial type of hunting experience involv- types of hunters as “wasteful” or oth- (2000) reviews several studies from ing the killing of half-tame non-native erwise unethical. Teel, Krannich, and the 1990s indicating that hunters at

118 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Figure F. The population of the mallard, North America’s most abundant and adapt- able duck, has essentially been stable over the last fifty years (Wilkins and Otto 2002). The data indicate that mal- lards are holding their own in the face of heavy shooting pressures and agricul- tural degradation of the northern- prairie breeding grounds.

their while. Therefore, in most areas, hunters can kill a “basic bag” of six ducks. To that they can add up to five mergansers (“fish-eating” ducks) and fif- teen coots. However, mergansers and coots are rarely if ever eaten (one of the justifications given for duck shooting). The data gathered over the past fifty years continue to challenge the ing capacity in this region has been alleviated by reducing the kill of hens by assumptions and premises upon which reached. human hunters but, to date, this has wildfowl management is based. For Some blame increasing predation on been attempted only for the mallard. those who appreciate the beauty of nests and nesting hens for the failure of The data represent a continuing chal- ducks and the joy of watching them some species to rebuild their numbers. lenge for wildlife management and undisturbed, modern waterwildfowl But losses to natural predators general- modern-day duck hunting in the United management is, to date, more of a fail- ly affect only duck populations that are States. Regulators have long since con- ure than a success. declining for other reasons, such as cluded that duck hunters will not go —John W. Grandy over-hunting or habitat loss (Côté and “afield” (i.e., to shoot) if they are unable Sutherland 1997). These losses may be to shoot enough ducks to make it worth that time were among those least (Theodori, Luloff, and Willits 1998; likely to support conservation of bio- see also McFarlane and Boxall 1996 Hunting and diversity or an emphasis on manage- for evidence of bird watchers’ willing- ment of endangered species; accord- ness to contribute to conservation). Shooting in ing to these studies, hunters also Wildlife protection advocates also are the United were least likely to engage in environ- demonstrating their willingness to mentally responsible behaviors. protect habitat. For example The Kingdom Williams (1986) and Holsman (2000) Humane Society of the United States both cite examples of hunters and Wildlife Land Trust, an affiliate of The hunters’ associations opposing HSUS, has grown steadily since its “Hunting” versus attempts to restore native wildlife to inception in 1993 to encompass sixty “Shooting” regions from which they have been thousand acres in twenty one U.S. In the United Kingdom, the term extirpated, especially wolves and states and four countries outside of hunting generally refers to the use of other predators. More recently the the United States. The Wildlife Land dogs—hounds, fast coursing dogs, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance has Trust is one of a growing number of and sometimes terriers—in a hunt; it opposed efforts to end bear baiting organizations that seek to protect does not include the use of retrieving and to restrict the release of pen- wildlife, not only through habitat pro- dogs or pointers, which neither pur- raised non-native pheasants. tection but also by prohibiting hunt- sue nor kill the quarry. Typically Other outdoor recreation enthusi- ing and trapping in protected sanctu- hounds chase the fox, deer, hare, or asts, such as bird watchers, may be aries. other animal and humans follow on more likely to support such goals, horseback, on foot, or in vehicles. The either by volunteering their time or term shooting, on the other hand, is through financial contributions used in the United Kingdom to

The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain 119 describe the use of a rifle or shotgun can go on for up to six hours (Bateson has hunting with dogs in the United to kill foxes, deer, or other animals 1997). More than 80 percent of hinds Kingdom, and access to guns is regu- and does not involve the use of dogs are pregnant during the hind hunting lated heavily, shooting is widespread for pursuit. season (Langbein 1997); the extent and is probably the predominant In the case of fox hunting as of abortions among hinds that escape means of wildlife culling (Macdonald defined above, despite wide variation, the hounds is not known. More than et al. 2000). Shooting by stalking the average pursuit lasts half an half of the deer roused and hunted with a rifle or large bore shotgun is hour (Macdonald and Johnson 1996; escape without being brought to bay the most common method used to Masters of Foxhounds Association (Masters of Deerhounds Association cull deer in England and Wales, as [MFHA] 2000), and about 75 percent 2000). Once the deer has been brought well as in Scotland and Northern Ire- of foxes found during a mounted hunt to bay or has stopped running and land (British Association for Shooting evade capture (n=149 hunts, data, attempting to escape, it normally is and Conservation 2000; British Deer 1990–1996). On average, 64 percent killed by a shot at close quarters with Society 2000). Shooting, particularly of fox kills are made by the hounds. In a modified shotgun, pistol, or, under as part of organized Deer Manage- 30 to 40 percent of cases where a fox some circumstances, a humane killer ment Groups (groups of adjoining is killed (by any means) during a (a captive bolt pistol used from landholders coordinating their deer mounted hunt, a terrier is used either extremely short range). Staghounds management), is the method of deer to kill the fox underground or to are trained to surround the deer and control recommended by government locate it or flush it out so it can be bark at the end of the hunt, and (MAFF 2000). From its 1996 survey, killed by hounds or shot. In the Unit- should not attack or savage the deer, the British Association for Shooting ed Kingdom, packs of foxhounds, although Bradshaw and Bateson and Conservation (BASC) estimated occupying largely non-overlapping (2000) report attacks by dogs in one that 10,000 of its members were territories, are registered with the out of four deer kills observed. Hunt- active deer stalkers. Of these, 87.6 Masters of Foxhounds Association. In ing deer to hounds is now restricted percent (8,700) were “recreational” common British usage, each of these almost entirely to one small part of stalkers, and 12.4 percent (1,300) is referred to as a Hunt. (The proper England lying within West Somerset were “professional” deer stalkers who noun distinguishes these organiza- and North Devon. accounted for 40 percent of the total tions from a hunt, the common noun Hares are hunted with dogs either deer cull. referring to a particular chase. Inter- using packs of hounds, or by coursing One part of the debate surrounding nationally, this usage can be ambigu- in competitions or on an ad hoc basis. the hunting of foxes with dogs in the ous, so here we refer to each “club”— With packs of hounds, a hunt usually United Kingdom is whether it is more a word that itself would have different lasts for an hour to an hour and a half, or less humane than shooting. Sup- connotations in this context in Great and only an estimated 5 percent of porters of hunting argue that shoot- Britain—as a “pack of foxhounds.”) hares sighted are killed (Association ing leaves wounded foxes to die long, However there is enormous variation of Masters of Harriers and Beagles lingering deaths and that shooting among packs of foxhounds: some dig 2000). During organized competition would necessarily increase should out no foxes, while in others up to 86 coursing, dogs are not released until hunting be banned. An alternative percent of fox kills are dug out by ter- the hare is at least 80 meters away; view is that foxes killed by shooting riers, having gone underground after the hare must be “in a fit condition”; die quickly and painlessly, without the being pursued (Macdonald et al. nothing must hinder the hare’s distress of the chase and capture. 2000). Digging to reach the fox escape; and it must have “sufficient Foxes are shot mainly either at night and/or fighting between fox and ter- knowledge” of the ground (National with a spotlight and rifle (known as rier underground may last from ten Coursing Club 2000). An average “lamping”) or during the day by minutes to three hours (Phelps, greyhound course lasts 35 to 40 sec- groups or individuals, sometimes at Allen, and Harrop 1997). This activity onds, and an average of 13 percent of the cubbing den (or “earth”). Gun is not considered to be part of hunt- the hares chased are killed, either by packs and shooting at earths may ing “proper.” From an anthropologi- the dogs or by human “pickers-up,” combine shooting with the use of cal perspective, at “this point hunting the latter of whom have a duty to dogs to find, bolt, or flush out foxes. has ceased and vermin control takes ensure that hares are killed quickly Research commissioned by the All over” (Marvin 2000, 195). Indeed, and humanely (National Coursing Party Parliamentary Middle Way MFHA rules stipulate that those out Club 2000). There are no data on the Group (Fox et al. 2003) formed the hunting may not participate in dig- extent or nature of ad hoc coursing, first experimental attempt to address ging to reach a fox. which often is associated with illegal the humaneness of shooting foxes. In a deer hunt, the average overall gambling and use of land without the The research used colored cut-out fox time for a deer to be successfully owner’s permission. silhouettes as targets to assess the hunted, brought to bay, and killed is Although it has attracted a much penetration, kill rate, and wounding around three hours, though hunts lower level of public controversy than rate of fifty-one different shooting

120 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Table 3 Responses of Urban Dwellers and Farmers Regarding the Acceptance and Need for Fox Control

Urban Respondents Rural Respondents Questions (percent in agreement) (percent in agreement)

Where do foxes need to be controlled? In the country? 47.7 73.9 In towns? 61.9 70.7

Why do foxes need to be controlled? To control disease? 56.6 45.7 To protect livestock? 48.7 67.6 To protect game species? 14.4 44.5 Foxes too numerous 21.1 65.1

Do you approve of fox control for these reasons? To improve shooting? 6.7 42.0 For pelts? 3.3 16.8 For sport with hounds? 11.8 68.4

Do you approve of active conservation of foxes? 46.0 19.3

Source: Macdonald and Newdick (1978). Results are based on a questionnaire distributed to 14,000 households in Oxford, England, of which 3,468 (26 percent) were returned the following day. The differences between urban and rural respondents were statistically 2 significant overall: X (1) > 23, P<0.0001. regimes, including different shot es largely on culling of foxes, the most method to be acceptable. In a ques- sizes and user competencies. Fox abundant mammalian carnivore in tionnaire-based study, Macdonald and wounding rates increased significant- the United Kingdom. Although both Newdick (1982) found that urban ly when No. 6 shot was used in shot- include a significant element of sport, dwellers were much less likely to state guns, due to poor penetration, but hunting and shooting in the United that foxes needed to be controlled the use of BB shot minimized wound- Kingdom often are justified in terms and were less likely to state that any ing rates. Experienced shooters using of their contribution to pest control of the listed motives for culling was correctly zeroed rifles achieved a high (Burns et al. 2000). When ques- acceptable (Table 3). Urban dwellers kill rate. While studies such as this tioned, however, neither farmers nor were also more likely to approve of can point to ways of making culling members of the public necessarily the active conservation of foxes. more humane, it remains extremely consider either method—especially Upbringing appears to play a role in difficult to compare different types of hunting with dogs—to be acceptable attitudes toward fox hunting and suffering. Welfare science is advanc- or effective for wildlife damage reduc- other forms of fox control: respon- ing rapidly in this respect; for exam- tion or sport. dents raised in the country were sig- ple, McLaren et al. (in press) have For example, in a public opinion nificantly more likely to favor fox con- recently described a measure of stress poll of 801 adults throughout Great trol in the countryside (53 percent) based on leucocyte competency that Britain regarding fox hunting, 63 per- than were those brought up in the can provide rapid results in the field. cent of respondents either supported city (46 percent). or strongly supported a ban on hunt- Baker and Macdonald (2000) asked Attitudes toward ing foxes with dogs. Most people (69 farmers in the county of Wiltshire to percent) disagreed with the state- say which, among a list of non-exclu- Hunting/Shooting in ment that fox hunting is a necessary sive options, were their principal the United Kingdom means of preserving the balance of motivations for hunting. All respon- There have been few studies exam- wildlife in the countryside; more rural dents opted for “recreation,” while 55 ining attitudes of either the general (39 percent) than urban (20 percent) percent said “to control foxes as a public or landowners toward hunting respondents considered fox hunting pest.” Farmers’ perceptions and prac- and shooting. Those that do exist to be necessary (Macdonald et al. tice of hunting and shooting are like- have occurred largely in response to 2000). As in the United States, urban ly to be colored by the extent to public concern over mounted fox- residents appear less likely than farm- which they consider target species to hunting, therefore this section focus- ers to find culling of foxes by any be a pest, the extent to which they

The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain 121 Table 4 Farmers’ Attitudes toward Hunting on Their Land, according to Enterprise, “Pest” Status, whether Gameshooting Took Place, or the Farmer Himself Hunted1

Encourage Tolerate Discourage Disallow Hunting Hunting Hunting Hunting

All Farms (n=97) 30.9 50.5 12.4 6.2

Dairy (n=63) N.S. 23.8 55.6 14.3 6.4

Non-Dairy Stock (n=13) 53.9 30.8 7.7 7.7 N.S. Mixed (n=16) 31.3 50.0 12.5 6.3 Arable (n=5) 60.0 40.0 0.0 0.0

“Pest” Farms2 (n=25) 40.0 56.0 4.0 0.0 X2=4.68

“Non-Pest” Farms (n=52) 26.9 50.0 17.3 5.8 P=0.094

Game-shooting Farms (n=31) 41.9 48.4 9.7 0.0 X2=3.76

Non-Game-shooting Farms (n=66) 25.8 51.5 13.6 9.1 P=0.052

Hunting Farmer (n=12) 66.7 33.3 0.0 0.0 Fisher’s Exact, P=0.036

Non-Hunting Farmer (n=63) 23.8 55.5 15.9 4.8

Numbers shown are percentages of farmers who encouraged, tolerated, discouraged, or disallowed hunting.

1Some farms comprised Council Farms on which the farmer surveyed was a tenant and may not have had control over whether or not hunting occurred on his land.

2Pest status indicates whether a given farmer considered the fox to be a pest.

Source: Baker and Macdonald (2000) themselves hunt or shoot for sport, shire. In 1995 the sporting rights on Reynolds 2000a). and the extent to which they believe a 88 (73 percent) of the local authori- Two questionnaire surveys, one cov- method to be humane and effective ty’s 120 farms had been retained by ering 859 farmers from ten regions in for pest control (Macdonald and the local authority, and fox hunting England in 1981 (Macdonald and Johnson 2002). was automatically permitted regard- Johnson 1996) and the other covering Mounted fox hunting occurs over less of the farmer’s wishes. In a ques- 72 farmers in Wiltshire in 1995 about two-thirds of England and tionnaire survey of gamekeepers, (Baker and Macdonald 2000), have Wales (Macdonald et al. 2000), but a slightly fewer than half (48 percent) assessed whether farmers believe dif- farmer allowing hunting on his land of 203 respondents (persons em- ferent methods of fox control are does not necessarily see it as part of a ployed on shooting estates) cited “humane.” In both surveys and all strategy for fox control. For example, hunting with dogs as one of the meth- regions, shooting was consistently in the English county of Wiltshire, ods they used to cull foxes (National considered the most humane method only 31 percent of farmers encour- Gamekeepers’ Organisation 2000). of fox control (69 percent overall in aged the hunt; 6 percent did not Arable farmers (those who raise food 1981, 58 percent in 1995; Table 5); in allow it and 63 percent “tolerated” or crops but not livestock) are less likely 1995 49 percent considered it effec- “discouraged” it (Table 4) (Baker and than those with game birds or live- tive as well as humane. In 1981 a high Macdonald 2000). The high propor- stock, especially more vulnerable ani- proportion of farmers believed both tion of tenant farmers, and the reten- mals such as chickens, to consider hunting with hounds (55 percent tion of sporting rights (Parkes and the fox a pest on their farm, although overall), and gassing (49 percent) to Thornley 1994) by the local authority most farmers consider the fox to be a be humane; in Wiltshire in 1995, how- (Wiltshire County Farms Estate), may pest in the wider sense (Baker and ever, only 29 percent believed gassing create this complex situation in Wilt- Macdonald 2000; Heydon and was humane, although more than half

122 The State of the Animals II: 2003 still thought hunting with hounds changes since 1980, or the smaller change” in the legislation governing humane. Macdonald et al. (2000) sample size in the Wiltshire study. fox hunting (Produce Studies, Ltd. investigated whether these farmers' According to 1981 data, farmers 1995; n = 831); 11 percent said they judgments regarding the humaneness who reported that they had sustained would instruct their M.P. to vote for a of different methods, and the justifi- damage by foxes were more likely to ban on foxhunting; while 14 percent cation of different motives, were influ- say that killing foxes to improve held no strong view. Regionally, those enced by damage they had sustained pheasant shooting or for fur were in favor of no change varied between that they attributed to foxes, and by acceptable motives (Table 6). Dam- 86 percent (southwest England) and the field sports in which they partici- age had no effect on the likelihood of 56 percent (Scotland). Those in favor pated. In Wiltshire the proportion of farmers approving the active conser- of a ban varied between 6 percent farmers who considered each method vation of foxes. Hunting farmers were (southwest England) and 26 percent to be humane did not vary significant- less likely to say that shooting and (Scotland). ly from the proportion who had, and gassing were humane and more likely had not, designated the fox a pest on to state that digging with terriers was Hunting/Shooting their farms (Baker and Macdonald humane. Paradoxically, farmers who 2000). However, more farmers report- considered hunting to be a form of and Wildlife Damage ing actual stock loss to foxes in the pest control were also more likely to Reduction previous year said hunting was approve of the active conservation of The motives for culling wildlife in the humane compared with those who did foxes. This may be because hunting United Kingdom are not always clear- not. This contrasts with findings in farmers are more likely both to cite cut, and different groups of people 1981 (Macdonald and Johnson 1996), pest control as a rationale for the take contrasting views on the desir- which suggested that farmers were sport and to want foxes to persist in ability of certain motivations. For more likely to think shooting, snaring, the locality of a pack of foxhounds. example, the only way to prevent local poisoning, or the use of terriers In the United Kingdom as a whole, extinction of some populations of humane if they had suffered losses to 75 percent of farmers (including water voles, a species native to foxes, but that their opinions of hunt- those who did not consider foxes a Britain, is to remove (de facto, to kill) ing and gassing were not affected. The problem on their farms) said they American mink, an introduced differences between these studies would instruct their member of Par- species. Conservationists may see this could reflect regional variation, liament (M.P.) to vote for “no as a regrettable necessity, whereas

Table 5 Percentage of English Farmers Replying “Yes” When Asked Whether They Believed a Method Was Effective or Humane in Controlling Foxes

Wiltshire County (1995 study) n=72, 10 Regions in England except hunting and snaring, n=71 (1981 study) n=859

Control Methods Effective Humane Effective Humane

Shooting 62.5 58.3 68.8 68.8

Hunting 54.9 52.1 43.7 54.8

Gassing1 38.9 29.2 61.0 49.2

Poisoning1 22.2 8.3 41.2 8.3

Terriers/digging 19.4 9.7 34.2 23.0

Snaring 7.0 1.4 39.1 13.2

Adapted from Baker and Macdonald (2000); Macdonald and Johnson (2000, 2003).

1Gassing was made illegal in 1987, poisoning in 1963.

The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain 123 Table 6 The Effect of Fox Damage and Hunting Participation on the Perceived Humaneness of Different Control Methods

Fox Damage? Farmer Hunts? Farmer Shoots?

No Yes No Yes No Yes

Motive

Protect pheasants 35.3 56.5 43.8 39.5 22.9 62.8 For fur 12.8 25.1 18.9 12.2 12.7 22.1

Humaneness

Shooting 70.7 77.3 80.5 59.1 76.4 77.4 Gassing 48.8 62.0 59.9 38.7 56.6 64.1 Snaring 9.1 24.6 14.3 13.4 11.4 18.3 Hunting 59.0 59.3 41.4 91.2 44.0 44.0 Poisoning 17.4 32.6 24.2 36.5 24.2 28.9 Terriers 21.2 34.8 19.1 36.5 21.3 36.1

Percentage of respondents approving of the motive or stating that the control method is humane welfarists may not. Another recent individual estates or farms; and by the involved shooting) was 73 percent, 18 example in the United Kingdom is the fundamental difficulty in assessing percent, and 11 percent for the same proposed cull of introduced hedge- the extent of damage attributable to three regions, respectively (Heydon hogs from Scottish islands where they any one species. Nevertheless such and Reynolds 2000a,b; Heydon, threaten endangered seabirds. In gen- studies as there are for foxes have Reynolds, and Short 2000). Attempts eral, however, the two major reasons generally found that the population to model the effects of hunting with people hunt or shoot in the United impact of hunting and shooting is hounds further suggest that this Kingdom are, first, to control wild small (Phillips et al. 1972; Hewson method, by itself, has little impact on mammal populations that are and Kolb 1973; Storm et al. 1976; the abundance of foxes at a national believed to damage livestock, game Harris 1977; Macdonald 1980; Hew- or regional level. Shooting is more birds, or crops and, second, for sport son 1986; Voigt 1987; Wandeler likely to effectively reduce popula- (Macdonald et al. 2000). Conflicting 1988; Baker, Harris, and Webbon tions regionally, provided that it takes management aims therefore arise, 2002), though, in some upland areas place over a high proportion of the particularly for species such as hares of the United Kingdom, hunting may region (Macdonald et al. 2000). In and some deer, which are simultane- contribute more substantially to fox addition to human-induced mortality, ously considered pests, game species, mortality (Heydon and Reynolds fox populations appear to be regulat- and quarry, and are of conservation 2000a,b). Macdonald et al. (2000) ed by density-dependent effects on concern. estimated that registered mounted reproductive output, likely as a result Although damage reduction is a foxhunts, together with upland foot of food availability and social (stress- frequently cited motive and justifica- and gun packs, probably take a cull in mediated) suppression of reproduc- tion for hunting and shooting in the the region of 21,500 to 25,000; this tion (e.g., Macdonald et al. 2000; United Kingdom, there are few com- represents perhaps 4 percent of annu- Heydon and Reynolds 2000b). parative assessments of the effective- al fox mortality in the United King- Stag hunting kills, on average, 228 ness of different control methods in dom. There are no U.K.-wide data red deer per year, roughly 13 to 17 the literature for any mammalian regarding numbers of any mammal percent of the total cull required to species. Assessing effectiveness is shot. However in three regions of prevent further population increases complicated by a lack of data pertain- England, the proportion of the fox within the stag hunting area. Shoot- ing to cull levels (as there is no oblig- cull taken by methods involving ing with a rifle kills at least 1,000 per ation to report numbers killed) and shooting was 46 percent, 62 percent, year (Macdonald et al. 2000). Shoot- to population sizes (monitoring is and 68 percent, in mid-Wales, east ing is the most common method to largely absent or rudimentary); by the Midlands, and west Norfolk, respec- control population numbers of all six lack of coherent management goals tively, while that taken by methods of the deer species present in Britain, and strategies over areas larger than involving dogs (some of which also as well as in most other countries

124 The State of the Animals II: 2003 throughout Europe and in North ment core-funding will not be ade- Hunting, Shooting America, though it is not clear the quate to supplant the need for volun- extent to which human-induced mor- tary involvement for the foreseeable and Habitat tality may be compensatory with future (Macdonald and Tattersall Preservation other sources of mortality. The total 2002). Some effort is now being In the United Kingdom, where much annual red and roe deer mortalities applied to assessing the factors deter- of the landscape is dominated by the due to shooting during 1995–1996 mining the efficiency of volunteers effects of farming, the existence of in six countries of Western Europe (e.g., Newman, Buesching, and Mac- hunting and shooting as sports activi- were 110,000 and 1,750,000, respec- donald 2003). ties may provide an incentive for the tively (Deutscher Jadgschutz Verband Macdonald and Johnson (1996) preservation and restoration of some 1997). Macdonald et al. (2000) calcu- analyzed a time series of approximate- habitat types. For example, mounted late that, as a percentage of the pre- ly thirty years of cull data generated packs have traditionally managed breeding population (Harris et al. by MFHA packs, quantifying both woodland and copses as cover for 1995), shooting kills approximately regional differences and temporal foxes and maintained their hedgerows 14 to 20 percent of red deer, 29 to 40 trends; these were thought to reflect and dry stone walls to provide jumps percent of fallow deer, and 16 to 22.5 real patterns in fox abundance. The for followers on horseback (where percent of roe deer. These estimated recent establishment (in 2000) in the otherwise lower-maintenance wire percentages fall within the range of United Kingdom of an Independent fences, which are much less desirable human-induced mortality thought to Supervisory Authority for Hunting from the biodiversity perspective, be necessary to contain population (ISAH) has presented an opportunity might have been substituted). Mac- increase, provided that population to standardize and regulate the col- donald and Johnson (2000) used sizes are not greatly underestimated. lection of these data and to ensure farmer questionnaire data to identify There are no data on the extent to that all potentially useful data are patterns in habitat management which population control is reflected recorded. Packs of hounds are now across different sporting interest in damage control. recording, where possible, the sex and groups in the 1970s and 1980s. They Macdonald et al. (2000) concluded age of culled foxes. Early returns sug- found that there was a tendency for that, for deer, foxes, mink, and hares, gest interesting and hitherto unrecog- hunting and shooting farmers to hunting with dogs is generally less nized patterns. For example of the report having removed less hedgerow effective than alternative methods of approximately 6,000 foxes culled in in the decade preceding the survey, population and damage control, with the (at the time of writing, incom- particularly in the 1970s (rates of the possible exception of the use of plete) 2002/2003 season, the sex removal were everywhere much lower terriers to control foxes in upland ratio (male:female) as recorded for in the later period). There was also areas. The potential for non-lethal adults is approximately 2:1. evidence that other non-productive methods to mitigate the need for le- The commissioners of the ISAH habitats were better treated by these thal control is at an early stage of ex- (who include D.W.M.) have encour- interest groups. Oldfield et al. (2003) ploration (Baker and Macdonald 1999). aged the MFHA to maximize their have recently reported a similar utility in monitoring a number of result. Aerial photography and ques- Hunting and other species. These wildlife reports tionnaires showed that farms where Shooting as seem likely to yield some fascinating hunting and shooting occurred had geographic patterns when subjected more woodland, and had planted Monitoring Tools to close scrutiny. For example at a more new woodland and hedgerow, While there is no legal requirement national level, we can already see that than did farms where these activities for packs of hounds to record the perceived trends in deer species differ were absent. number of foxes killed, MFHA packs markedly: the majority of respon- record this information voluntarily dents record that Roe and Muntjac and have proven willing to make it deer are more abundant than they Conclusions available for scientific scrutiny. In the were ten years ago, while most record In both the United States and the context of monitoring in general in no change in fallow deer numbers. United Kingdom, attitudes toward the United Kingdom, the use of vol- The United Kingdom’s Game Con- hunting—and toward animals in gen- untary contributions seems likely to servancy Trust has for some time eral—have changed in the past sever- continue to form an important com- made similar efforts to use shooting al decades. Interestingly, the public’s ponent of the total endeavor. While bags and gamekeeper records to study acceptance of hunting, at least in the the ecological importance of moni- trends in pest and quarry species on United States, is dependent largely on toring is reflected in national and large estates. Tapper (1992) gives an hunters’ abilities to justify this activity international agreements, govern- account of these data. for the sake of providing food, rather

The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain 125 than merely as a sport; simultaneous- cies relating to wildlife has been Service, Office of Migratory Bird ly, Americans’ attitudes toward wildlife changing rapidly. Perceptions and Management, Washington. D.C. have become less utilitarian. If the policies are also changing fast, within Applegate, J. 1991. Patterns of early emphasis on the non-utilitarian values a labile cultural framework. Even desertion among New Jersey of wildlife increases, the public may between such similar nations as the hunters. Wildlife Society Bulletin 17: also increasingly question utilitarian United States and Great Britain, 476–481. motivations for hunting. there are substantial differences in Association of Masters of Harriers and Mirroring the changing perception this context, and such differences Beagles. 2000. The hunting of the of hunting in the United States, par- become immense when the discus- hare with hound, Joint submission ticipation there has declined steadily sion is generalized across the globe. to the Burns Inquiry by the Associ- over the past twenty years. Though However, our short and incomplete ation of Masters of Harriers and potentially constrained by a financial review of this enormous topic, notwith- Beagles (AMHB) and the Masters dependence on this dwindling popula- standing its geographical restrictions, of Basset Hounds Association tion of hunters, professionals in does reveal its inescapable inter-disci- (MBHA). First round evidence wildlife management appear to be plinarity and the complex entangle- submission to the Committee of placing less importance on “produc- ments of fact and perception. Ulti- Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs. On ing” wildlife as a “crop.” Instead, mately, society’s judgments—and the CD accompanying the Report broader concepts from conservation policies—on wildlife issues such as of the Committee of Inquiry into biology are increasingly prominent in this will be heavily influenced by ethi- Hunting with Dogs, CM 4763 (by the profession, with management cal considerations. However, these T. Burns, V. Edwards, J. Marsh, seeking to integrate the needs of non- judgments, and the ethics that decide L. Soulsby, and M. Winter). Nor- game wildlife species. them, should be based on the clearest wich: The Stationary Office. Management of mammalian wild- possible understanding of what is Baker, P.J., S. Harris, and C.C. Web- life in the United Kingdom is mini- known factually, and an equally clear bon. 2002. Effect of British hunting mally regulated in governmental appreciation of what is not known. ban on fox numbers. Nature 419: terms and lacking in any cohesive 34. national strategy. Culling, mainly for Notes Baker, S.E., and D.W. Macdonald. pest control and sport, occurs largely 1Limitations of space preclude a full discus- 1999. Non-lethal predator control: on private land and out of public view, sion of the means by which wildlife damage may Exploring the options. In Advances be reduced through either lethal or non-lethal and public debate regarding the means. See Henderson and Spaeth (1980), Robel in vertebrate pest management, ed. acceptability of hunting and shooting et al. (1981), Baker and MacDonald (1999), and D.P. Cowan and C.J. Feare, 251— revolves mainly around foxhunting Knowlton, Gese, and Jaeger (1999) for a discus- 266. Furth: Filander Verlag. sion of this issue. and hunting with dogs in general. ———. 2000. Foxes and foxhunting This is perhaps unfortunate, as it has Figures 1 and 3 are reprinted from The Value of on farms in Wiltshire: A case study. deflected attention away from other Life: Biological Diversity and Human Society, Journal of Rural Studies 16: by Stephen R. Kellert. Copyright ©1996 issues relating to hunting and shoot- Island Press. Reprinted by permission of Island 185–201. ing. One issue, for example, that has Press/Shearwater Books, Washington, D.C., and Bateson, P. 1997. The behavioural and received little attention outside the Covelo, California. Figures 2 and 4 copyright physiological effects of culling red ©1996 from “Population Change and Its Implica- Scottish conservation community is tion for Wildlife Management in the New West: A deer. London: Report to the Coun- the very large population of red deer Case Study in Colorado” by M.J. Manfredo and cil of the National Trust. in the Scottish Highlands (more than H.C. Zinn. Reproduced by permission of Taylor Bethke, R.W., and T.D. Nudds. 1995. and Francis, Inc., http://www.routledge-ny.-com. 350,000, up from 150,000 at the end Effects of climate change and land of the nineteenth century). For many use on duck abundance in Canadi- owners of large upland estates in an Prairie-Parklands. Ecological Scotland, red deer are a significant Literature Cited Applications 5 (3): 588–600. financial asset, bringing revenue from Allen, S.A. 1988. Montana bioeco- Bissell, S.J. 1993. Ethical issues in stalking and venison. However, the nomics study: Results of the elk state wildlife policy: A qualitative current high deer numbers pose a hunter preference study. Report analysis. Ph.D. diss., University of problem to native woodland regenera- prepared for Montana Department Colorado. tion and moorland conservation, and of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, Bissell, S.J., M.D. Duda, and K.C. there have been calls for widespread Mont. Young. 1998. Recent studies on reductions in deer densities across Allen, G.T., D.F. Caithamer, and M. hunting and fishing participation in the Scottish Highlands. Otto. 1999. A review of the status of the United States. Human Dimen- The science that should, and one greater and lesser scaup in North sions of Wildlife 3(1): 75–80. hopes increasingly will, underpin poli- America. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Bolen, E.G. 2000. Waterfowl manage-

126 The State of the Animals II: 2003 ment: Yesterday and tomorrow. Côté, I.M., and W.J. Sutherland. United States. Wildlife Society Bul- Journal of Wildlife Management 1997. The effectiveness of remov- letin 28(4): 817–824. 64(2): 323–335. ing predators to protect bird popu- Fox, N., S. Rivers, N. Blay, A.G. Green- Bradshaw, E.L., and P. Bateson. 2000. lations. Conservation Biology 11 wood, and D. Wise. 2003. Welfare Welfare implications of culling red (2): 395–405. aspects of shooting foxes. London: deer (Cervus elaphus). Animal Wel- Dasmann, R.F. 1964. Wildlife biology. All Party Parliamentary Middle Way fare 9: 3–24. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Group. British Association for Shooting and Decker, D.J., R.W. Provencher, and Fronczak, D. 2002. Waterfowl harvest Conservation. 2000. First round T.L. Brown. 1984. Antecedents to and population survey data. evidence submission to the Com- hunting participation: An exploratory Columbia, Mo.: U.S. Fish and Wild- mittee of Inquiry into Hunting with study of the social-psychological life Service. Dogs. On the CD accompanying the determinants of initiation, continua- Fulton, D.C., J. Pate, and M.J. Man- Report of the Committee of Inquiry tion, and desertion in hunting. Out- fredo. 1995. Colorado residents’ into Hunting with Dogs, CM 4763 door Recreation Research Unit attitudes toward trapping in Col- (by T. Burns, V. Edwards, J. Marsh, Publication 84-6, Department of orado. (Project Report No. 23). Pro- L. Soulsby, and M. Winter). Nor- Natural Resources, New York State ject Report for the Colorado Divi- wich: The Stationary Office. College of Agricultural and Life Sci- sion of Wildlife. Fort Collins, Colo.: British Deer Society. 2000. First ences. Ithaca: Cornell University Colorado State University, Human round evidence submission to the Press. Dimensions in Natural Resources Committee of Inquiry into Hunting Decker, D.J., T.L. Brown, B.L. Driver, Unit. with Dogs. On the CD accompany- and P.J. Brown. 1987. Theoretical Gill, R.M.A. 1990. The Global Envi- ing the Report of the Committee of developments in assessing social ronment Monitoring System: Moni- Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs, values of wildlife: Toward a compre- toring the status of European and CM 4763 (by T. Burns, V. Edwards, hensive understanding of wildlife North American cervids. (Gems J. Marsh, L. Soulsby, and M. Win- recreation behavior. In Valuing Information Series No. 8). Nairobi, ter). Norwich: The Stationary Wildlife: Economic and Social Per- Kenya: United Nations Environ- Office. spectives, ed. D.J. Decker and G.R. ment Programme. Brown, T.L., D.J. Decker, K.G. Purdy, Goff, 76–95. Boulder: Westview Grandy, J.W. 1983. The North Ameri- and G.F. Mattfield. 1987. The Press. can black duck (Anas rubripes): A future of hunting in New York. Decker, D.J., T.L. Brown, N.A. Connel- case study of 28 years of failure in Transactions of the North American ly, J.W. Enck, G.A. Pomerantz, K.G. American wildlife management. Wildlife and Natural Resources Con- Purdy, and W.F. Siemer. 1992. International Journal for the Study ference 52: 553–566. Toward a comprehensive paradigm of Animal Problems, Supp. (4): Bryan, H. 1979. Conflict in the great of wildlife management: Integrat- 1–35. outdoors: Toward understanding ing the human and biological Harris, S. 1977. Distribution, habitat and managing for diverse sportmen dimensions. In American fish and utilization and age structure of a preferences, Bureau of Public Ad- wildlife policy: The human dimen- suburban fox (Vulpes vulpes) popu- ministration, Sociological Studies sion, ed. W.R. Mangun, 33–54. Car- lation. Mammal Review 7: 25–39. Series 4. Tuscaloosa: University of bondale: Southern Illinois Universi- Harris, S., P. Morris, S. Wray, and D. Alabama. ty Press. Yalden. 1995. A review of British Burns, T., V. Edwards, J. Marsh, L. Deutscher Jadgschutz Verband. 1997. mammals: Population estimates Soulsby, and M. Winter. 2000. DJV Handbuch. Verlag Deiter Hoff- and conservation status of British Report of the Committee of Inquiry mann, Mainz. mammals other than cetaceans. into Hunting with Dogs in England Ditton, R.B., D.K. Loomis, and S. Peterborough, England: Joint and Wales. London: The Stationary Choi. 1992. Recreation specializa- Nature Conservation Committee. Office, CM 4763. tion: Re-conceptualization from a Heberlein, T.A., and E.J. Thomson. Causey, A.S. 1989. On the morality of social world’s perspective. Journal 1991. Socio-economic influences hunting. Environmental Ethics 11: of Leisure Research 24(1): 33–51. on declining hunter numbers in the 327–343. Duda, M.D. 1993. Factors related to United States 1977–1990. In Conover, M.R., and D.O. Conover. hunting and fishing participation in Transactions of the 20th Congress 1987. Wildlife management in the United States. Phase I: Litera- of the International Union Game colonial Connecticut and New ture review. Responsive Manage- Biologists, ed. S. Csanyi and J. Haven during their first century: ment. Erhnhaft, 699–705. Godollo, Hun- 1636–1736. Transactions of the Enck, J.W., D.J. Decker, and T.L. gary: University of Agricultural Sci- Northeast Section of The Wildlife Brown. 2000. Status of hunter ences. Society 44: 1–7. recruitment and retention in the

The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain 127 Henderson, F.R., and C.W. Spaeth. Knowlton, F.F., E.M. Gese, and M.M. R. Bornkamm, J.A. Lee, and M.R.D. 1980. Managing predator problems: Jaeger. 1999. Coyote depredation Seaward, 123–137. New York: Hal- Practices and procedures for pre- control: An interface between biol- stead Press. venting and reducing livestock loss- ogy and management. Journal of MacDonald, D.W., and F.H. Tattersall. es. Manhattan, Kan.: Cooperative Range Management 52: 398–412. 2002. The state of Britain’s mam- Extension Service, Kansas State Kohlberg, L. 1984. The psychology of mals: 2002. Oxford: WildCRU and University. moral development. San Francisco: Mammals Trust UK. Hewson, R. 1986. Distribution and Harper and Row. Macdonald, D.W., F.H. Tattersall, P.J. density of fox (Vulpes vulpes) Langbein, J. 1997. The ranging behav- Johnson, C. Carbone, J. Reynolds, breeding dens and the effects of iour, habitat-use, and impact of deer J. Langbein, S.P. Rushton, and M. management. Journal of Applied in oak woods and heather moors of Shirley. 2000. Managing British Ecology 23: 531–538. Exmoor and the Quantock Hills. mammals: Case studies from the Hewson, R., and H.H. Kolb. 1973. Fordingbridge, England: British hunting debate. Oxford: WildCRU. Changes in the numbers and distri- Deer Society. Manfredo, M.J., and H.C. Zinn. 1996. bution of foxes (Vulpes vulpes) Leopold, A. 1933. Game manage- Population change and its implica- killed in Scotland from 1948–1970. ment. Madison: University of Wis- tion for wildlife management in the Journal of Zoology 171: 345–365. consin Press. New West: A case study in Heydon, M.J., and J.C. Reynolds. ———. 1966. A Sand County alman- Colorado. Human Dimensions of 2000a. Fox (Vulpes vulpes) man- ac and sketches here and there: With Wildlife 1(3): 62–74. agement in three contrasting other essays on conservation from Manfredo, M.J., D.C. Fulton, F. Ciruli, regions of Britain, in relation to Round River. New York: Oxford Uni- S. Cassin, J. Lipscomb, L. Skjorows- agricultural and sporting interests. versity Press. ki, and S. Norris. 1993. Summary of Journal of Zoology, London 251: Macdonald, D.W. 1980. Social factors project report: Coloradoans’ recre- 237–252. affecting reproduction amongst red ational uses of and attitudes toward ———. 2000b. Demography of rural foxes (Vulpes vulpes L. 1758). Bio- wildlife. Summary of Project Report foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in relation to geographica 18: 123–175. No. 6. Project Report for the Col- cull intensity in three contrasting ———. 1987. Running with the fox. orado Division of Wildlife. Fort regions of Britain. Journal of Zoolo- London: Unwin Hyman. Collins, Colo.: Colorado State Uni- gy, London 251: 265–276. Macdonald, D.W., and S.E. Baker. In versity, Human Dimensions in Nat- Heydon, M.J., J.C. Reynolds, and M.J. press. Non-lethal control of fox pre- ural Resources Unit. Short. 2000. Variation in abun- dation: The potential of generalised Mangun, J.C., D.A. Hall, and J.T. dance of foxes (Vulpes vulpes) aversion. Animal Welfare. O’Leary. 1996. Desertion in the between three regions of rural Macdonald, D.W., and P. Johnson. ranks: Recruitment and retention Britain, in relation to landscape 1996. The impact of sport hunting: of sportsmen. Transactions North and other variables. Journal of A case study. In The exploitation of American Wildlife and Natural Zoology, London 251: 253–264. mammal populations, ed. V. Taylor Resources Conference 61: 161–167. Holsman, R.H. 2000. Goodwill hunt- and N. Dunstone, 160–207. Lon- Marvin, G. 2000. The problem of ing? Exploring the role of hunters don: Chapman and Hall. foxes: Legitimate and illegitimate as ecosystem stewards. Wildlife Macdonald, D.W., and P.J. Johnson. killing in the English countryside. Society Bulletin 28(4): 808–816. 2000. Farmers and the custody of In People and wildlife: Conflicts in Kellert, S.R. 1980. Activities of the the countryside: Trends in loss and anthropological perspective, ed. J. American public relating to ani- conservation of non-productive Knight, London: Routledge. mals. Phase II of U.S. Fish and habitats, 1981–1998. Biological Masters of Deerhounds Association. Wildlife Service Study. Washington, Conservation 94(2): 221–234. 2000. First round evidence submis- D.C.: Government Printing Office, ———. 2003. Farmers as conserva- sion to the Committee of Inquiry 024-010-00-624-2. tion custodians: Links between per- into Hunting with Dogs. On the CD ———. 1988. Human-animal interac- ception and practice. In Conserva- accompanying the Report of the tions: A review of American atti- tion and conflict: Mammals and Committee of Inquiry into Hunting tudes to wild and domestic animals farming in Britain, ed. F.H. Tatter- with Dogs, CM 4763 (by T. Burns, V. in the twentieth century. In Ani- sall and W.J. Manley. Yorkshire: Lin- Edwards, J. Marsh, L. Soulsby, and mals and People Sharing the World, nean Society Occasional Publica- M. Winter). Norwich: The Station- ed. A.N. Rowen, 137–175. Hanover, tion, Westbury Publishing. ary Office. N.H.: Tufts University/University Macdonald, D.W., and M.T. Newdick. Masters of Foxhounds Association. Press of New England. 1982. The distribution and ecology 2000. First round evidence submis- ———. 1996. The value of life: Biolog- of foxes, Vulpes vulpes (L.), in sion to the Committee of Inquiry ical diversity and human society. urban areas. The second European into Hunting with Dogs. On the CD Washington, D.C.: Island Press. Symposium. In: Urban Ecology, ed. accompanying the Report of the

128 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Committee of Inquiry into Hunting Union. Norsk Institut for Natur- letin 28(4): 774– 779. with Dogs, CM 4763 (by T. Burns, V. forskning Utredning 18: 1–47. Phelps, R.W., W.R. Allen, and S. Har- Edwards, J. Marsh, L. Soulsby, and National Coursing Club. 2000. Ques- rop. 1997. Report of a review of M. Winter). Norwich: The Station- tions 2–17, First round evidence hunting with hounds. London: ary Office. submission to the Committee of Countryside Alliance. Matthews, B.E. 1993. Recruiting a Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs. On Phillips, R.L., R.D. Andrews, G.L. new constituency for sportfishing the CD accompanying the Report Storm, and R.A. Bishop. 1972. Dis- and hunting in the 21st century. of the Committee of Inquiry into persal and mortality of red foxes. Northeast Wildlife. Transactions of Hunting with Dogs, CM 4763 (by Journal of Wildlife Management 36: the Northeast Section of The Wildlife T. Burns, V. Edwards, J. Marsh, 237–248. Society 50: 159–166. L. Soulsby, and M. Winter). Nor- Posewitz, J. 1994. Beyond fair chase: McFarlane, B.L., and P.C. Boxall. wich: The Stationary Office. The ethic and tradition of hunting. 1996. Participation in wildlife con- National Gamekeepers’ Organisation. Helena, Mont.: Falcon Publishing, servation by birdwatchers. Human 2000. First round evidence submis- Inc. Dimensions of Wildlife 1(3): 1–14. sion to the Committee of Inquiry ———. 1999. Inherit the hunt: A jour- McLaren, G.W., D.W. Macdonald, C. into Hunting with Dogs. On the CD ney into the heart of American hunt- Georgiou, F. Mathews, C. Newman, accompanying the Report of the ing. Helena, Mont.: Falcon Publish- and R. Mian. In press. Leukocyte Committee of Inquiry into Hunting ing, Inc. coping capacity: A novel technique with Dogs, CM 4763 (by T. Burns, Produce Studies Ltd. 1995. Farmers’ for measuring the stress response V. Edwards, J. Marsh, L. Soulsby, attitudes to fox control. Newbury, in vertebrates. Journal of Experi- and M. Winter). Norwich: The Sta- Berkshire, England: Produce Stud- mental Physiology. tionary Office. ies, Ltd. Mighetto, L. 1991. Wild animals and Newman, C., D.D. Buesching, and Robel, R.J., A.D. Dayton, F.R. Hender- American environmental ethics. D.W. Macdonald. 2003. Validating son, R.L. Meduna, and C.W. Spaeth. Tucson: The University of Arizona mammal monitoring methods and 1981. Relationships between hus- Press. assessing the performance of volun- bandry methods and sheep losses Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and teers in wildlife conservation: Sed to canine predators. Journal of Food (MAFF). 2000. First round evi- quis custodiet ipsos custodies. Bio- Wildlife Management 45(4): 894– dence submission to the Commit- logical Conservation 113: 189–197. 911. tee of Inquiry into Hunting with Nichols, J.D., F.A. Johnson, and B.K. Rohlfing, A.H. 1978. Hunter conduct Dogs. On the CD accompanying the Williams. 1995. Managing North and public attitudes. Transactions Report of the Committee of Inquiry American waterfowl in the face of of the North American Wildlife and into Hunting with Dogs, CM 4763 uncertainty. Annual Review of Ecol- Natural Resources Conference 43: (by T. Burns, V. Edwards, J. Marsh, ogy and Systematics 26: 177–199. 404–411. L. Soulsby and M. Winter). Nor- Oldfield, T.E.E., R.J. Smith, S.R. Har- Roosevelt, T. 1900. The wilderness wich: The Stationary Office. rop, and N. Leader-Williams. 2003. hunter. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Minnesota Department of Natural Field sports and conservation in the Sons. Resources. 1992. Constituent inven- United Kingdom. Nature 423: ———. 1913. Our vanishing wildlife. tory: What Minnesotans think about 531–533. Outlook 103: 161–162. hunting, fishing, and native plant Organ, J.F., and E.K. Fritzell. 2000. Schmidt, R.H. 1996. A modest pro- management. St. Paul: Minnesota Trends in consumptive recreation posal to assist in the maintenance Department of Natural Resources, and the wildlife profession. Wildlife of a hunting culture. Wildlife Soci- Division of Fish and Wildlife. Society Bulletin 28(4): 780–787. ety Bulletin 24(2): 373–375. Muir, J. 1901. Our national parks. Paquet, P., and A. Hackman. 1995. Storm, G.L., R.D. Andrews, R.L. New York: Houghton Mifflin. Large carnivore conservation in the Phillips, R.A. Bishop, D.B. Siniff, Muth, R.M., D.A. Hamilton, J.F. Rocky Mountains: A long-term strat- and J.R. Tester. 1976. Morphology, Organ, D.J. Witter, M.E. Mather, egy for maintaining free-ranging reproduction, dispersal and mortal- and J.J. Daigle. 1998. The future of and self-sustaining populations of ity of mid-western red fox popula- wildlife and fisheries policy and carnivores. Toronto: World Wildlife tions. Wildlife Monographs 49: management: Assessing the atti- Fund. 1–82. tudes and values of wildlife and fish- Parkes, C., and J. Thornley. 1994. Fair Stroud, D.A., S. Gibson, J.S. Holmes, eries professionals. Transactions of game—The law of country sports and C.M. Harry. 1999. The legisla- the North American Wildlife and and protection of wildlife. London: tive basis for vertebrate pest man- Natural Resources Conference 63: Pelham Books. agement in Europe (with examples 604–627. Peyton, R.B. 2000. Wildlife manage- from the UK). In Advances in Verte- Myrberget, S. 1990. Wildlife manage- ment: Cropping to manage or man- brate Pest Management, ed. D.P. ment in Europe outside the Soviet aging to crop? Wildlife Society Bul- Cowan and C.J. Feare, 85–108.

The Science and Sociology of Hunting: Shifting Practices and Perceptions in the United States and Great Britain 129 Fürth: Filander Verlag. ———. 2002. Status of ducks. Wash- Tapper, S.C. 1992. Game heritage: An ington, D.C. ecological review from shooting and Voight, D.R. 1987. Red fox. In Wild gamekeeping records. Fording- Furbearer Management and Con- bridge, Hants, England: The Game servation in North America, ed. M. Conservancy Trust. Novak, J.A. Baker, M.E. Obbard, Teel, T.L., R.S. Krannich, and R.H. and B. Mallock, 379–392. Ontario: Schmidt. 2002. Utah stakeholders’ Ministry of Natural Resources. attitudes toward selected cougar Wandeler, A.I. 1988. Control of and black bear management prac- wildlife rabies: Europe. In Rabies, tices. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30(1): ed. J.B. Campbell and K.M. Charl- 2–15. ton, 365–380. Boston: Kluwer Aca- Theodori, G.L., A.E. Luloff, and F.K. demic Publishers. Willits. 1998. The association of Wilkins, K.A., and M.C. Otto. 2002. outdoor recreation and environ- Trends in duck breeding popula- mental concern: Reexamining the tions, 1955–2002. U.S. Fish and Dunlap-Heffernan thesis. Rural Wildlife Service Administrative Sociology 63(1): 94–108. Report, Division of Migratory Bird U.S. Census Bureau. 1996. Inter- Management, Laurel, Md. censal estimates of the total resident Williams, T. 1986. Who’s managing population of states: 1980 to 1990. the wildlife managers? Orion 5(4): Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department 16–23. of Commerce, Bureau of the Cen- Woolf, A. and J.L. Roseberry. 1998. sus. Deer management: Our profes- ———. 2001. Ranking tables for sion’s symbol of success or failure? states: 1990 and 2000. Washington, Wildlife Society Bulletin 26(3): D.C.: U.S. Department of Com- 515–521. merce, Bureau of the Census. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1997. 1996 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. Accessed at http://federalaid.fws. gov/surveys/surveys.html* survey _trends. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau. 2002. 2001 Nation- al Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. Accessed at http://federalaid.fws. gov/surveys/surveys.html* survey _trends. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1981. 1980 hunting and fishing license revenues continue to increase. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. News release, June 1. ———. 2001. Number of anglers and hunters remains steady. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. News release, August 15.

130 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Farm Disease Crises in the United Kingdom: 10CHAPTER Lessons to Be Learned

Michael C. Appleby

Introduction

ver the last fifteen years, a • An emphasis on the economics of demonstrated clearly that public diverse succession of disease- animal production to the exclu- expectations of food safety had Orelated crises has befallen sion of all other considerations. increased, and understandably so, farm animal and food industries in Few of these crises have been limit- since an earlier time when occasional the United Kingdom. Some have ed to the United Kingdom, but the food poisoning was routine. involved animal health, with little risk problems do seem to have been worse Fifteen years later, the food indus- to humans. Some have involved and more frequent there. try is only beginning to grapple with human health, with animals acting as this heightened expectation. The a reservoir for infection but little industry’s complacency has been affected themselves. Some, howev- Salmonella hard to shake off and, although per- er—including the most alarming— haps ill-founded, this could be justi- have involved both animal and human in Eggs fied at least partially by the fact that health through zoonoses, diseases In 1988 a government minister’s the poultry sector has led other agri- transmittable from animal to human. statement that “most egg production cultural sectors in health care for its All of these crises are linked in the in the United Kingdom is infected by animals. Because of the susceptibility public mind and in many commen- salmonella” received wide publicity of chickens and other poultry to dis- taries, and indeed there are issues (BBC 1999). The statement proved to ease, in the years following World War that many of them share. The most be true, and it was confirmed that sal- II the industry developed a positive common of these is concern for food monella bacteria from eggs cause food approach to health control, including safety, but concern for animal welfare poisoning. Egg sales fell by about half. farm design, hygiene, preventative is also a recurrent theme. These con- To some extent this was a “non-story,” vaccination, and general manage- cerns play out against a backdrop of: since salmonella had not recently ment (Julian 1995). Perhaps the • Prevalent attitudes, including increased, the number of eggs affect- most important element of general complacency, about issues of bio- ed was small, and the health risk for management has been the “all in, all security, from animal health to consumers was relatively minor. out” approach in which houses are food safety; (Healthy adults are unlikely to suffer emptied completely between one • Relevant legislation, law enforce- more than a stomach upset even from flock’s departure and the next’s ment, and law breaking; raw, infected eggs, although children arrival. The ability to clean facilities • The practices of transporting ani- and old people may be more seriously thoroughly between flocks and to mal feed, animals, and animal affected. Cooking infected eggs kills reduce transmission of disease vec- products; and the bacteria.) However, the scare tors from old to young animals, has

149 made a paramount contribution to mal products, including poultry, enteritidis problem in another poultry health. It also underscores enter the United Kingdom from way. Changes in egg production the irony of the 1988 scare’s relation- European Union sources in an have adversely affected infection ship to poultry products rather than almost unrestricted way, and sev- control in poultry flocks. In 1945, to others more vulnerable. (The eral EU countries have no salmo- a typical hen house contained approach is only now, many years nella control programmes. Poultry 500 birds. By 1995, many houses later, being adopted by other agricul- products are currently entering contained 100,000 hens, and tural sectors such as pig farming.) the United Kingdom from other multiple houses were often linked Despite all this, the industry has parts of the world where salmonel- by common machinery, resulting not eliminated salmonella in eggs, in la control programmes are absent. in large flocks with common risk part, perhaps, because there are Thus, with people and animal profiles. Large-scale distribution many different types of bacteria products constantly putting our of shell eggs from infected flocks involved. The consequences for poul- birds at risk, the United Kingdom has caused outbreaks in which try are variable (Curtis 1990); mor- government’s policy is, at the contaminated eggs were distrib- tality ranges from 1 to 75 percent least, worrying. uted in many states over a period (Sainsbury 2000) but is usually low. By contrast, Pennington (BBC of months. By contrast, “a few areas of the world, 1999)—professor of bacteriology at notably Scandinavia, have been able the University of Aberdeen and well to virtually rid themselves of salmo- known due to the E. coli inquiry (see Bovine nella infections in animals” (113). page 153)—suggests that salmonella The furor in the United Kingdom should not still be a problem: Spongiform provoked an extensive response from I don't know why we have a prob- the government, including three lem with salmonella still, proba- Encephalopathy orders introduced in 1989. The bly because we have not worked As its name indicates, BSE—a disease Zoonoses Order required registration hard enough to try to get rid of it. discovered in 1986—causes the of flocks, regular testing for salmo- We shouldn't have a problem with brains of cattle to become spongy. nella, and stringent measures if it was salmonella. We know how to sort The resulting behavior, such as stag- detected. The Processed Animal Pro- it out. Other people have sorted it gering, has given rise to BSE’s com- tein Order and the Importation of out, we should have had it sorted mon name, “mad cow disease.” After Processed Animal Protein Order out long ago. 1986 the incidence of BSE increased required salmonella testing of such In 2001 the EU Commission gradually and then rapidly, peaking in protein, intended for feeding ani- announced that it would target sal- 1992 at more than 3,000 cases per mals—although it is notable that monella poisoning as a number one month in the United Kingdom. Early these orders did not identify the sort priority in a food safety crackdown, on, there was concern that BSE might of problem that was even then exac- bringing in new controls affecting be transmittable to humans, and in erbating Bovine Spongiform En- producers of breeding poultry, laying March 1996 it was confirmed that cephalopathy, or BSE (see the next hens, broilers, turkeys, and pigs over such is probably the case. Eating section). The promise of such mea- the next eight years (Meade 2001). infected animal material is the likely sures, and their implementation, In the United States, about 40,000 cause of a new variant of Creutzfeldt- reassured the public. Egg sales slowly cases of salmonellosis are reported Jakob disease (vCJD), which has sim- recovered. However, salmonella in annually (more probably go unreport- ilar physical symptoms in humans to eggs still has not been eliminated in ed), and about 1,000 deaths (Marler those of BSE in cattle. As of 2000 the United Kingdom and in most of Clark, L.L.P., P.S. 2001). Evidence about 115 people had died from the European Union (EU). Sainsbury that a significant number of these vCJD, mostly in the United Kingdom, (2000, 116) suggests that even if it cases derives from animal products is according to an official inquiry set up were, this status would be difficult to circumstantial, but convincing, given in 1997 and chaired by Lord Phillips maintain. He comments as follows the extent of infection in poultry and (Phillips, Bridgeman, and Ferguson- about the lack of effective govern- other units (Altekruse, Cohen, and Smith 2000). ment policy to reduce salmonellosis Swerdlow 1997): BSE must have become established and other zoonoses: The doubling of salmonellosis in U.K. cattle in the 1970s. Its origin Our poultry. . . will always be vul- incidence in the last two decades is not known, but a major possibility nerable to the introduction and has accompanied modern food is that it arose from a similar disease re-infection from other sources, industries’ centralized production in sheep called scrapie (Horn et al. such as wildlife, over which we and large-scale distribution. 2001). Other sources suggested have no control, the whole envi- . . . The trend toward larger mar- include a mutation in a single cow, ronment around them and above kets and consolidation of industry zoo antelopes (Phillips, Bridgeman, all from man himself ....Also, ani- has exacerbated the Salmonella and Ferguson-Smith 2000), and U.S.

150 The State of the Animals II: 2003 cattle (H.W. Reid, Moredun Research export MBM around the world. There tainly is not true now, especially since Institute, personal communication, also was contamination of cattle feed the ban includes not “all animal pro- June 27, 2001). The latter idea stems from that prepared for pigs and poul- tein” but only mammalian MBM. from the fact that U.S. mink have had try (Phillips, Bridgeman, and Fergu- They make this clear elsewhere, but outbreaks of a similar disease since son-Smith 2000). this still leaves room for confusion. It the 1940s, of which beef is a likely The result of the mistaken assump- remains legal, for example, to feed source (Phillips, Bridgeman, and Fer- tions was that the disease became poultry protein to animals, including guson-Smith 2000). much more widespread than it other- poultry. Even as of 2002 a complete It quickly became clear that the wise might have. As of 2002 there had ban on intra-species recycling was disease was spread by feeding cattle been more than 180,000 cases of BSE only being considered, not pressed. meat and bone meal (MBM) from ani- in the United Kingdom. In the rest of Whether or not the ban was radical mal carcasses. The biological agent Europe, more than 3,000 cases had when it was introduced, MAFF resist- that causes scrapie may have changed been reported; presumably these ed it for a long time. It seems bizarre to make it infective in cattle. Alterna- started from MBM from the United now, but this resistance came in the tively or in addition, new manage- Kingdom, but recycling of infected face of proposals from feed manufac- ment practices introduced in the MBM also is likely to have been a prob- turers, as represented by the U.K. 1970s and 1980s probably increased lem within those European countries. Agricultural Supply Trade Association infectivity; these included changes in There also had been a small number of (UKASTA) (Phillips, Bridgeman, and how MBM was produced, and cases in non-European countries; Ferguson-Smith 2000): increased feeding of MBM to young these involved imported animals. MAFF was concerned not to do calves (Horn et al. 2001). One reason it was difficult to under- anything that would lead UKASTA In 1988 the Ministry of Agriculture, stand—and therefore control—BSE members to cease using animal Fisheries, and Food (MAFF) intro- more quickly is that the disease has a protein as an ingredient of feed duced a ban on feeding ruminant pro- long incubation period; it takes four for non-ruminant animals. UKAS- tein to ruminants. This was followed to six years before infected cattle TA, for its part, was anxious that in 1990 by a ban on using material show symptoms. Most have been its members should be able to from cattle tissue most likely to be slaughtered before then. For a long continue to do this without incur- infective (brain, spinal cord, and time, it was mistakenly believed that ring risk of prosecution should it intestines) for human food, and animals not showing symptoms could result, on occasion, in cross-cont- another in 1991 on using such mate- not infect others. Indeed, confidence amination of ruminant feed. rial for feeding pigs and poultry. that beef was safe to eat meant that UKASTA was to threaten repeat- Unfortunately, implementation of for some time even animals slaugh- edly that it might have to advise these bans was made less effective by tered because they were showing its members to cease using ani- two mistaken assumptions. First, it symptoms were used for human food. mal protein, while MAFF officials was thought that the infection was The incubation period in humans may sought to allay UKASTA’s anxi- coming directly from sheep. In fact, be ten or more years. eties. (vol. 1, 63) whatever its original source, the With increased knowledge of BSE, No cases of BSE had been diag- infection now was being spread by including its probable transmission to nosed in the United States as of mid- MBM from infected cattle being fed humans, a complete ban was imposed 2003. Importation of ruminants and to other cattle. This had a self-ampli- in the United Kingdom in March ruminant by-products from countries fying effect that was not understood 1996 on use of all mammalian MBM with BSE have been banned for some for several more years: as more ani- in farm animal feed. Even this ban years, and in 1997 the U.S. Food and mals were infected, so the rate of could be described as conservative, Drug Administration banned the use infection accelerated. The assump- and indeed there is a lack of clarity on of mammalian carcasses in the pro- tion that scrapie was responsible also exactly what has been banned. duction of feed for ruminants. A study inappropriately lessened the urgency Phillips, Bridgeman, and Ferguson- commissioned by the U.S. Depart- of measures to protect human health, Smith (2000) get it wrong in their ment of Agriculture concluded that as scrapie is not transmittable to summary (vol. 1, 66): risk of BSE in the United States is low humans. Second, it was thought that [Previous measures] were re- (Harvard Center for Risk Analysis infection was possible only if a large placed after 20 March 1996 by 2001), but some commentators ar- amount of infective material was the radical step of banning the in- gue that there is much too little sur- eaten, whereas it proved that as little corporation of all animal protein veillance, especially as compliance as one gram was needed. Perhaps in animal feed. with feed rules is known to be weak because of this assumption, farmers Phillips, Bridgeman, and Ferguson- (Newman 2001). and feed suppliers were relaxed about Smith are suggesting that, despite all At the height of the BSE epidemic continuing, illegally, to use existing that had happened up to that point, there were at least four serious public stocks of MBM for their cattle and to the ban still seemed radical. That cer- concerns in addition to the obvious

Farm Disease Crises in the United Kingdom: Lessons to be Learned 151 worries about possible effects on human health and the farming indus- Table 1 try. First was a view that MAFF was Symptoms of vCJD in Humans divided in its loyalties on the BSE issue and could not be trusted to defend consumers’ interests as well as An early age of onset or death (average 27.6 years, range 18–41 years). those of farmers. Second, there was a A prolonged duration of illness (average 13.1 months, range 7.5–24 months). perception that the government had concealed the truth about the risk to A predominantly psychiatric presentation including anxiety, depression, withdrawal, and progressive behavioral changes. humans. Phillips, Bridgeman, and Ferguson-Smith (2000) reject both of First evidence of neurological involvement in four patients was dysaesthesiae these charges. Nevertheless, they (unpleasant abnormal sensations) in the limbs and/or face. acknowledge (vol. 1, xviii) that “con- Development of a cerebellar syndrome, with problems with gait fidence in government pronounce- and limb muscle coordination after a period of weeks or months. ments about risk was a further casu- alty of BSE.” One consequence of this Development of forgetfulness and memory disturbance, often late in the clinical course, which progressed to severe cognitive impairment and a state of akinetic (in combination with other crises, mutism (paralysis and inability to speak) in the majority of cases. particularly the outbreak of E. coli discussed next) was the establish- Development of muscle twitching or spasms in the majority of patients ment in 2000 of an independent Food (myoclonus), preceded by purposeless involuntary movements in some (chorea), with EEG appearances typical of sporadic CJD absent. Standards Agency. Another was redis- tribution of MAFF’s responsibilities Source: Phillips, Bridgeman, and Ferguson-Smith 2000, 8:2 after the 2001 general election and its replacement with a Department of Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs. forcing herbivores to eat animal pro- and had the right mix of nutrients. The third public concern had to do tein, of making cows into cannibals, However, the practice now can be with the effects of the disease on the was an unnatural practice. This may seen to be part of a general approach cattle themselves. There has been be partly a concern for the cows, part- to animal agriculture, common par- surprisingly little discussion of the ly a feeling that treating animals ticularly in the second half of the actual impact of BSE on cattle wel- unnaturally is wrong in itself, and twentieth century, that pushed for fare. However, Phillips, Bridgeman, partly an opinion that it should have increased production at decreased and Ferguson-Smith (2000) make it been obvious that such a practice cost with scant regard for the animals clear that vCJD is very unpleasant for would lead to disaster. Phillips, concerned. It now is well recognized humans (Table 1), and it may be pre- Bridgeman, and Ferguson-Smith that dairy cows are under huge meta- sumed that BSE in cows has at least (2000) reject this last point: bolic stress to maintain their greatly some similar mental as well as physi- The practice of feeding MBM to increased milk production, with many cal effects. Furthermore, media cov- animals in the United Kingdom effects on welfare such as negative erage suggested that concern for the dates back at least to 1926....It energy balance and lameness (Web- animals involved was not limited to is a practice which has also been ster 1994). In developed countries considerations of suffering. It also followed in many other countries. most people do not need milk to be as expressed that it is wrong for animals It was recognised that it was cheap as it currently is, so that less to have a disease, especially one seen important that the rendering economy-oriented dairy systems— as avoidable, irrespective of its men- process should inactivate conven- those that do not use protein supple- tal effects, and that killing of animals tional pathogens. Experience had mentation—could be adopted. (including healthy herd mates of cows not suggested that the practice The most important question now with BSE) is of serious ethical con- involved any other risks. In these is not whether the practice of feeding cern. The concern about killing may circumstances we can understand cattle protein to cattle was culpable, be based in part on the fact that the why no one foresaw that the prac- but how to adapt agriculture to animals are not being used for meat tice of feeding ruminant protein reduce the chance of similar disasters or other purposes. It also is possible to ruminants might give rise to a in future—disasters that are perhaps that the concern simply came to the disaster such as the BSE epidem- intrinsically unforeseeable. An impor- fore because the killing was brought ic. (vol. 1, 20) tant part of the answer must be to to public attention. These ideas will If producers were going to give cat- reduce the emphasis on cheap pro- be discussed again below, in the con- tle supplementary protein to boost duction and to take into account the text of foot and mouth disease. their productivity, then perhaps it was evolutionary history and biology of The fourth and most fundamental not unreasonable for them to use ani- the animals involved—in other words, concern was that the whole process of mal protein that was readily available to treat the animals more naturally.

152 The State of the Animals II: 2003 included the three clusters worst way from cattle to table—on the Escherischia affected. Eight people who died had farm, during animal transport, at the been at a church lunch in Wishaw on slaughterhouse, during meat trans- coli O157 Sunday, November 17; six who died port, in premises processing and sell- Many strains of the bacterium were at a nursing home in Bonny- ing food, and in the home. The report Escherischia coli (E. coli) live harm- bridge (all whom were aged 69 or recommended new regulations, bet- lessly in the guts of humans and ani- older); and a number of non-fatal ter education, and a general change mals. One of the exceptions is E. coli cases had followed a birthday party on in attitude to improve hygiene. O157, a virulent, toxin-producing Saturday, November 23. Some cases Involvement of farms, slaughterhous- strain first identified as causing hu- resulted from sales Barr made from es, and food distributors will be men- man illness in 1982. Infection is fre- the back door of the shop after it was tioned here. quent; for example, there are an esti- shut on November 27. Farmers have a responsibility to send mated 73,000 cases of infection and The main problem was that Barr animals to slaughter in clean con- 61 associated deaths in the United and his staff did not keep raw and dition. This is affected by a number of States each year (Centers for Disease cooked meat properly separated. This factors, such as whether they are given Control and Prevention 2001). The was exacerbated by a general lack of clean, dry bedding and whether they main reservoir is in cattle and sheep, proper hygiene in the handling and are crowded in holding yards (which for whom it causes no illness. The preparation of food. When contami- increases the likelihood that they will main route of human infection proba- nated raw meat came in, the contam- soil each other (C.B. Tucker, Universi- bly is contamination of meat by ani- ination spread to cooked meat, which ty of British Columbia, personal com- mal feces. Heating of meat kills E. customers did not heat enough to munication, June 30, 1999). The Pen- coli, but only if it is thorough. People make safe. Thus the contamination nington Report also criticizes a also can be infected directly by live got progressively worse rather than practice of “feeding up” cows before animals and each other—for example, being eliminated. In January 1998 slaughter to increase live weight and in nursing homes where hygiene is Barr’s company was fined for breach- hence the price obtained; feeding up poor. ing food hygiene regulations. increases the chance of intestines An outbreak of E. coli food poison- Because failure to follow regula- bursting during removal, and hence ing in central Scotland in 1996 affect- tions contributed to this outbreak, contaminating carcasses. By contrast, ed about 500 people, 18 of whom died the Pennington Group (1997) empha- in instances where the same company (Pennington Group 1997; most of sized the need to educate people on both owns and slaughters animals, it is this account depends on this report, the importance of such regulations, common for food to be withheld before supplemented by Pennington 1999). and to improve enforcement of com- slaughter. This was the world’s second highest pliance. But it also stressed the Slaughterhouses also must avoid number of deaths from such an out- importance of events all along the slaughtering dirty cattle, and must break. Events moved with impressive speed (Table 2). A likely outbreak was Table 2 identified on Friday, November 22, 1996, with fifteen confirmed or sus- Events in the 1996 Outbreak of E. coli pected cases. By that evening it was Food Poisoning in Central Scotland known that at least eight had eaten food from John Barr’s butcher shop Sunday, November 17 Wishaw Parish Church lunch in Wishaw (although that did not Friday, November 22 Likely outbreak identified prove it was the source) and health Barr’s butcher shop visited by health officials officials visited the premises. On Sat- Saturday, November 23 Outbreak Control Team formed urday, November 23, an outbreak- Birthday party at Cascade Public House, control team was formed, chaired by Wishaw a local health board consultant. On Wednesday, November 27 Barr’s closed Wednesday, November 27, Barr’s Thursday, November 28 Expert Group set up under closed. On Thursday an inquiry was Professor Pennington announced in Parliament, chaired by Thursday, December 5 Fatal Accident Inquiry announced Professor Hugh Pennington of Aber- Tuesday, December 31 Pennington Group submitted interim report deen University. March 1997 Report commissioned on setting up Barr’s shop was indeed the source. a Food Standards Agency He had supplied contaminated food April 1997 Pennington Group submitted final report to many private customers and sever- al institutions and groups. These 2000 Food Standards Agency established

Farm Disease Crises in the United Kingdom: Lessons to be Learned 153 improve various practices to safe- Netherlands in 1997 was via trucks guard hygiene. The Pennington Classical moving between farms (Elbers et al. Group comments that: 1999). Another major problem in the There clearly has to be a cultural Swine Fever Netherlands was the concentration of change amongst slaughterhouse Classical swine fever (CSF), or hog its industry, enabling the virus to operators and their staff.... cholera, is one of the most important spread readily from house to house Notwithstanding commercial con- virus diseases of pigs. It is a fast- and farm to farm. siderations and the implications spreading disease, limited to pigs, In many ways, control of the U.K. of, for example, piece rates of pay- with high mortality. Outbreaks are outbreak was a success story, and one ment for workers [in which they intermittent in Europe. There was a that must have influenced decisions get paid for work done rather major outbreak in the Netherlands in on handling foot and mouth disease, than time worked], the speed of 1997, for example, and many, smaller which followed hot on its heels. How- the production process within outbreaks in Germany (where it is ever, it renewed concerns about vigi- abattoirs needs to be controlled endemic in wild boar) from 1998 to lance and effective surveillance for so as to permit the achievement 2000. North America is free of CSF. diseases, and about general attitudes of adequate food safety standards. A CSF outbreak in southeast Eng- regarding the importance of disease (1997, 19) land started on August 8, 2000. On control. (The United Kingdom’s state The report includes this statement August 14 movement restrictions veterinary service has been reduced concerning food distributors: were imposed, which, over the next in size, and the number of veterinari- The distribution chain of meat four months, would affect 264 farms ans working in large animal practices and meat products from Barr’s suspected of disease and 907 more in has been declining (Anonymous was diverse and complex and it the infected areas. CSF was con- 2000).) It also renewed concerns took some days for the details on firmed on sixteen farms; 41,000 pigs about the killing of animals, many of that to be unravelled from a were slaughtered on those and neigh- whom were found to have been painstaking investigation of the boring farms as a direct result of the healthy. There is an effective vaccine company’s records. That caused outbreak and 34,000 more as “dan- for CSF, but EU and U.K. policy is not delays in relation to the identifi- gerous contacts.” to use it on animals who have the dis- cation, publicly, of some of the On December 30 (Anonymous ease, who are suspected of having it, outlets involved or potentially 2001) the outbreak was confirmed to or who might become infected. This involved in the outbreak. Some be over, and movement restrictions is because vaccinated animals cannot 85 outlets. . . were eventually were lifted. While the outbreak was be distinguished from infected ani- identified as being supplied by the confined and eliminated relatively mals, so vaccination hinders eradica- company, making the task of out- rapidly, it had a severe financial effect tion. An EU directive adopted in 2001 break management and control on a pig industry that already was in continued this policy but placed extremely difficult. (5) difficulties; many pig farmers left the increased emphasis on development So, while response to the Barr’s business. It is also noteworthy that of “marker vaccines” that would allow outbreak was rapid, it could have the outbreak was at its height when vaccinated and infected pigs to be dis- been more rapid—and prevented the Phillips report on BSE was pub- tinguished. many cases—if it had not been for lished in October 2000. this complexity of food distribution. The most likely source of disease is Around the time of this outbreak, thought to have been an infected Foot and other food safety problems also were pork product, illegally imported, per- publicized, including the danger of haps dropped on the farm by a mem- Mouth Disease Listeria in unpasteurized cheeses. As ber of the public or a wild animal Foot and mouth disease (FMD) a response to the accumulating list of (Gibbens et al. 2000). Initial detec- appeared in northern England in Feb- such problems, the United Kingdom’s tion was slow, perhaps in part because ruary 2001 and rapidly became an Labor Party commissioned a report in CSF’s symptoms are similar to those epidemic. It broke out on a pig farm March 1997 on the possibility of set- of other, prevalent diseases. The dis- and spread to neighboring sheep ting up a food standards agency. ease probably was present in June, so farms. Sheep from this farm were Labor won the general election that that movements of pigs to other moved around the country before the May, formed the new government, farms already had occurred before disease was diagnosed. Three days and, shortly thereafter, accepted the CSF was identified (Sharpe et al. after the diagnosis, the U.K. minister report’s proposals. The Food Stan- 2001). Subsequently there was some for agriculture imposed a complete dards Agency was established in spread between neighboring farms, ban on animal movements. By then, 2000. but no evidence of irresponsible however, the disease had been estab- movements. By contrast, one of the lished for several weeks; the Depart- ways in which disease spread in the ment of Environment, Food, and

154 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Rural Affairs (DEFRA)—which cials traced the source of the out- left untreated gave rise to discussion replaced MAFF in June 2001—esti- break to his farm. of whether it should be allowed to mated that there had probably been So far, Australia, New Zealand, and continue rather than eradicated by over 2 million movements of sheep in the United States have managed to draconian measures. (In fact, symp- that period. Many of these move- keep FMD out, presumably by more toms of the disease vary in severity; it ments were not recorded, as they rigorous import controls than are sometimes causes considerable suf- should have been. Furthermore, farm- achieved in Europe. fering and in particular causes major ers continued to move animals ille- As with CSF, during the 2001 epi- problems in breeding animals, such gally during the crisis (Lashmar demic, the policy of the United King- as abortion and loss of milk produc- 2001). Some of these movements dom and the rest of the EU was to tion, and mortality in the young.) On were for the animals’ sake—for exam- slaughter animals with FMD, those balance, it seems appropriate to erad- ple, because they were in fields with who might have it, and those who icate an eradicable disease. However, insufficient food—and the govern- risked spreading it. The main reason even though FMD was eventually ment soon issued guidance and help was commercial: a country with eradicated, it might break out again for such cases. However, some move- infected or vaccinated animals may sooner or later. If that were to hap- ments must have been for commer- not export animals or meat to coun- pen, the U.K. government says it cial reasons. Some animals were tries free of the disease. At the peak would employ vaccination rather than moved abroad both before and after of the epidemic, about fifty farms extermination as its strategy in deal- the ban, and the disease spread to the where the disease was present were ing with the disease. (Countries in Netherlands, France, and Ireland. It identified daily. After about two which FMD is endemic use regular reached Ireland by an illegal move- months, the number had dropped to vaccination and, as is the case for ment of animals across the border fewer than ten per day. The outbreak CSF, development of marker vaccines from Northern Ireland. had a long “tail,” with three or four has been proposed.) This was the first outbreak in the farms being infected per day before To re-emphasize the commercial United Kingdom since 1967, apart the disease finally was eliminated late basis of the policy not to vaccinate, from a small outbreak on the Isle of in the year. More than 1,900 farms the decision to end vaccination in the Wight, off the south coast, which were affected directly, and 7,000 EU in 1991 was taken on the basis rapidly was controlled. The latter neighboring farms also were cleared that a major outbreak every ten years demonstrated, though, just how of animals. About 4 million animals would be less costly than annual vac- infective the disease is, as it was were slaughtered. cination (Nettleton and Reid 2001). caused by the virus blowing across The slaughter policy was hugely There were reasons other than the from France. DEFRA attributed the controversial. This was largely a result slaughter policy for controversy. It decades-long period without infec- of the issue’s high profile, as televi- was apparent that the United King- tion, in a world with widespread FMD, sion broadcasts showed thousands of dom was ill-prepared for the crisis. to tightened control of imports from farm animals being killed, many of The early slaughter and carcass dis- countries with the disease after 1967 them healthy, and their carcasses posal were relatively slow, delaying and improved hygiene and animal burned. Individual stories of pet ani- containment of the epidemic. In addi- health standards. However, illegal mals and prime breeding herds tion, the methods used for handling importation of meat is common, with received considerable publicity. As and slaughtering animals evidently more than 200 consignments inter- with BSE, even though the farm ani- were not as humane as they might cepted on their way into the United mals would eventually have been have been. Accusations also were Kingdom every month and unknown killed anyway, the fact that they were made against farmers. Some were numbers missed. Some of these go to being prematurely and very visibly seen to be profiteering by pushing restaurants, and waste food from a killed was morally repugnant to many claims for compensation higher than restaurant was found at the pig farm people. The outrage probably was reasonable, with the direct cost of in question. Use of waste food for pigs exacerbated by the fact that, for FMD reaching £1 billion by August. has been common, and although it is many, the killing was seen not to have There were suspicions that some supposed to be heated at 100°C for an a useful purpose—such as meat pro- deliberately spread the infection to hour—which would kill the FMD duction—but to be done for defense their own animals to claim compen- virus—this often does not happen of a meat export trade that they sation above market values (Hether- (Lashmar 2001). (Feeding of waste regarded as unnecessary. Indeed, loss- ington and Lomax 2001). On the food to pigs now is banned.) While es to the tourism industry, caused by other hand, many farmers were hurt exactly what happened on this farm people being unable to move around both emotionally and financially by has yet to be established, it seems in the countryside, heavily out- the crisis; a number even committed that the farmer failed to notice symp- weighed the value of the meat suicide. toms of FMD, although his pigs were exports. Furthermore, suggestions Apart from inquiries into the epi- infected for several weeks before offi- that the disease is not very severe if demic and its handling, the FMD cri-

Farm Disease Crises in the United Kingdom: Lessons to be Learned 155 sis finally precipitated wide-ranging Similarly, movement of animal discussion of the future of farm ani- Biosecurity feed, animals, and food from animals mal production in the United King- When international travellers enter within countries must be reduced. A dom. One result was establishment by the United States or New Zealand major factor in the foot and mouth the government of a Policy Commis- they are asked whether they are epidemic was the enormous scale of sion on the Future of Farming and bringing in food and whether they sheep movements. Animals often are Food, which produced a report have visited farms or plan to do so. driven very long distances to slaugh- (2002) emphasizing the importance While this is done with varying strin- terhouses, for instance, frequently of sustainability. gency, it is strikingly different from passing by nearer slaughterhouses on the lax approach used in other coun- the way. For biosecurity and animal tries. Indeed, New Zealand is the only welfare, animals should be slaugh- Is the United country with a minister for agricul- tered at facilities as close as possible ture and biosecurity, and its Biosecu- to the farm where they are produced; Kingdom rity Authority produces a regular yet the number of slaughterhouses in magazine intended for the general the United Kingdom has declined Exceptional? public as well as specialists. By con- considerably over recent years. Local One obvious question that arises from trast, although DEFRA launched a food production and consumption this succession of crises is whether biosecurity campaign in the United clearly are desirable for animal the United Kingdom is doing some- Kingdom in June 2001, it was aimed health—and many other reasons thing different from other countries, solely at farmers. (Valen 2001). Traceability—the prin- something culpable. It is true that Obviously, other countries should ciple that it should be possible to agriculture is more industrialized in adopt policies on biosecurity similar track any product “from farm to fork” the United Kingdom than in many to those of New Zealand. Given that or vice versa—also is gaining impor- other European countries, with larger classical swine fever and FMD proba- tance, with obvious relevance to ani- farms and a smaller proportion of the bly were introduced into the United mal health and food safety. population involved. It also is true Kingdom by illegal imports, the fact Biosecurity frequently has been that the drive for greater and cheaper that the United States and New regarded with complacency. It is food production after World War II Zealand have remained free of FMD imperative that vigilance become the was stronger in the United Kingdom must partly be luck. However, strin- norm, with systems in place in the than elsewhere, arguably because the gent regulations and stringent food industry that lead to contain- United Kingdom is an island nation. enforcement of those regulations ment or prevention of disease. It is possible that these factors led to must reduce the chance of disease In the United States, such vigilance widespread laxity in food handling, transmission. has been discussed much more since which magnified the disease crises. The United States and New Zealand the events of September 2001 raised However, it also is apparent that the are not blame-free: they are guilty of the possibility that disease outbreaks United Kingdom is not the only coun- double standards in restricting might be introduced purposefully. It try with such problems. Reprehensi- imports while aggressively exporting is striking that little of that discus- ble actions occur elsewhere; for agricultural products. So long as sion has addressed the fundamental example, in 1999 it became known these export policies continue, the structure of the U.S. agricultural that human and animal feces were two countries risk exporting any dis- industry, despite the prominent role being incorporated illegally into feed ease that does get into their animals such structure was seen to have had for farm animals in France (Meade or animal products in the future. in causing the crises in the United 1999). This practice was both repel- They also reinforce the tendency to Kingdom—and the fact that the agri- lent and as risky as those that gave regard such exportation as routine, cultural industry in the United States rise to BSE. While the United King- acceptable, and inevitable. In fact, on is much more concentrated and more dom has been hit particularly hard by the contrary, it is evident that inter- intensive than that of the United farm animal diseases in recent years, national movement of animal feed, Kingdom, and that there is much this must at least partly have been animals, and food from animals is more movement in the United States bad luck. The lessons to be learned dangerous, largely unnecessary and of animal feed, animals, and food are relevant to all countries. damaging to animal welfare and the from animals. The future is difficult environment (Lucas 2001). Ways to predict, but it does seem extreme- must be found of reducing such ly likely that if there is a serious out- movement.

156 The State of the Animals II: 2003 break of a disease such as FMD in the health and welfare. A decent, reliable British Broadcasting Corporation United States—whether accidental or income for farmers—not huge (BBC). 1999. Salmonella remains a deliberate—it could rapidly become wealth, but a reasonable living—must threat. http://news.bbc.co.uk. very serious, indeed. These issues be part of a sustainable future for Accessed June 2001. would then be given the attention farming. Centers for Disease Control and Pre- they deserve. What seems surprising, On the farm, relevant issues vention (CBC). 2001. Escherischia especially as salmonellosis and E. coli include: coli O157: H7. http://www.cdc. infection already are widespread, is • Group size: Maintaining smaller gov. Accessed June. that such attention isn’t already groups of animals restricts dis- Curtis, P. 1990. A handbook of poultry forthcoming. It would obviously be ease transmission. and game bird diseases. Third edi- better to address these issues proper- • Housing conditions: Giving ani- tion. Liverpool, England: Liverpool ly before such an outbreak—reducing mals sufficient space and clean, University Press. the chance of it occurring—than dry conditions, including bed- Elbers, A.R.W., A. Stegeman, H. after. ding, increases their health and Moser, H.M. Ekker, J.A. Smak, and cleanliness. Hygiene is not F.H. Pluimers. 1999. The classical increased by barren conditions. swine fever epidemic 1997–1998 in Economics • Feeding methods: These are criti- the Netherlands: Descriptive epi- cal and have many effects on demiology. Preventive Veterinary of Animal health and welfare. Considera- Medicine 42: 157–184. tion must be given to the biology Gibbens, J., S. Mansley, G. Thomas, Production of the animals involved, that is, to H. Morris, D. Paton, T. Drew, T. Biosecurity will not come cheap. treating the animals as naturally Sandvik, and J. Wilesmith. 2000. However, it is increasingly apparent as possible. Origins of the CSF outbreak. Veteri- that pressure for cheap food has • Concentration of animals: Large, nary Record 147: 310. incurred many external costs, that closely spaced units increase dis- Harvard Center for Risk Analysis. “cheap food at any price” is not a sus- ease transmission. Small, well- 2001. Risk analysis of Transmissi- tainable policy, and that cost-cutting spaced houses and farms should ble Spongiform Encephalopathies in elsewhere (such as in veterinary sur- be favored. cattle and the potential for entry of veillance) also has been damaging. As Consideration also should be given the etiologic agent(s) into the U.S. the Pennington Group (1997) empha- to licensing farms or farmers. Most food supply. Cambridge: Harvard sized in relation to E. coli, disease farmers are not criminal or irrespon- Center for Risk Analysis. control includes events on the farm, sible, but it should be possible to Hetherington, P., and S. Lomax. 2001. during animal transport, at the exclude the minority who are. Farmers accused of infecting live- slaughterhouse, during transport of Minor increases in expenditure on stock. Guardian Weekly, August meat, in premises processing and sell- food and on other aspects of biosecu- 2–8: 9. ing food, and in the home—and sup- rity related to food production could Horn, G., M. Bobrow, M. Bruce, M. ply of animal feed should be added to produce major improvements in farm Goedert, A. McLean, and J. Web- the beginning of that sequence. animal health and welfare. Mecha- ster. 2001. Review of the origin of Improvement of disease control at all nisms should be explored to achieve BSE. http://www.maff.gov.uk. Ac- those stages will require expenditure. these changes. cessed June. How is it to be paid for? One mecha- Julian, R.J. 1995. Population dynam- nism might be a levy on food from ics and diseases of poultry. In Poul- animals, to be spent on improving Literature Cited try Production, ed. P. Hunton, animal health and welfare. As the cost Altekruse, S.F., M.L. Cohen, and D.L. 525–560, Amsterdam: Elsevier. of animal products in a meal usually Swerdlow. 1997. Emerging food- Lashmar, P. 2001. Pig keepers with accounts for only a small proportion borne diseases. Emerging Infectious links to centre of the outbreak of its selling price, most consumers Diseases 3: 285–93. fined over untreated swill. Indepen- would hardly notice such a change. Anonymous. 2000. Editorial: Develop- dent, March 15. Cheap food production has not gen- ing a strategy for surveillance. Vet- Lucas, C. 2001. Stopping the great erally increased profits of farmers, erinary Record 147: 429. food swap. European Parliament: because profits constantly are pared ———. 2001. Classical swine fever: The Greens. away by price competition. Income Movement restrictions lifted. Veteri- for many farmers is low and unreli- nary Record 148: 3. able, which must affect their attitude to and limit their spending on animal

Farm Disease Crises in the United Kingdom: Lessons to be Learned 157 Marler Clark, L.L.P., P.S. 2001. About and food: A sustainable future. Lon- Salmonella. http://www.about-sal- don: The Cabinet Office. monella.com. Accessed June 2001. Sainsbury, D.W.B. 2000. Poultry Meade, G. 1999. Cows fed human health and management: Chickens, sewage. http://www.mad-cow.org. ducks, turkeys, geese, quail. Fourth Accessed June 2001. edition. Oxford, England: Black- ———. 2001. EU food safety crack- well. down targets salmonella cases. Sharpe, K., J. Gibbens, H. Morris, and Irish Independent, August 2. T. Drew. 2001. Epidemiology of the Nettleton, P., and H. Reid. 2001. Foot 2000 CSF outbreak in East Anglia: and mouth disease. The Moredun preliminary findings. Veterinary Foundation News Sheet 3: 11. Record 148: 91. Newman, L. 2001. Risk of BSE in Valen, G. 2001. Local food project: A U.S.A. is low, say U.S. investigators. how-to manual. Washington, D.C.: Lancet 358: 9298. The Humane Society of the United Pennington Group. 1997. Report on States. the circumstances leading to the Webster, A.J.F. 1994. Animal welfare: 1996 outbreak of infection with E. A cool eye towards Eden. Oxford, coli O157 in central Scotland, the England: Blackwell. implications for food safety and the lessons to be learned. Edinburgh: The Stationery Office. Pennington, T.H. 1999. Food scares: Science, politics, and the media. Public lecture, University of Edin- burgh, Scotland, April 28. Phillips, Lord, J. Bridgeman, and M. Ferguson-Smith. 2000. Report, evi- dence and supporting papers of the inquiry into the emergence and identification of Bovine Spongi- form Encephalopathy (BSE) and variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) and the action taken in response to it up to 20 March 1996. Norwich: The Stationery Office. Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food. 2002. Farming

158 The State of the Animals II: 2003 The EU Ban on Battery Cages: History and 11CHAPTER Prospects

Michael C. Appleby

Introduction n June 15, 1999, the Euro- forty four in 2002). Perhaps its most Council of Ministers the power to leg- pean Union (EU) passed a important activity is the preparation islate. The Council of Ministers Odirective on the welfare of lay- of conventions. The only one widely (sometimes called the Council of the ing hens, requiring that battery cages known is the European Convention EU but not to be confused with the (so called because they are arranged on Human Rights, and most people Council of Europe) is the main deci- in batteries of rows and tiers) be assume that the EU produced it. One sion-making body. It includes one rep- phased out by 2012. Enriched laying area in which the council has been resentative from each country; a con- cages (which may also be arranged in active is animal welfare. Indeed it has fusing feature, however, is that these batteries but which provide increased stated that “the humane treatment of representatives vary. For agricultural area and height, when compared with animals is one of the hallmarks of matters, the Council of Ministers con- conventional cages, and a perch, nest Western civilisation” (Appleby, Hugh- sists of the ministers of agriculture box, and litter area) will still be es, and Elson 1992). In 1976 it pro- from fifteen countries. A vital aspect allowed. This chapter outlines how duced the Convention on the Protec- of the Council is that its presidency is this directive came about, and the tion of Animals kept for Farming held for six months by each country social, economic, and political issues Purposes. Though not legally binding in turn, and the presiding country involved. It considers prospects for on member countries until they rati- takes most of the initiative for that the future, both within and outside fied it, member countries accepted period, often attempting to impose the EU, and implications for welfare the responsibility to include the con- its own agenda. The United Kingdom of laying hens in the United States. vention’s provisions in their national presided for the first half of 1998. legislation. This convention will be Germany presided for the first half of considered later. 1999. Both periods were critical in The Council of The EU, which has existed under a the course of the battery cage issue, number of names, such as the Euro- as shall be seen. Europe and the pean Community and the European The EU can enact regulations and Economic Community, started as a directives, among other legislation. European Union subset of the Council of Europe and Regulations are binding throughout First it is necessary to explain the now includes fifteen countries (Table the EU and overrule any contradicto- institutions involved. One influential 1). It has three key bodies. The Euro- ry national legislation. Directives, by grouping—little known, even in pean Commission is appointed by contrast, are not operative in the Europe—is the Council of Europe. member countries to run the show, member countries. They direct each The Council was established in 1949 including drafting legislation. The country to pass national legislation to to increase cooperation among European Parliament consists of put them into effect. This require- nations; it represents most of the members elected by constituents in ment is binding, so that countries will countries of Europe (the number was each country; it shares with the have at least the same minimum stan-

159 and this affects attitudes). The most Table 1 persuasive explanation, though, is Countries of the European Union and the that concern has developed largely in people who were less involved with System of Qualified Majority Voting Used animals than were others. The United by the Council of Ministers* Kingdom and the Netherlands, for example, are more industrialized Country Votes Country Votes than many other countries, and pres- sure for animal protection has come mostly from city dwellers rather than Austria 4 Italy 10 those involved in farming. A revealing Belgium 5 Luxembourg 2 snapshot was provided in 1981 by a review of which countries had then Denmark 3 Netherlands 5 ratified the Council of Europe’s 1976 Finland 3 Portugal 5 Convention on the Protection of Ani- mals kept for Farming Purposes France 10 Spain 8 (Table 2). Of the twenty-one member Germany 10 Sweden 4 countries, most of the eleven that rat- ified first were from the north and Greece 5 United Kingdom 10 had an average of only 6 percent of the population involved in agricul- Ireland 3 ture. Switzerland is relatively south- Total 87 ern but also relatively industrialized and ratified early, along with northern Required for Directive to be adopted 62 nations. Countries that ratified later Blocking minority 26 had a population average of 21 per- cent involved in agriculture. Most of *Number of votes is determined primarily by population. these countries were southern. Source: Council of the European Union 2003 Though a northern country, Ireland was in this group, too, and 23 percent dards (for example, the same mini- with votes weighted by countries’ of its population was involved in agri- mum space allowance for hens in populations (Table 1). culture. The north-south dichotomy cages). It has to be said, though, that The emergence of these complex may have reflected not only differ- when countries are unenthusiastic structures is in large part accounted ences in attitude but also the fact about directives they may delay pass- for by the diversity of the countries of that, where many people are engaged ing legislation as long as possible and Europe, and all that this has meant in agriculture, governments are skimp on the details. If they wish, historically and politically. That diver- unwilling to impose restrictions that countries may legislate for higher sity is further reflected in attitudes may affect their livelihood. Indeed, standards within their own borders— about animals. the agricultural industry has always for example, a greater space been particularly vociferous and effec- allowance in cages—but they cannot tive in lobbying for its interests. generally restrict imports of related Attitudes about It is relevant to note that priorities products from other member coun- other than animal welfare may also tries—such as eggs produced more Animal Welfare influence welfare, and that such pri- cheaply. (For one exception, see the It is well recognized that concern for orities also vary among countries. section on page 164 on Sweden.) For animal welfare varies across Europe, Norway, for example, has legislation regulations and directives, the mech- being generally stronger in the to limit farm size because it regards anism is as follows: The Commission north—particularly the United King- rural employment as important, and drafts legislation, either on its own dom, the Netherlands, Germany, and this limitation probably has some initiative or when requested to do so Scandinavia—and weaker in the benefits for animal welfare. France by the Council. The Parliament may south. Reasons are complex. A num- puts emphasis on food quality, which amend the draft. The Council amends ber of factors correlate with this vari- also has some positive effects: many it further and passes or rejects the ation, including temperature (it is people believe that non-cage eggs final version, with joint authority hotter in the south, which affects how taste better, and some of these eggs from the Parliament. On matters such animals are kept) and religion are probably bought in France for this as those of concern here, this deci- (Catholicism is commoner in the reason. sion is made by “qualified majority,” south, Protestantism in the north, In recent years concern for animal

160 The State of the Animals II: 2003 welfare has grown in southern Europe, as indicated by public opin- Table 2 ion polls. There is public sympathy for Ratification of the Council of Europe’s high-profile campaigns by celebrities such as Brigitte Bardot, and scientists 1976 Convention on the Protection and scientific bodies have increased of Animals Kept for Farming Purposes their interest in, and support for, ani- by 1981, and the Proportion of Each mal welfare research. The story that follows is, therefore, not simply one of Country’s Population Involved the north outvoting the south or in Agriculture browbeating it into agreement. How- ever, southern governments do con- Agricultural Labor Agricultural Labor tinue to be less positive than north- Ratified (percent) Not Yet Ratified (percent) ern governments about animal Belgium/Luxembourg 4 Austria 9 welfare (Sansolini 1999a). Publication of Ruth Harrison’s Ani- Cyprus — Greece 30 mal Machines in the United Kingdom in 1964 had a huge, international Denmark 8 Iceland 9 impact. It greatly increased awareness France 9 Ireland 23 of factory farming methods, including battery cages, and concern for farm Netherlands 5 Italy 12 animal welfare. The U.K. government Norway 8 Liechtenstein — set up the Brambell Committee (which issued a report in 1965), Sweden 5 Malta 5 passed the Agriculture (Miscellaneous Switzerland 5 Portugal 26 Provisions) Act in 1968, and estab- lished an independent Farm Animal United Kingdom 2 Spain 17 Welfare Council (FAWC). Both the West Germany 4 Turkey 54 Brambell Report and FAWC have had an international influence, too, Average 6 21 including their development of the concept of Five Freedoms (Table 3). Source: Ludvigsen et al. 1982

Table 3 The Five Freedoms*

Animals should have:

Freedom from hunger and thirst by ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigour

Freedom from discomfort by providing an appropriate environment, including shelter and a comfortable resting area

Freedom from pain, injury and disease by prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment

Freedom to express normal behaviour by providing sufficient space, proper facilities, and company of the animal's own kind

Freedom from fear and distress by ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering

*The concept originated from a phrase in the Brambell Report (Brambell 1965) and was developed by the U.K. Farm Animal Welfare Council (1997) Brambell Report: Farm animals should have freedom “to stand up, lie down, turn around, groom themselves and stretch their limbs.” Source: FAWC

The EU Ban on Battery Cages: History and Prospects 161 nest box, and a litter area. The term background scientific work on poul- Housing furnished cages probably is best, try welfare in a “farm animal welfare because it is descriptive rather than co-ordination program.” The author Systems for judgmental (Appleby et al. 2002), but was employed under this program Laying Hens the EU 1999 directive refers to starting in 1981 (Appleby 1983). enriched cages, so that term will be Another important effort has been Another important development in used here. The author suggests that the series of European symposia on the United Kingdom and elsewhere, welfare is improved in enriched cages, poultry welfare held by the World beginning in the mid-1970s, was work and more reliably so than in alterna- Poultry Science Association every on alternatives to battery cages. In tive approaches such as percheries four years; the first symposium took the developed world, by about 1970 and free range systems (Appleby place in 1981 (following a predeces- most hens kept for egg production 1993). This argument is still contro- sor in Denmark in 1977), and the (called laying hens or layers) were versial and unfamiliar to the public. sixth was in Switzerland in September housed in conventional laying cages The public tends to think that “free 2001. or battery cages. It is widely acknowl- range” means small, farmyard flocks, Two problems arose in general edged that battery cages cause many whereas commercial free range sys- understanding of the production welfare problems. They compromise tems house hundreds or thousands of methods used. First, systems were most or all of FAWC’s Five Freedoms, hens. Such conditions have numerous given a bewildering variety of and indeed contravene the very limit- problems, including—to emphasize names—those already listed as well as ed “freedoms” listed in the Brambell the point—the fact that unless part of aviaries, percheries, and others—and, Report (Table 3). Work on alternative the birds’ beaks is amputated, the second, systems had no official speci- housing systems, primarily aimed at birds often peck each other to death. fications. Eggs sold as free range, for reducing welfare problems, was most Other important work on improv- instance, might come from hens active in the 1970s and 1980s. ing cages included that of scientist allowed to “range” only inside a Much of this work was funded by Ragnar Tauson in Sweden. He sur- house or only if they could find one national governments in northern veyed the incidence of trapping and small exit from a huge building. The Europe. The main emphasis was on injury of caged hens (Tauson 1985). EU addressed these problems in 1985 use of non-cage systems such as deep This led to design of improved cages, by imposing a regulation defining litter, straw yards, and free range in use of which resulted in reduction in four labels that can be put on eggs the United Kingdom (Appleby et al. incidence (Tauson 1988). Tauson also and the corresponding conditions in 1988; Gibson, Dun, and Hughes developed an abrasive strip which, which hens must be kept (Table 4). In 1988; Keeling, Hughes, and Dun when attached to the egg guard the absence of one of those labels, 1988); slatted floors in Denmark behind the food trough, prevents eggs are presumed to come from (Nørgaard-Nielsen 1986); and tiered overgrowth of claws (Tauson 1986). cages. This regulation immediately wire floors in the Netherlands Beginning in 1979 the EU financed slowed the name-changing and had a (Ehlhardt and Koolstra 1984). There also was work in the United Kingdom and Germany on a modified cage called the Get-away cage (Elson Table 4 1981; Wegner 1990). However, all Criteria Defined by these systems have one major welfare the EU for Labeling of Eggs problem that battery cages do not. Birds in these facilities have to be Label Criteria beak-trimmed—a mutilation that has become increasingly controversial— Free range Continuous daytime access to ground mainly otherwise cannibalism is likely, often covered with vegetation affecting a high percentage of birds. Maximum stocking density 1,000 hens/hectare The cannibalism apparently is related Semi-intensive Continuous daytime access to ground mainly to group size, which in all these sys- covered with vegetation tems is larger than in battery cages. Maximum stocking density 4,000 hens/hectare Therefore, work began in the mid- Deep litter Maximum stocking density 7 hens/m2 1980s, in Edinburgh and elsewhere, A third of floor covered with litter on modifying cages for small groups. Part floor for droppings’ collection What have come to be called enriched Perchery or barn Maximum stocking density 25 hens/m2 or furnished cages provide increased Perches, 15 cm for each hen area and height compared with con- ventional cages, and also a perch, a Source: Commission of the European Communities 1985

162 The State of the Animals II: 2003 big impact on how non-cage hens are kept. For example, there are no laws Table 5 in any EU country on maximum floor Cost of Egg Production in Different stocking rates but to get a premium for deep litter eggs a producer must Systems, Relative to Laying Cages not exceed seven hens per square with 450 Square Centimetres Per Bird meter. Exceeding the limit means selling the eggs unlabeled, at a loss. System Space Relative Cost (%) The battery cage system is the least costly approach in use for egg pro- Laying cage 450 cm2/bird 100 duction (Table 5). However, over the Laying cage 560 cm2/bird 105 same period, in the 1970s and 1980s, a market for non-cage eggs was devel- Laying cage 750 cm2/bird 115 oping. Some people, again particular- Laying cage 450 cm2/bird + nest 102 ly in the north of Europe, will pay more for such eggs either because Shallow laying cage 450 cm2/bird 102 they are concerned about the welfare Get-away cage 10–12 birds/m2 115 of hens or because they perceive the eggs to be more nutritious, tasty, or Two-tier aviary 10–12 birds/m2 115 healthful. Thus some producers con- 2 tinued to keep hens in non-cage sys- Multi-tier housing 20 birds/m 105–108 tems, covering the higher cost with a Deep litter 7–10 birds/m2 118 higher selling price for the eggs. No 2 full economic analysis of enriched Strawyard 3 birds/m 130 cages has been published, but egg Semi-intensive 1,000 birds/ha 135 (140 including production probably costs around 10 land rental) percent more from these than from Free range 400 birds/ha 150 (170 including battery cages (Appleby 1998). This is land rental) cheaper than using most non-cage systems, but since eggs from enriched Source: Elson 1985 cages cannot be given any of the Space refers in cages to cage floor area, in houses to labels in Table 4, shoppers cannot dis- house floor area, and in extensive systems to land area tinguish them from battery eggs. As a result farmers will not use enriched 1973), Sweden (which joined in cages unless required to do so by law. Developments 1995), and Switzerland (which is not Egg labels often confuse customers. a member). Many people think (or perhaps hope) in Individual that eggs sold under names that Denmark sound appealingly rural or wholesome Countries In 1950 Denmark passed a compre- do not come from cages, but such Animal welfare legislation in individ- hensive Protection of Animals Act, brand names actually have no official ual European countries shows a which stated (T. Ambrosen, University status. About 20 percent of eggs sold dichotomy that reflects differing atti- of Copenhagen, personal communica- in the United Kingdom do come from tudes. Northern countries have tion, May 16, 2001) that: non-cage systems, either free range or detailed laws, with codified lists of Animals must be properly treated barn. In the Netherlands, Germany, actions that are prohibited. Southern and must not by neglect, over- and Denmark, deep litter eggs (which countries tend simply to state that strain or in any other way be sub- are called “scratching eggs” in their animals must not be ill-treated. Leg- ject to unnecessary suffering; Any- languages) are more popular. In islation also is enforced more strictly one keeping animals should see recent years, some supermarkets in in some countries than in others. that they have sufficient and suit- northern Europe have responded to Several northern countries have able food and drink, and that they customer concerns by labelling eggs passed legislation or made other are properly cared for in suitable from caged hens as such. The EU as of changes over the last half century accommodation. 2002 was moving toward making this that have affected the welfare of This language was interpreted as labelling mandatory. caged hens both within and outside their borders. This section considers prohibiting battery cages, so there Denmark and the United Kingdom were no cages in Denmark for many (both of which joined the EU in years. However, Danish companies

The EU Ban on Battery Cages: History and Prospects 163 started building farms over the bor- end of the laying year, so they ought Sweden der in Germany and bringing the eggs to have been given more than 550 In 1988, at a time when Sweden per- to Denmark. By the 1970s the law was square centimeters of living space. haps did not expect to join the EU, being flouted with impunity: battery They probably had about 500 square the country passed a new Animal Wel- cages were being installed in Den- centimeters, corresponding to a body fare Act. This required that, starting mark and even supported by govern- weight of 2.2 kilograms. in 1989, all new cages should provide ment grants. A compromise was In the late 1970s, the U.K. Parlia- 600 square centimeters per hen. The reached in 1979, when a new law was ment set up a Select Committee on country also took account of Tauson’s passed that allowed cages, but with a Agriculture, whose members chose to work (mentioned above), mandating, minimum area of 600 square cen- consider animal welfare before any- for example, that by 1994 all cages timeters per bird. In a typical cage of thing else. They produced a report in should be fitted with a claw-shorten- 2,500 square centimeters, this meant July 1981 concluding that: ing system and a perch. More radical housing four instead of five birds. Agreement should be sought in change was to follow (R. Tauson, Denmark became a net importer of the European Community to a Swedish Agricultural University, per- eggs rather than a net exporter, but statement of intention that after, sonal communication, August 20, the Danish egg industry survives, say, five years egg production will 2000): even if smaller than before. be limited to approved methods Animals should be able to per- which will not include battery form natural behaviours and be United Kingdom cages in their present form. protected against disease and The U.K. Agriculture (Miscellaneous . . . This should be pursued during unnecessary suffering; Provisions) Act of 1968 had important the UK Presidency. . . .Meanwhile Hens for egg production should provisions in addition to those already the Minister should seek Com- not be kept in cages from 1999, mentioned, particularly a require- munity agreement to a minimum But alternatives must not mean ment to produce Codes of Recom- standard for adult laying birds in Impaired animal health, mendation for the Welfare of Live- battery cages of not less than 750 Increased medication, stock. Contravention of these is not a sq cm per bird. He should refuse Introduction of beak trimming or legal offense in itself but can be used to agree to anything less than Impaired working environment. as evidence in prosecution for cruelty. 550 sq cm. (House of Commons Despite the ban on cages, remark- (In the same way, breaking the better- 1981, 53) ably little was done on alternative sys- known Highway Code by driving on The proposal for a ban on battery tems in the next few years, by either the wrong side of the road is not ille- cages received widespread publicity, the government or the industry, and gal but would be evidence in a prose- but the timing was poor. The United the industry suggested that the cution for dangerous driving.) The Kingdom had just started a six-month required conditions would be “diffi- 1969 Code for domestic fowls stated: term as president of the Council of cult, if not downright impossible to In cages holding three or more the EU, and it was too late for the meet” (Fredell 1994, 1). More than 40 lightweight birds, the floor area detailed preparation that the battery percent of producers said they would should normally allow not less cage action would have needed. Per- leave egg production and predicted than 1 sq m per 39.1 kg live- haps partly for this reason, the pro- that imports would rise to more than weight. For heavier birds the posal was not taken up by the U.K. 60 percent (Sörensen 1994). allowance should not normally be government. Tauson agreed that the required less than 1 sq m per 44 kg live- The U.K. Farm Animal Welfare conditions were inconsistent with a weight. (Ministry of Agriculture, Council (FAWC) also arose from the cage ban, and started work on Fisheries, and Food 1969, 5) 1968 Act, and it has produced a suc- enriched cages in collaboration with Strains of heavier brown hens were cession of influential reports. These this author (Abrahamsson, Tauson, becoming common in the United include an assessment of egg produc- and Appleby 1995). In 1997 Sweden Kingdom by 1969, and they soon tion systems (1986), a report on the accepted the industry’s arguments became ubiquitous. This was an inter- welfare of laying hens in colony sys- and deferred implementation of the esting result of consumer preference: tems (1991), and a report on the wel- ban, requiring instead that all cages people bought brown eggs (which fare of laying hens (1997). be enriched. (By then Sweden was in come from brown birds) even though the EU.) A ban on cages remains on they cost more, because the eggs the statutes but in abeyance; enriched were perceived to be tastier or more cages were introduced in Sweden on a natural than white ones (which come large scale beginning in 1998 (Tauson from white hens). Brown birds 2000; Tauson and Holm 2001). weighed about 2.5 kilograms by the

164 The State of the Animals II: 2003 The actual threat from imports was but have improved with experience allow for different requirements. not as great as the industry claimed. (Fröhlich and Oester 2001). Because the convention itself is very Restrictions on imports are not gen- broad, the Council of Europe has a erally allowed within the EU. Howev- standing committee with a responsi- er, the Swedish egg industry is almost The 1976 bility for elaborating more specific free of salmonella, so that Sweden requirements. One of the first areas can refuse imports from countries Convention in which it became active was that of with salmonella—including the rest poultry welfare. of the EU, apart from Finland. and the 1986 In addition to individual countries, the EU became a party to the conven- Directive tion in 1978. Not surprisingly, the EU Switzerland From the late 1970s on, an underly- Switzerland is the only country in the decided it should act on the welfare of ing influence on poultry welfare was laying hens. After several years of world to have banned laying cages. the Council of Europe’s 1976 Con- The ban was imposed in 1992, after a negotiation, an EU directive was vention on the Protection of Animals adopted in 1986 which establishes 1978 referendum in which citizens kept for Farming Purposes. As men- were informed of the economic con- minimum standards for the protec- tioned above, once members ratified tion of hens in battery cages (Com- sequences of the proposed action. the convention they were obliged to Not being in the EU, Switzerland can mission of the European Communi- take it into account in their coun- ties 1986). By January 1988 all newly restrict imports of cheaper eggs. tries—and that included all the coun- Some imports are permitted, though, built cages had to provide 450 square tries in Table 2, except Turkey (which centimeters of space per hen and despite the fact that they come from still has not ratified). It also includes systems that are illegal in Switzer- meet other requirements (Table 7); other countries that subsequently these standards were to apply to all land, because the country’s egg pro- joined the council. The convention duction is insufficient to meet cages by January 1995. was concerned with the care, hus- In hindsight the directive seems demand. bandry, and housing of farm animals, The Swiss law is framed as a ban on minimalist to many in Europe. How- especially those in intensive systems ever, it was one of the first Europe- any enclosure for fewer than forty (Table 6). Its recommendations are birds. Various designs based on the wide statutes that actually specified couched in general terms, but the how animals were to be kept. Prior to Dutch tiered-wire floor systems are drafting committee commented that used (Matter and Oester 1989). Per- this approximately half the hens in it tried to lay down principles precise Europe were given less than 450 formance of these, and the welfare of enough to avoid a completely free the birds, were relatively poor at first square centimeters each, and proba- interpretation, yet wide enough to bly few cages in Europe met all the

Table 6 Extracts from the Convention on the Protection of Animals Kept for Farming Purposes

Article 3 states: Animals shall be housed and provided Article 5 deals with lighting, temperature, with food, water and care which—having humidity, air circulation, ventilation regard for their species and to their and other environmental conditions degree of development, adaptation and such as gas concentration and domestication—is appropriate to their noise intensity. physiological and ethological needs, in accordance with established experience Article 6 deals with the provision of food and water. and scientific knowledge. Article 7 deals with inspection, both of the condition and state of the animal Article 4 states: The freedom of movement appropriate to an animal, having regard to its species and of the technical equipment and in accordance with established and systems. experience and scientific knowledge, shall not be restricted in such a manner as to cause it unnecessary suffering or injury. Where an animal is continuously tethered or confined it shall be given the space appropriate to its physiological and ethological needs.

Source: Council of Europe 1976

The EU Ban on Battery Cages: History and Prospects 165 Table 7 Extracts from the EU 1986 Directive Laying Down Minimum Standards for the Protection of Laying Hens Kept in Battery Cages

A minimum area of 450 cm2 per bird and 10 cm of feeding Cage height of at least 40 cm over 65 percent of the cage area trough per bird and nowhere less than 35 cm A continuous length of drinking trough providing at least Cage floors capable of supporting adequately each forward- 10 cm per bird or if nipple drinkers or drinking cups are facing claw and not sloping more than 8 degrees, unless used, at least two shall be within reach of each cage constructed of other than rectangular wire mesh

Source: CEC 1986 criteria specified for area, feeding licity and the commission took no come most of the behavioural space, height, and floor slope. The direct action on it. In that same year, deficiencies, modified enriched governments of southern Europe however, the commission issued a cages are showing good potential resisted inclusion of a space draft for a new directive (Commission in relation to both welfare and allowance as high as 450 square cen- of the European Communities 1992) production....Mainly because of timeters, agreed to this provision which surprised everyone by recom- the risk of feather pecking and reluctantly, and subsequently imple- mending that cages should provide cannibalism, [non-cage] systems mented it slowly. However, all mem- 800 square centimeters of area and have severe disadvantages for the bers of the EU did have to translate 20 centimeters of perch per hen. A welfare of laying hens. (109) the directive into national legislation. minimum height of 50 centimeters In the first half of 1998, the United In the United Kingdom, for example, was included, with a height of at least Kingdom held presidency of the coun- this was done in 1987. The United 60 centimeters over 65 percent of the cil and was pressing for change. That Kingdom also amended its Welfare area. This was generally interpreted March the commission brought out Code to recommend only the legal as “testing the water” rather than a another proposal for a new directive. minimum of 450 square centimeters serious proposal, and no mention of The proposal was oddly framed, how- (Ministry Of Agriculture, Fisheries, 20 centimeters of perch or 60 cen- ever, requiring hens to be provided and Food 1987). Denmark and Swe- timeters of height was ever seen with nests and litter but stating that: den, by contrast, continue to provide again—although requirements for Member states may authorise more than the minimum. 800 square centimeters of area and derogation from [those require- 50 centimeters minimum height were ments] in order to permit the use retained to the next stage. of battery cages if the following Developments Meanwhile much relevant research conditions are met: continued. For example, in 1989 (a) At least 800 cm2 of cage Leading to the Dawkins and Hardie reported that area . . . shall be provided brown hens take up 475 square cen- for each hen; 1999 Directive timeters just standing still and 1,272 (b) Cages shall be at least One further provision of the directive square centimeters simply turning 50 cm high at any raised the possibility of future around. point. (Commission of changes, for example a ban on cages, By 1995 the commission had decid- the European Communi- by saying that: ed that it had to take further action, ties 1998, 5) Before 1 January 1993 the Com- and asked the Scientific Veterinary Enriched cages, “equipped with lit- mission shall submit a report on Committee to update its report. The ter, perches, and a nestbox,” were scientific developments regarding updated report, issued in 1996, listed mentioned as a possible housing sys- the welfare of hens under various welfare benefits and deficiencies of tem; they were required to be 50 cen- systems of rearing. (Commission cages and non-cage systems. It con- timeters high but no more than that. of the European Communities cluded that: Then a critical coincidence 1986, 3) Because of its small size and its occurred: Sweden started introducing The Scientific Veterinary Commit- barrenness, the battery cage as enriched cages on a commercial tee (Animal Welfare Section) of the used at present has inherent basis. In late 1998 a number of key commission did produce a report in severe disadvantages for the wel- players in the Council of Ministers 1992 (de Wit 1992), but it did not fare of hens. . . .To retain the and the Commission’s Directorate- receive widespread circulation or pub- advantages of cages and over- General for Agriculture were able to

166 The State of the Animals II: 2003 visit Sweden and see the cages for agreed with it. The Parliament although the Council does not need themselves. They doubtless took note amended the first version of the direc- unanimity, it attempts to achieve it, of the fact that egg production from tive, voting heavily to replace the rather than forcing minority coun- enriched cages is cheaper than from derogation for battery cages with a tries to accept change against their most non-cage systems. provision that “the use of battery will. If several countries were known Meanwhile Germany, hungry for cages shall be prohibited”: the vote to be planning to vote against the substantial progress on animal wel- was 58 percent for, 38 percent directive, the Council probably would fare during its forthcoming presiden- against, 4 percent abstaining. The have deferred the vote and considered cy of the council in the first half of increasing concern for animal welfare further amendments. 1999, was gearing up to ensure adop- among southern Europeans may be Those thought most likely to vote tion of the directive in that period. illustrated by the fact that the amend- against were France, Greece, Italy, The German presidency—that is, the ment was presented by an Italian Portugal, and Spain; these countries German ministry of agriculture, with member of the Parliament and signed have a total of 38 votes, more than support from the rest of the German by Italian and Greek members, the 26 needed for a blocking minori- government—recognized that the among others (Sansolini 1999b). The ty. Portugal, for example, stated pub- proposed directive did not give Parliament did not delete the men- licly that it planned to vote against enough details of enriched cages for tion of enriched cages as a permissi- (Aguirre y Mendes 1999). Groups these to be properly regulated. They ble system, though. Thus it, too, supporting the ban, such as Euro- put forward an amended version in voted to ban battery cages but not group for Animal Welfare and Com- early January. This avoided the words enriched cages. passion in World Farming (CIWF), battery and enriched altogether, and This was the first stage of the were particularly active in lobbying said that: debate to hit the headlines, making those five countries but also lobbied All cage systems [must] comply the front page at least in the poultry countries thought to be in favor—to at least with the following re- and animal welfare press, if not in the ensure their continued support and quirements: popular media. The coverage empha- to persuade them to put pressure on (a) Where the cage contains sized that the European Parliament the possible dissenters. The action eight hens or more, at had voted to ban batteries. But the that received most publicity was a least 550 cm2 of cage most important stage was still to hunger strike by Adolfo Sansolini, the area. . . must be provided come. The final decision would be Italian head of Compassion in World for each hen; taken by the Council of Ministers. Farming’s campaign in Mediter- (b) Where the cage contains Strictly speaking, the decision might ranean countries. On May 20, 1999, fewer than eight hens, at not be completely final. If the Council Italy announced that it would support least 800 cm2 of cage area did not act as the Parliament wanted, the ban (Sansolini 1999b). must be provided for each the Parliament could then require it Details of the negotiations among hen.... to think again—as it did recently the EU ministers of agriculture are, of (f) Cages must also provide: a when the Parliament voted to ban course, not public. It is possible that nest and an area with or sales of cosmetics tested on animals some who opposed the ban finally without litter enabling and the Council demurred. However, agreed to support it in return for hens to peck and scratch. the Parliament might well not have some other political favor. Stories (Commission of the Euro- persisted, so the Council decision have circulated that they were warned pean Communities would be momentous. that, if the directive failed, there 1999a, 7) would be increased pressure for more In other words, they proposed to radical change, such as a complete ban battery cages, but not enriched The 1999 ban on cages. It also happened that cages. the final vote came just after a dis- The European Parliament—which, Directive cussion on the dioxin scandal (Com- it will be remembered, is the directly The next months were busy. Govern- mission of the European Communi- elected, democratic body represent- ments put the proposals out for con- ties 1999b), which is rumored to have ing the public throughout the EU— sultation—for example, the author diminished any trust that the agricul- debated the proposed directive in late was on the list of those consulted by tural industry could be left to regu- January 1999. In the convoluted the U.K. government. Lobbying inten- late itself. (Not long before, there had political process that constitutes the sified because the Council would be been a widespread problem in Bel- EU, the version it debated was that using qualified majority voting (Table gium of dioxin contamination of ani- first proposed, not the version amend- 1) so that, if several countries voted mal feed, leaving toxic residues in the ed by Germany. However, the mem- against the directive, it would fall. carcasses after slaughter.) Serendipi- bers of Parliament were aware of the Indeed, the directive probably would ty may well have played some part in German initiative and most of them not even reach a vote because, the vote. However, it can also be said

The EU Ban on Battery Cages: History and Prospects 167 that this was a vote whose time had The Royal Society for the Prevention cages, it will disallow enriched cages come. of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) within its own borders, producing a On June 15, 1999, thirteen of the (undated [a], 9) says that “as more situation similar to that in Switzer- fifteen countries voted for the direc- producers become familiar with the land. This is despite Germany’s part tive (Compassion in World Farming design and management of alterna- in promoting the directive, including 1999). Only Austria voted against, tive systems, enriched cages offer few its provision for enriched cages. The and it did so because it did not believe benefits.” The RSPCA’s Freedom Netherlands and the United Kingdom the directive went far enough. Spain Foods standards do not allow cages. are considering similar moves abstained. The group does not mention the (Department for Environment, Food The key provisions of the directive problems of beak trimming, cannibal- and Rural Affairs 2002). are shown in Table 8. It will phase out ism, and occupational safety in alter- What was the egg industry’s barren battery cages by 2012, with an native systems. In this context, the response to passage of the directive? interim measure requiring 550 EU Scientific Veterinary Committee It was horrified. In the United King- square centimeters per hen by 2003. report may be recalled; it described dom, egg producers met on June 15, All new cages starting in 2003 and all both battery cages and non-cage sys- the very day of the decision, and “as cages starting in 2012 must provide tems as having severe welfare disad- details of the directive were revealed, 750 square centimeters per hen, as vantages but said that modified they were received with a stunned well as a nest box, a perch, and a lit- enriched cages had good potential for silence” (Cruickshank 1999). A Sep- ter area for scratching and pecking. both welfare and production (Scien- tember meeting of the International Requirements for non-cage alterna- tific Veterinary Committee 1996). Egg Commission, representing thirty- tives also change. Litter is not cur- Perhaps the most important point three countries, including all of the rently required in percheries (Table is that it seems extremely unlikely major producing countries except 5), but as of 2007 it will be needed in that a complete ban on cages would China, resolved to raise $1 million for all houses. (The situation will be have been possible in the EU in 1999 action to overturn the ban. The reso- reviewed before the end of 2004.) or the foreseeable future. Such a ban lution was supported by countries Not surprisingly, given the complex would have faced the arguments that worldwide, including the United process leading up to the directive caused Sweden to defer its own ban in States. One reason must have been and the various forms it went 1997—arguments that there would solidarity in face of what was per- through, there was confusion for be problems in both practical and ceived as a direct attack on the Euro- some time about exactly what had welfare terms. It also would have been pean members; in addition, “a domi- been decided. Headlines were along much more difficult for the countries no effect is feared by the United the lines of “Battery Cages Banned.” of southern Europe to accept a States, Canada, and Australia” (Far- As many people, even within industry change that would have had even rant 1999). and welfare groups, were unaware of more economic impact; some of the The industry may have been the existence of enriched cages or northern countries might also have encouraged in the hope that it could gave them little thought, they rejected such a change. Finally, the overturn the ban by the complex cir- believed that cages had been prohib- Council of Ministers may believe that cumstances leading up to the vote. ited altogether. The situation was the EU can protect an industry shoul- Ben Gill, president of the U.K. clarified to some extent by articles dering 10 percent cost increases National Farmer’s Union, wrote to the such as that by Elson (1999), entitled against competition from the rest of U.K. Minister of Agriculture describ- “Laying Cages to be Enriched, Not the world, but it probably would have ing the changes as “ill thought Banned,” but it still is not clear what balked at a higher cost increase. through” (Cruickshank 1999). How- actually will happen on most com- There is, therefore, a strong case ever, the complexities should not be mercial farms, as shall be seen below. that it was the availability of enriched taken as indicating that Europe was cages as a viable system that enabled half-hearted on this measure. Such a the ban on battery cages to be negative conclusion is denied by the Commentary accepted. Some commentators sug- strength of the vote in Parliament and Welfare groups enthusiastically wel- gest that enriched cages will not be by the fact that fourteen of fifteen comed the directive. Compassion In economically competitive with non- ministers voted for or wanted the ban. World Farming (1999), for example, cage alternatives (Compassion in At least since publication of Animal called it a “huge victory for animal World Farming 1999) and thus will Machines in 1964, “Ban the Battery welfare.” However, the groups are never be common commercially out- Cage” has been one of the most com- unenthusiastic about enriched cages. side Sweden. Even if that is true, mon protest calls. In the twentieth Peter Stevenson (2001a) of Compas- however, the cages have moved the century, it probably was surpassed as sion In World Farming calls on the issue forward. Germany decided in a popular cause by very few others, industry not to install these, but 2001 that, in the context of a such as “Votes for Women” and “Ban instead to move to non-cage systems. Europe-wide phasing out of battery the Bomb.” Ruth Harrison lived to see

168 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Table 8 Extracts from the EU 1999 Directive Laying Down Minimum Standards for the Protection of Laying Hens

Un-enriched (conventional) Cages Review From 1st January 2003 no new conventional cages may be By 1st January 2005 “the Commission shall submit to the brought into service and existing cages will have to provide Council a report, drawn up on the basis of an opinion from 550 cm2 per bird and a claw shortener the Scientific Veterinary Committee, on the various systems From 1st January 2012 conventional cages are prohibited of rearing laying hens, and in particular on those covered by this Directive, taking account both of pathological, Enriched Cages zootechnical, physiological, and ethological aspects of From 1st January 2002 enriched cages must provide: the various systems and of their health and environmental • 750 cm2 per bird, of which at least 600 cm2 impact. is at least 45 cm high “That report shall also be drawn up on the basis of a study • A minimum total cage area of 2,000 cm2 of the socio-economic implications of the various systems • A nest and their effects on the Community's economic partners. • Litter such that pecking and scratching are possible “In addition, it shall be accompanied by appropriate • 15 cm perch per hen proposals taking into account the conclusions of • 12 cm of food trough per hen the report and the outcome of the World Trade Organisation negotiations.” • A claw shortener

Alternative Systems From 1st January 2002 new non-cage systems must have: • A maximum of 9 hens per m2 of usable area • Litter occupying at least one third of the floor • 15 cm perch per hen From 1st January 2007 all non-cage systems must comply with these conditions

Source: Commission of the European Communities 1999c the directive passed (and, character- egg sales for the next few years. longer if the directive’s deadline is istically, immediately started consid- Various manufacturers are offering not strictly enforced. ering how it could be improved), but models of enriched cages, and The review will consider perfor- died in 2000. If full implementation research on design details is in mance of different systems (including of the directive is achieved by 2012, progress. The U.K. Ministry of Agri- enriched cages in Sweden) and their as planned, it will be forty-eight years culture, for example, commissioned “socio-economic implications,” after Animal Machines fired the indig- research on cage height, group size, together with “the outcome of the nation of the European public. Taking and space allowances with the inten- World Trade Organization negotia- half a century to achieve just one of tion of making the results available to tions” (Table 8). So the latter must be the changes called for in that book, the Scientific Veterinary Committee’s considered next. and arguably only partially at that, is review in 2003 or 2004. However, few hardly rushing things. enriched cages will be installed out- side Sweden before the Commission World Trade report is out. Immediate No doubt producers continued to Organization install conventional cages right up to Developments December 2002. Some used models Rules What happens next obviously will be that are convertible to enriched Negotiations are under way to extend affected by the timing and content of cages; for example, a model of this the rules for free trade established by the EU Scientific Veterinary Commit- kind is sold by Big Dutchman, the the World Trade Organization (WTO) tee’s review and the subsequent Com- largest European cage manufacturer. to agricultural products, preventing mission report (Table 8). Others used standard models, taking individual countries and trade zones Installation of non-cage systems the risk that they will be usable only such as the EU from limiting imports, probably will increase slowly in the until 2011 (J. Campbell, Glenrath subsidizing exports, or applying any short term. Those who are ahead of Eggs, personal communication, other process that favors domestic the game will get premiums for their March 15, 2001), or perhaps a while versus foreign producers. The EU pro-

The EU Ban on Battery Cages: History and Prospects 169 poses that animal welfare be taken welfare. However, under no possible countries with lower standards” (Sci- into account in trade, by allowing construction could it be argued that entific Veterinary Committee 1996, labelling; agreements between trad- the ban on use of batteries within 111). ing partners that safeguard welfare; Europe—with all its fantastical histo- If the EU succeeds in restricting or payment of subsidies to producers ry—is itself motivated by protection- import of battery eggs, or in other who maintain high welfare (European ism. One additional piece of evidence measures such as being allowed to Communities 2000). This will meet against such an interpretation is that label eggs from different systems or resistance from other countries, any tightening of legislation on hous- subsidize farmers required to including the United States. However, ing of laying hens always has been renounce batteries, the Commission it is possible that welfare can be taken resisted by the industry (cf Jorêt surely will recommend few, if any, into account even under existing 1998). Examples in the United King- changes to the directive. In that case, WTO rules. Article XX of the WTO’s dom and Sweden have been men- changes to existing battery cage sys- General Agreement on Tariffs and tioned above, and the horror provoked tems will accelerate in 2010 or so. Trade says (Stevenson 2001b, 13): in egg producers by the 1999 directive Indications are that most producers Nothing in this agreement shall has been described. Clearly, egg pro- will choose to use enriched cages be construed to prevent the adop- ducers did not regard the legislation rather than other alternatives, partic- tion or enforcement by any con- as a potential defense against imports ularly in the colder northern coun- tracting party of measures: from the rest of the world. Neverthe- tries. a) necessary to protect public less, not unexpectedly they did ask for However, success for the EU in the morals, protection; indeed, they believe that WTO negotiations is not assured. b) necessary to protect human, the Commission and the agriculture animal or plant health. ministers have promised it (Farrant The possibility of using this article 1999). In fact, most reports, from var- Prospects Under to justify measures within the EU to ied sources, recommending tighter protect animal welfare has not yet legislation on housing of laying hens Free Trade been fully explored. This possibility is in Europe have recommended such What will the socio-economic impli- strengthened by the fact that the protection (House of Commons 1981; cations be if such protection cannot United States recently used similar Scientific Veterinary Committee be achieved? Could the directive still arguments to justify a ban on trade of 1996; Farm Animal Welfare Council be implemented? Yes, it could. The dog and cat fur (United States Con- 1997; Royal Society for the Prevention chance of a great reduction in Euro- gress 2000). The act’s preamble of Cruelty to Animals undated [b]). pean egg production is small. The states (Stevenson 2001b) that: Still this cannot be described as pro- suggestion of the Scientific Veteri- The trade of dog and cat fur prod- tectionism. Certainly protection of nary Committee (1996), just quoted, ucts is ethically and aesthetically European egg producers is envisaged, probably is an overstatement. So is abhorrent to U.S. citizens; but on the two grounds of fairness and the following statement by Jorêt [The] ban is also consistent with animal protection. It would be unfair (1998) in responding for the U.K. egg provisions of international agree- to require producers to adopt more industry to proposals for the direc- ments to which the United States costly, humane systems and then suf- tive: “There is no point in legislating is a party that expressly allow for fer competition from cheaper, inhu- our own industry out of existence measures designed to protect the mane imports. And this would not pro- only to turn round and import that health and welfare of animals: tect animals if sales of eggs from product from those very same sys- [U.S. consumers have a right to] cages outside Europe displace egg tems, but operated to much lower ensure that they are not unwit- production from more humane sys- standards than were in use at home.” ting participants in this gruesome tems in Europe; the common phrase The phrase, “legislating our own trade. is that “we would be exporting our industry out of existence,” is an exag- Thus the United States cannot con- welfare problems.” Clearly, if the main geration. For years, as mentioned, sistently argue against attempts by effect of the directive is a great reduc- Denmark has had more stringent leg- the EU to prevent import of battery tion in European egg production and islation on cages than the rest of eggs, on the grounds that banning of substitution by battery egg produc- Europe. Its egg industry survives, batteries in Europe is a matter of pub- tion elsewhere in the world, it will albeit perhaps smaller than it might lic morality and protection of animal have failed in its intentions. The Sci- otherwise have been. If this applies to health. entific Veterinary Committee suggest- trade within Europe, it applies even Perhaps some countries will suggest ed that “high standards of laying hen more to the threat of longer-distance that such attempts by the EU to pre- welfare can only be implemented and imports to European countries from vent import of battery eggs are pro- sustained if the EU market is protect- outside Europe, at least with regard tectionist rather than concerned with ed against imports of eggs from third to whole eggs (which the industry

170 The State of the Animals II: 2003 calls “shell eggs”). The industry in battery cages. The egg industry lems that remain to be solved, such as acknowledges this. Mary Ann also believes that the European bat- parasite infestation and poor working Sörensen of the Federation of tery ban may in due course lead to a conditions for operatives. Swedish Egg Farmers considers that “domino effect” in the United States, the importance of freshness in shell Canada, and Australia (Farrant 1999). eggs should enable countries to If Europe cannot protect its egg Implications retain this market for local produc- producers under WTO rules, there tion (Farrant 1999). Similarly, Mike will be considerable discussion and for the United Ring, director general of the Interna- lobbying. One additional complicat- tional Egg Commission, says that ing factor is the potential accession States “the EU shell egg market will be of up to twelve new countries as EU What are the lessons from such a largely protected by the freshness members; these countries are likely labyrinthine history for a single coun- needs of that market” (Farrant 1999). to argue that they need more time for try such as the United States? There is a possibility, though, that implementation than those with a 1. Don’t expect too much too soon. imports of processed eggs, which head start. Nevertheless, it is almost The First (and so far only) North make up 25 percent of European egg certain that there will be major American Symposium on Poultry Wel- production, would rise. In fact, as changes to the housing of many or fare was held in 1995 (in Edmonton, these would be from battery cages, most laying hens in Europe in 2010 Canada)—compared with the Euro- the result would be to continue a and 2011. pean Symposia that effectively started trend that already is present. Refer- in 1977—and related changes of atti- ences to people’s willingness to buy tude still have not gathered pace. non-cage eggs apply mainly to fresh Long-term 2. Change is possible. One of the eggs; few people consider where the most important agents for that eggs come from in processed food. If Prospects change is public opinion. Politicians other countries increase exports of Obviously, longer-term prospects in every European country and relat- processed eggs to Europe, it is likely depend on many factors, including ed institution comment that they that European egg production would the WTO negotiations, but one point receive more letters on animal wel- shrink under the proposed changes, needs to be made. It has been empha- fare than on any other subject, and but it would not disappear. sized that non-cage systems have two that this influences and strengthens Precisely how the European Com- major, alternative welfare problems: them in countering industrial mus- mission, Parliament, and Council cannibalism, and the beak trimming cle. American politicians make simi- would act in response to such a likeli- required to prevent it. If strains of lar comments. Furthermore, it seems hood is hard to predict, but it is diffi- birds can be developed that do not that expectations of American citi- cult to believe that they would back- show cannibalism, then eventually zens are being affected by develop- track completely and rescind the ban cages probably will be phased out ments in Europe. Differences between on battery cages. Given the manifold altogether. Such genetic selection is the American political system and circumstances leading to the ban, possible (Muir 1996). However, it is that in Europe probably will mean, such a move would be seen as a not in the economic interests of the however, that even more public pres- betrayal and would lead to a huge out- poultry breeders, for two reasons: sure will be needed to effect similar cry. It seems more likely that, if any- adding any such criterion would change in the United States. thing, compromise proposals would reduce breeders’ ability to breed for 3. The United States is a single be made, lengthening the phase-out other, more profitable characteris- country, but as a union of semi- period for batteries, for example, or tics, and success would favor the autonomous states it has much in reducing the space requirements in move from cages to other systems, common with the EU. Individual other systems. One additional argu- which the industry sees as unfavor- European countries were successful ment for Europe “putting its own able. Thus one of the most important acting alone, and these actions finally house in order” in this matter, requirements for long-term improve- led to communal action. Similarly, despite world-wide pressures, is that ment of laying hen welfare is legisla- single American states could take the there is reason to believe that the rest tion requiring such selection against lead, and persuade others to follow, of the world will eventually follow. cannibalism. If that legislation is on hen housing as on hog factories. Canada, Australia, and New passed, enriched cages will perhaps 4. In fact, most of the above history Zealand—and McDonalds and other have been a medium-term develop- shows that piecemeal change is chain restaurants in the United ment, although certainly one that worthwhile in itself, and finally leads States—already have moved toward facilitated further change. However, to wholesale change. This obviously matching European space allowances non-cage systems do have other prob- applies to labelling. Much of the dis-

The EU Ban on Battery Cages: History and Prospects 171 cussion about labelling refers to giv- 86/113/EEC: Welfare of battery ing consumers a choice. In regard to Literature Cited hens. Official Journal of the Euro- welfare, choice is not actually what is Aguirre y Mendes, A. 1999. Portu- pean Communities (L 95) 29: desired; it is desirable to improve the gal—Press campaign and political 45–49. welfare of all hens, not just a small, lobbying. Agscene 135: 9. ———. 1992. European Communi- labelled proportion of them. Yet the Abrahamsson, P., R. Tauson, and M.C. ties draft recommendations No. fact that some people buy Free Range Appleby. 1995. Performance of four VI/2327/92. Brussels: CEC. eggs—and Freedom Foods demon- hybrids of laying hens in modified ———. 1997 Protocol on the welfare strates that a significant proportion and conventional cages. Acta Agri- and protection of animals. Brussels: will “put their money where their culturae Scandinavica 45: 286– CEC. mouth is”—has led the way for more 296. ———. 1998. Proposal for a Council widespread change. Labelling Appleby, M.C. 1983. Nest-site selec- Directive laying down minimum schemes in the United States—such tion by domestic hens. CEC Farm standards for the protection of lay- as the Farm Free label of the Ameri- Animal Welfare Programme Evalua- ing hens kept in various systems of can Humane Association—could tion Report, 1979–1983: 34–38. rearing. Brussels: CEC. receive much more emphasis, to use- ———. 1993. Should cages for laying ———. 1999a. Proposal for a Council ful effect. hens be banned or modified? Ani- Directive laying down minimum 5. Similarly, the initiative by mal Welfare 2: 67–80. standards for the protection of lay- McDonalds in 2000 to require its egg ———. 1998. The Edinburgh Modi- ing hens [Amendment from the Ger- suppliers to increase their cage size fied Cage: Effects of group size and man Presidency]. Brussels: CEC. parallels the actions by some Euro- space allowance on brown laying ———. 1999b. Press release. pean supermarkets and has influ- hens. Journal of Applied Poultry http://ue.eu.int/newsroom/main.cf enced other commercial companies Research 7: 152–161. m?LANG=1. to make similar moves. It is possible ———. 2003. The European Union ———. 1999c. Council Directive that nongovernmental action to influ- ban on conventional laying cages: 1999/74/EC laying down mini- ence market structure is a more History and prospects. Journal mum standards for the protection promising route than regulation in of Applied Animal Welfare Science 6 of laying hens. Official Journal of the United States (Thompson 2001). (2): 103–121. the European Communities August 6. The EU ban on battery cages is Appleby, M.C., G.S. Hogarth, J.A. 3, L 203: 53–57. the cumulative result (and even now Anderson, B.O. Hughes, and C.T. Compassion in World Farming only a partial result) of activity on Whittemore. 1988. Performance of (CIWF). 1999. Europe agrees ban many different fronts. Some of these a deep litter system for egg produc- on battery cages: Huge victory for have not even been discussed in this tion. British Poultry Science 29: animal welfare. Agscene 135: 10. account, such as the pressure on the 735–751. Council of Europe. 1976. Convention EU to agree—which it finally did Appleby, M.C., B.O. Hughes, and H.A. on the Protection of Animals Kept (Commission of the European Com- Elson. 1992. Poultry production for Farming Purposes. http://con- munities 1997)—that animals are systems: Behaviour, management ventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties. “sentient beings,” not just products. and welfare. Wallingford, England: Council of the European Union. Any campaign in the United States CAB International. 2003. Qualified majority. http: must be similarly multifaceted, bring- Appleby, M.C., A.W. Walker, C.J. Nicol, //ue.eu.int/en/Info. ing pressure to bear on all relevant A.C. Lindberg, R. Freire, B.O. Cruickshank, G. 1999. Egg producers groups, including producers, retail- Hughes, and H.A. Elson. 2002. call for unity to fight cage ban. ers, consumers, legislators, and the Development of furnished cages for Poultry World (August): 1–3. media. laying hens. British Poultry Science Dawkins, M.S., and S. Hardie. 1989. 43. Space needs of laying hens. British Note Brambell, R. 1965. Command Paper Poultry Science 30: 413–416. Another version of this article is cited as Appleby 2836. London: Her Majesty's Sta- Department for Environment, Food 2003. tionery Office. and Rural Affairs. 2002. Consulta- Commission of the European Com- tion on a possible ban on the use of munities (CEC). 1985. Amend- enriched cages for laying hens in ment 1943/85 to Regulation England. http://www.defra.gov.uk/ 95/69, also amended by 927/69 corporate/consult/enrichedcages/ and 2502171. Official Journal of the letter.htm. European Communities (July 13). de Wit, W. 1992. The welfare of laying ———. 1986. Council Directive hens kept under various housing

172 The State of the Animals II: 2003 systems: Report to the EC. Pro- Switzerland: World’s Poultry Sci- responses. Poultry Science 75: ceedings, World’s Poultry Congress, ence Association. 447–458. Amsterdam: 320–323. Gibson, S.W., P. Dun, and B.O. Hugh- Nørgaard-Nielsen, G. 1986. Behav- Ehlhardt, D.A., and C.L.M. Koolstra. es. 1988. The performance and iour, health and production of egg- 1984. Multi-tier system for housing behaviour of laying fowls in a cov- laying hens in the Hans Kier system laying hens. Pluimveehouderij ered strawyard system. Research compared to hens on litter and in (December 21): 44–47. and Development in Agriculture 5: battery cages. Rapport til Hans Kier Elson, H.A. 1981. Modified cages for 153–163. Fond, Forseningen tel Dyrenes layers. In Alternatives to intensive Harrison, R. 1964. Animal machines. Beskyttelsei Danmark, 1–198. husbandry systems, 47–50. Potters London: Stuart. Royal Society for Prevention of Cruel- Bar, England: Universities Federa- House of Commons. 1981. First ty to Animals (RSPCA). Undated tion for Animal Welfare. report from the Agriculture Commit- (a). Home to roost: The future for ———. 1985. The economics of poul- tee, Session 1980–81: Animal wel- laying hens. Horsham, England: try welfare. In Proceedings, Second fare in poultry, pig and veal calf pro- RSPCA. European Symposium on Poultry duction. London: Her Majesty's ———. Undated (b). Conflict or con- Welfare, ed. R.M. Wegner, 244–253. Stationery Office. cord? Animal welfare and the World Celle, Germany: World's Poultry Jorêt, A.D. 1998. Walking the animal Trade Organization. Horsham, Eng- Science Association. welfare tight-rope—An egg indus- land: RSPCA. ———. 1999. Laying cages to be try view. In Farm animal welfare: Sansolini, A. 1999a. Europe in brief. enriched, not banned. Poultry Who writes the rules? Programme & Agscene 134: 13. World (August): 16. summaries, ed. British Society for ———. 1999b. Italian turning point. European Communities. 2000. Euro- Animal Science, 2. Edinburgh: Agscene 135: 7. pean Communities proposal: Ani- British Society for Animal Science. Scientific Veterinary Committee (Ani- mal welfare and trade in agricul- Keeling, L.J., B.O. Hughes, and P. mal Welfare Section). 1996. Report ture. WTO Committee on Dun. 1988. Performance of free on the welfare of laying hens. Com- Agriculture, Special Session, Paper range laying hens in a Polythene mission of the European Communi- G/AG/NG/W/19: www.wto.org, house and their behaviour on ties Directorate-General for Agri- Trade Topics, Agriculture, Negotia- range. Farm Buildings Progress 94: culture VI/B/II.2. tions. 21–28. Sörensen, M.A. 1994. Economical Farm Animal Welfare Council Ludvigsen, J.B., J. Empel, F. Kovacs, and political considerations of (FAWC). 1986. An assessment of M. Manfredini, J. Unshelm, and M. keeping laying hens in Europe and egg production systems. Tolworth, Viso. 1982. Animal health and wel- in the EU: The Swedish case. In England: FAWC. fare. Livestock production science Future egg production in Sweden: ———. 1991. Report on the welfare of 9: 65–87. Prospects for alternatives to con- laying hens in colony systems. Tol- Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and ventional cage keeping of laying worth, England: FAWC. Food (MAFF). 1969. Codes of rec- hens in a larger scale in Sweden, ed. ———. 1997. Report on the welfare of ommendations for the welfare of M.A. Sörensen, 85–96. Kunsängen, laying hens. Tolworth, England: livestock: Domestic fowls. London: Sweden: Kronägg. FAWC. MAFF Publications Office. Stevenson, P. 2001a. An ethical Farrant, J. 1999. IEC’s world action ———. 1987. Codes of recommenda- approach to farm animal hus- to keep cages. Poultry World tions for the welfare of livestock: bandry. In Proceedings, Ethics and (November): 1–4. Domestic fowls. London: MAFF Animal Welfare 2001: Relationships Fredell, R. 1994. Welcoming remarks. Publications Office. between Humans and Animals. In Future egg production in Sweden: Matter, F., and H. Oester. 1989. Conference, Stockholm, May. Prospects for alternatives to con- Hygiene and welfare implications of (Comment cited is not in the print- ventional cage keeping of laying alternative husbandry systems for ed abstract.) hens in a larger scale in Sweden, ed. laying hens. In Proceedings, Third ———. 2001b. The WTO rules: Their M.A. Sörensen, 1. Kunsängen, Swe- European Symposium on Poultry adverse impact on animal welfare. den: Kronägg. Welfare, ed. J.M. Faure, and A.D. Petersfield, England: Compassion Fröhlich, E.K.F., and H. Oester. 2001. Mills, 201–212. Tours, France: in World Farming Trust. From battery cages to aviaries: 20 World's Poultry Science Associa- Tauson, R. 1985. Mortality in laying years of Swiss experience. In Pro- tion. hens caused by differences in cage ceedings, 6th European Symposium Muir, W.M. 1996. Group selection for design. Acta Agriculturae Scandi- on Poultry Welfare, ed. H. Oester adaptation to multi-hen cages: navica 35: 165–174. and C. Wyss, 51–59, Zollikofen, Selection program and direct ———. 1986. Avoiding excessive

The EU Ban on Battery Cages: History and Prospects 173 growth of claws in caged laying hens. Acta Agriculturae Scandinav- ica 36: 95–106. ———. 1988. Effects of redesign. In Cages for the future, Cambridge Poultry Conference, 42–69. Not- tingham, England: Agricultural Development and Advisory Service. ———. 2000. Furnished cages and aviaries: Production and health. Proceedings, 21st World Poultry Congress, Montreal: 8–17. Tauson, R., and K.E. Holm. 2001. First furnished small group cages for laying hens in evaluation pro- gram on commercial farms in Swe- den. In Proceedings, 6th European Symposium on Poultry Welfare, ed. H. Oester, and C. Wyss. 26–32. Zol- likofen, Switzerland: World’s Poul- try Science Association. Thompson, P.B. 2001. Book review: What should we do about animal welfare? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 73: 81–82. U.S. Congress. 2000. Dog and Cat Protection Act. U.S. Congress Pro- ceedings PL 106/476 Chapter 3: sections 1441–1443. Wegner, R.M. 1990. Experience with the get-away cage system. World’s Poultry Science Journal 46: 41–47.

174 The State of the Animals II: 2003 The State of Meat Production in Developing 12CHAPTER Countries: 2002

Neil Trent, Peter Ormel, Jose Luis Garcia de Siles, Gunter Heinz, and Morgane James

Introduction illions of animals are killed for More humane transport, handling, Since 1994 HSI has worked with the food annually in developing and slaughter practices and the intro- FAO to introduce techniques and Bcountries, more than half of duction of modern systems and equipment for humane transport, han- them without the benefit of stunning equipment in the slaughter process dling, and slaughter of food animals in (a procedure that induces an uncon- not only decrease animal suffering developing areas. The most important scious state through administration but also provide economic benefits of these techniques is the use of the of a severe blow to the skull or the for the human population, as the captive bolt stunner (see sidebar on application of an electrical charge). amount of meat and hide wasted is page 181). The slaughter process begins most reduced. At the same time, worker HSI has underwritten the cost of often with food animals crowded into and meat safety is greatly increased. FAO slaughter-training workshops, inadequate vehicles with little protec- Two organizations—one dedicated providing equipment, and/or partici- tion from the elements and trans- to the elimination of animal suffering pating in presentations in Asia and ported long distances without water and the other to encouraging sustain- the Caribbean. HSI also has produced over harsh roads. In a typical develop- able agriculture and rural develop- a laminated poster for FAO use in its ing country, few slaughter facilities ment—have joined forces to address training workshops, cosponsored the have any government oversight of animal welfare issues in the global publication of a booklet (Guidelines sanitation or veterinary care. Animals livestock industry. The mission of The for Humane Handling, Transport, and may be stunned by repeated hammer Humane Society of the United States Slaughter of Livestock), and begun blows to the head. They may be (HSUS) and its international arm, development of a training video for stabbed with sharp knives until they Humane Society International (HSI), distribution worldwide. collapse. While the animals are still is to create a humane and sustainable As part of this collaboration with conscious, their throats are cut, and world for all animals, including peo- the FAO, HSI has solicited overviews they die from excessive blood loss ple, through education, advocacy, and on the various aspects of animal wel- after minutes of struggling. the promotion of respect and com- fare and the livestock industry in These brutal methods cause passion. The Food and Agriculture Latin America (contributed by FAO immense animal suffering. They also Organization (FAO) of the United representatives Jose Luis Garcia de have significant economic impact: Nations has as a specific priority to Siles and Peter W. Ormel); the Asia- bruising of the meat renders it unfit increase food production and food Pacific region (contributed by FAO for human consumption; damage to security while conserving and manag- consultant Gunter Heinz); and South the hides causes loss of product; and ing natural resources. The aim is to Africa (through a case study of the worker injuries result in decreased meet the needs of both present and status of livestock contributed by productivity. At the same time, unsan- future generations by promoting de- Morgane James of the National Coun- itary methods spread such diseases as velopment that does not degrade the cil of SPCAs). salmonellosis, cholera, E.coli poison- environment and is technically appro- ing, and Listeria and cause contami- priate, economically viable, and so- nation of the meat, a serious public cially acceptable. health concern.

175 Table 1 World Livestock Population, 1961–2001 (in million heads)

Percent Percent Overall Annual Species 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 Growth Growth

Cattle and Buffaloes 954 1,106 1,236 1,331 1,516 59 1.5

Pigs 348 551 707 791 923 166 4.1

Poultry 4,082 5,729 8,158 12,319 18,734 359 9.0

Sheep and Goats 1,203 1,301 1,435 1,635 1,743 45 1.1

mine quality, and poor sanitation slaughtered (see Table 2). Overview/ leads to considerable loss of product The increase in the number of ani- as well as to the risk of food-borne dis- mals slaughtered per year led to a Latin America eases (Garcia de Siles et al. 1997). 280 percent increase in the produc- The safety of meat calls for control tion of meat at the world level over Introduction from the farm until the time the meat the last forty years. Food security has been defined as is consumed. It is recognized that access by all people at all times to ad- stock handling, slaughtering condi- Regional Comparison equate quantities of safe food re- tions, carcass dressing, and meat han- The number of animals slaughtered quired for a healthy and active life. dling as well as the hygienic and envi- worldwide per region3 is presented in Although food availability has in- ronmental surroundings, contribute Table 3. For each species involved, creased noticeably during the last to the nutritional properties and Asia leads the world in terms of num- thirty years in developing countries, commercial value of the finished ber of animals slaughtered per year. there currently are more than 800 products. million people without adequate Livestock Evolution access to food, and more than 24,000 Evolution of people die each day because of lack of in Latin America Meat Production adequate food supply. and the Caribbean In developing countries, where As shown in Table 1, the world live- 1 In Latin America and the Caribbean, diets are composed of a few staple stock population has grown steadily 2 the cattle and buffalo population foods, meat and meat products are for all major species involved over more than doubled from 1961 to especially important in preventing the last forty years. 2001 (see Table 4). malnutrition and contributing to In terms of slaughter, the global During this same period, the total food security. view is very similar, with moderate meat production in Latin America In developing countries some tradi- increases in the number of ruminants and the Caribbean increased from tional methods of handling, process- slaughtered and larger increases in 7.9 million metric tons to more than ing, and marketing of meat under- the total numbers of pigs and poultry

Table 2 Animals Slaughtered Worldwide, 1961–2001 (in million heads)

Percent Percent Overall Annual Species 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 Growth Growth

Beef and Buffaloes 155 181 212 236 299 93 2.3

Pigs 313 533 680 861 1,172 274 6.9

Poultry 6,367 11,122 18,528 27,367 45,926 621 15.5

Sheep and Goats 364 432 507 646 788 117 2.9

176 The State of the Animals II: 2003 growth in developing countries, Table 3 which have led to a massive increase in the demand for products of animal Animals Slaughtered Worldwide origin, such as meat, milk, and eggs. Per Region: 2001 (in million heads) However, unlike the so-called green (or environmentally-conscious) revo- Region Cattle and Pigs Poultry Sheep and lution, which was supply driven, the Buffaloes Goats livestock revolution is demand driven. The increased demand for meat Africa 29 12 2,539 151 and meat products has come from a Asia 98 678 17,396 439 growing urban population with changing diets and sufficient income Europe 53 294 7,440 98 to increase animal products in their Latin America 65 62 8,581 31 diets. and the Caribbean A major change of this revolution is a shift in the balance of meat con- North America 41 119 9,525 4 sumption from developed countries Oceania 12 8 510 66 to developing countries. The devel- oped countries showed an annual World 298 1,173 45,991 789 growth in meat consumption of only 1.0 percent from 1982 to 1994. At 31.7 million metric tons. This in- tered in the Merco Sur and the the same time, the developing coun- crease was caused mainly by the in- Andean countries. tries increased their meat consump- crease in the production of poultry tion by 5.4 percent annually. In 2020 meat, and to a much lesser extent, by Livestock Revolution people in developing countries are the increase in beef and pork produc- Over the past decade, the Interna- expected to consume a total of 188 tion (see Figure 1). tional Food Policy Research Institute, million metric tons of meat, whereas the FAO, and the International Live- people in developed countries are Subregional stock Research Institute have com- expected to consume 115 million Comparison in bined their efforts to produce a glob- metric tons. al view of the developments in the These expected consumption Latin America and livestock sector to 2020 against the increases will lead to equivalent the Caribbean background of world globalization. increases in production, with produc- tion of livestock products growing The number of animals slaughtered in A revolution is taking place in live- most rapidly in areas where consump- the Latin American/Caribbean4 sub- stock production that could have vast tion grows (Table 6). region is presented in Table 5. Brazil implications for people and the envi- Total meat production for develop- leads the region in terms of number ronment in both developed and devel- ing countries in 2020 is expected to of animals slaughtered for cattle and oping countries. This livestock revolu- reach 183 million metric tons; for buffaloes, pigs, and poultry, whereas tion is being caused by population developed countries the projected the most sheep and goats are slaugh- growth, urbanization, and income

Table 4 Livestock Population in Latin America and the Caribbean, 1961–2001 (in million heads)

Percent Percent Overall Annual Species 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 Growth Growth

Cattle and Buffaloes 176 224 294 330 360 105 2.6

Pigs 50 65 74 76 81 61 1.5

Poultry 359 577 1,071 1,461 2,513 601 15.0

Sheep and Goats 155 148 143 146 117 (25) (0.6)

The State of Meat Production in Developing Countries: 2002 177 Several basic aspects of the live- Figure 1 stock revolution offer threats as well Latin America and the Caribbean as opportunities to the sustainable development of countries and regions Meat Production: 1961–2001 (Delgado et al. 1999): 15,000 (1) the revolution implies a sub- stantial increase in livestock (in 1,000s) 12,000 production in the near future; (2) the majority of this increase 9,000 will be in developing coun- Tons

tries; 6,000 (3) the function of livestock will 3,000 change from non-tradable,

Metric multipurpose to more mar- 0 ket-oriented functions; 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 (4) people will continue to substi- tute grains for meat and milk Years in their diets; Beef and Buffaloes Pigs Poultry Sheep and Goats (5) the rapid increase in mono- gastric production systems will lead to a rapid increase in total production in the same year is environmental and public health the use of cereal feeds; 121 million metric tons. However, the effects of these systems. This might (6) the stress on grazing systems rapid growth in products of animal explain a general absence of policies and expansion of monogastric origin has not been, nor is it expected and regulations in many developing production systems close to to be, evenly distributed across or countries with regard to monogastric urban centers will increase; within countries. production systems. Given the drastic (7) rapidly changing technologies The livestock revolution will pro- increase these systems will suffer in will be incorporated into in- duce a drastic increase in the capaci- the near future and their general tensive production systems. ty of existing production and distribu- proximity to urban centers, this regu- The livestock revolution is a de- tion systems and have possible effects latory vacuum easily could lead to mand-driven process that cannot be in such key areas as environmental substantial environmental problems stopped. The final overall effects (pos- pollution, public health, food safety, and important increased dangers for itive and negative) for the rural poor, and animal welfare. The changes that public health. the environment, public health, and are inherent to the livestock revolu- tion can be seen both as threats and as opportunities for the sustainable development of developed and devel- Table 5 oping countries. Number of Animals Slaughtered in Latin When not managed well, these changes could give rise to various America and the Caribbean, 2001 (in million heads) problematic situations, with negative effects for animal welfare, public health, and the environment. Animal Region Cattle and Pigs Poultry Sheep and welfare is a growing ethical concern, Buffaloes Goats especially in developed countries. Brazil 30 25 4,641 7 There, public awareness of environ- mental contamination of natural Mexico 7 14 1,107 5 resources (air, water, and land) by Andean Countries 8 9 1,204 8 intensive livestock production sys- tems is high. Many countries have Caribbean 0 1 157 0 established rules and regulations to Central America 3 5 604 1 mitigate and compensate for the effect these production systems have Merco Sur 17 9 868 10 on the environment. However, devel- Latin America and oping countries generally have much the Caribbean 65 63 8,581 31 less experience with the negative

178 The State of the Animals II: 2003 animal welfare depend on the willing- before slaughter, negatively affecting dirty, their legs covered with manure. ness of developing countries to regu- the quality of the meat. Often holding In these cases, the knife used for late the projected changes. pens are overcrowded, causing unnec- bleeding and de-hiding will have to essary stress to the animals. cut through manure and fecal Slaughtering The quality and condition of the residues, resulting in a great possibil- carcass and its storage depend great- ity for meat contamination. Meat Animals in ly on the care taken prior to slaugh- Slaughter methods vary widely and Developing Countries ter. Nervous, tired, and excited ani- include, among others, simple decap- Both meat quality and quantity are mals may have a raised body itation (in India), severing the medul- very much affected by pre-slaughter temperature, causing imperfect la (in some Latin American coun- conditions. In developing countries bleeding. Muscular fatigue reduces tries), and severing of the major meat animals are transported from glycogen content in the blood, which blood vessels with or without previous the farm to the slaughterhouse on after slaughter changes into lactic stunning. foot, by road, or by rail. Frequently acid, thus causing favorable condi- Animals going to slaughter should livestock must travel on foot for sever- tions for spoilage and the growth of be rendered unconscious in order to al days to reach the abattoir. Since the food-borne bacteria. Fatigue and ex- make death as stress-free and painless distances involved often are quite sub- citement also cause penetration of as possible. Nevertheless, in the Jew- stantial and the management of the bacteria from the intestinal tract to ish (kosher) and the Muslim (halal) animals during this process is poor, the meat. slaughter of livestock, stunning gen- transportation has deleterious effects Holding animals in vehicles or erally is not allowed, and the animal is that result in significant food losses. lairages without adequate litter bled directly, using a sharp knife to Livestock who have traveled long and/or drainage frequently results in cut the throat and sever the main distances on foot or in transport fre- fecal soiling of the skin. Cattle enter- blood vessels. This results in sudden quently are insufficiently rested ing slaughterhouses often are very and massive loss of blood, with loss of

Table 6 Projected Trends in Production of Various Livestock Products, 1993–2020

Projected Annual Growth of Total Production Total Production Per Capita Production Region/Product 1993–2020 1993 2020 1993 2020 (percent) (million metric tons) (million metric tons) Developed Countries

Beef 0.6 35 38 26 28

Pork 0.4 37 41 29 29

Poultry 1.2 27 36 21 26

Meat 0.7 100 121 78 87

Developing Countries

Beef 2.6 22 44 5 7

Pork 2.7 39 81 9 13

Poultry 3.0 21 47 5 7

Meat 2.7 88 183 21 29

Source: Delgado et al. 1999

Notes: Total and per capita production for 1993 are calculated from FAO (1998). Projections are updated figures, following the same format as that reported in Rosegrant et al. 1997. Meat includes beef, pork, mutton, goat, and poultry. Milk is cow and buffalo milk and milk products in liquid milk equivalents. Metric tons and kilograms are three-year moving averages centered on the two years shown.

The State of Meat Production in Developing Countries: 2002 179 consciousness and death. These types Rural Slaughter Urban Slaughter of slaughtering can be very unsatis- In developing countries, a high per- Many of the large-scale slaughter- factory since the animal may not be centage of animal slaughter takes houses in developing countries are in rendered unconscious and may suffer place in rural areas under very primi- poor condition. These usually are considerable discomfort and pain in tive conditions that do not meet even located in or around large cities and the slaughter process. Many Muslim minimal technical and hygienic may be categorized as follows: authorities permit some form of pre- requirements. Animals are slaugh- (a) Old and dilapidated slaughter- slaughter stunning such as electric tered in all kinds of places, such as houses established originally stunning of cattle, sheep, and poultry converted buildings or rooms, under on the outskirts of cities but (see sidebar on page 181) (Chambers the shade of trees, and on open, bare now found within the city lim- and Grandin 2001). ground. its due to rapid expansion of The use of humane methods in the Because of the level of bacterial the urban area. These slaugh- handling of livestock prevents need- contamination, meat produced under terhouses present a serious less suffering, results in safer working such conditions can deteriorate easily environmental hazard, in conditions, reduces meat losses, and and lead to food poisoning. Since addition to using unsanitary improves meat quality. However, cru- there is no meat inspection, meat slaughtering and meat han- elty to animals exists in developing from sick or parasite-infested animals dling practices; countries because of unsatisfactory may well be a vector in spreading dis- (b) Slaughterhouses built in the slaughtering procedures and infra- ease, affecting human beings as well last two decades, with an structures. Animals may be pulled, as animals. In addition, unsatisfacto- excessively high level of tech- beaten, or dragged on their way to ry slaughtering techniques can cause nical equipment. Problems slaughter and are allowed to see other unnecessary losses of meat and valu- with ongoing maintenance, animals being slaughtered. Animals able by-products. Such losses consti- inadequate staff training, and frequently are slaughtered without tute a major constraint in increasing high energy consumption being stunned. These practices need animal production. have resulted in much of the to be examined, since people in many The simplest structure used in specialized equipment being developing countries take cruelty to slaughtering and dressing livestock is shut down. Consequently, animals for granted and its preven- the gantry hoist. Animals who have many of these plants now tion is often an acquired concept been slaughtered on the ground are resemble the ones mentioned (Mann 1984). then hoisted via the gantry so that under category (a); and Dressing the carcass, which is the carcass can be dressed. One step (c) Slaughterhouses for export, defined by the Codex Alimentarius (a better than the gantry method is uti- which are technically and collection of international food stan- lization of a slaughter slab, an area of hygienically of a very high dards adopted by the Codex Alimen- concrete on which the animal is standard, since they have to tarius Commission, responsible for slaughtered and dressed. When rural comply with export require- execution of the FAO/WHO Food slaughtering takes place on relatively ments. The local population Standards Program) as the progres- small premises, very simple equip- usually does not benefit from sive separation of an animal into a ment, such as hooks or ropes for these quality meat-producing carcass (or sides of a carcass), other hanging animals and chopping blocks plants because their products edible parts, and inedible parts, is the for breaking down carcasses, may be are too expensive and are next step in the slaughter process. available. However, it remains a com- directed to external markets. The essential problem in many mon practice to dress carcasses on Even in larger towns, abattoirs that developing countries is the failure to the building floor. have been designed specifically to provide for hoists or hooks, hardware Under these conditions, the utiliza- supply meat to the expanding centers which permits the dressing of car- tion of animal by-products generally of urban population all too often are casses to take place off the floor. The is low or nonexistent, since the by- unsatisfactory from a hygienic view- contamination resulting from floor products are considered a nuisance. point. dressing of carcasses is considerable, Improved slaughter methods can Once the meat leaves the abattoir, especially where the removal of hides result in edible by-products which, its hygienic quality also is influenced and the cleaning of stomachs are car- properly utilized, may be a source of by careless and poor handling. Car- ried out in the same location as the animal protein for human consump- casses, quarters, unwashed offal, and dressing of the carcass itself. tion. They can assist in increasing liv- other items are placed together on ing standards in rural communities by the floor of the market or on dirty improving the nutritional level, and concrete or wooden tables in meat at the same time increasing employ- shops, increasing the microbiological ment possibilities. contamination of the meat.

180 The State of the Animals II: 2003 skull but does not enter the brain. They onds following stunning. The forelegs Humane cause unconsciousness due to concus- may be flexed initially and then gradual- Stunning: sive force alone and should only be ly straighten out, but this depends on used on cattle. the species and the severity of the Two Both types of stunner are powered blow. Tonic activity is followed by a peri- by blank cartridges. Cartridges vary in od of involuntary kicking, which gradual- Techniques strength and are classified according to ly subsides. the amount of propellant they contain, If an animal is stunned properly, he or as measured in grains. It is most impor- she collapses immediately. There is no Captive Bolt Stunning tant that the correct cartridges be used rhythmic breathing, no blinking, no The captive bolt stunner is used com- for each model of stunner. corneal reflex, and no vocalizing. The monly in stockyards, slaughterhouses, It also is essential that the correct car- animal has a fixed, glazed expression and packing plants where animals are tridge be used for the size and species and relaxed jaw, and the tongue is hang- slaughtered for food. The primary objec- of animal being stunned. In emergency ing out. tive of the captive bolt stunner is imme- situations, it is acceptable to use a car- tridge designed for a larger species, but diately to induce an unconscious state Bleeding Out by administering a severe blow to the never one designed for a smaller skull. The captive bolt is a humane stun- species. To obtain maximum effect, the To prevent the risk of recovery, animals ner—not a humane killer—and stunning muzzle of the captive bolt stunner must must be bled out (sometimes referred must always be followed immediately be held firmly against the head of the to as “sticking” or exsanguination) as by bleeding out. animal. soon as possible after stunning, ideally Captive bolt stunners are comprised while the animal is still in the tonic (rigid) phase. Bleeding out involves severing of a steel bolt with a flange and a piston Electrical Stunning at one end that is held in the barrel. The the carotid arteries and jugular veins of piston fits tightly into the breech and Electrical stunning involves passing (by the ventral neck and thorax region. The the bolt is free to move forward and means of voltage, or electrical pressure) animal then dies from loss of blood. It is backward in the barrel. Upon firing, the an electric current (the rate of flow of important that all major blood vessels expansion of gases, produced by the electricity) through the brain, severely are severed. If only one carotid artery is explosion of the charge, propels the pis- disrupting the brain’s normal electrical cut, the animal may take over a minute ton forward, and the bolt projects activity and causing an immediate state to die. through an aperture in the front of the of unconsciousness and insensibility to Whenever an animal is stunned using barrel. The bolt remains captive in the pain. a captive bolt stunner, he or she must barrel, however, because the flange at Electrodes must be placed on the be bled out within fifteen seconds to the rear prevents it from passing animal in a manner to ensure good elec- ensure a rapid and painless death. A through the hole. The impact of the trical contact, and they must span the maximum stun-to-stick interval of fif- flange at the front of the barrel is brain, enabling the current to pass teen seconds is essential for all species absorbed by either cellular buffers (also through it. The animal remains un- in the field. known as recuperator sleeves) or a conscious while his or her throat is cut The most practical method of bleed- grease collar, depending on the type of and dies from loss of blood. It is impor- ing out is to make a deep transverse cut stunner. tant to note that an animal may recover with a six-inch knife across the animal’s There are two types of captive bolt from a stun if his or her throat is not cut throat at the angle of the jaw (i.e., a cut stunners: penetrating and non-penetrat- quickly. across the throat). The cut should be ing. Penetrating stunners cause uncon- deep, severing the blood vessels, tra- sciousness as a result of a concussive chea and esophagus, and continue until Physiological the blade of the knife touches the blow to the skull and the physical dam- Effects of Stunning age caused by the entry of the bolt into spine. The intention is to severe the the brain. They are generally preferred, The initial effect on the animal is imme- carotid arteries and the jugular veins. as they result in more rapid uncon- diate unconsciousness, accompanied —Neil Trent sciousness and death. Non-penetrative by what is known as “tonic” activity. stunners have a “mushroom-headed” The animal collapses, stops breathing, bolt which comes in contact with the and becomes rigid. This period of rigidi- ty normally lasts for ten to twenty sec-

The State of Meat Production in Developing Countries: 2002 181 When meat is sold on one or two The FAO addresses this issue through on regional training of trainers cours- market days, meat stalls often are technical strategies and technology es to stimulate the multiplier and cat- crowded, and customers lean on the packages that include inter alia assis- alytic effect at member country level. stall; the meat becomes contaminat- tance for improved hygiene, handling, ed through contact with their hands, and preservation of livestock prod- bank notes, baskets, clothes, and ucts; development of appropriate pro- Animal Welfare other objects. The behavior of butch- cessing technologies, including devel- ers is not always the most appropriate opment of low-cost and shelf-stable in the Livestock from a hygienic point of view and may meat products; and establishment of contribute to the problem. small-scale meat processing plants. Sector in In urban areas the traditional mar- keting of meat begins with early 1. Slaughter Facilities Asia-Pacific morning slaughter and delivery of the It is evident that unsatisfactory Asia, which is home to almost half of unchilled meat to the marketplace a slaughtering techniques and lack of the world’s human population, tradi- few hours later. The FAO recommends appropriate slaughtering facilities tionally has also been a region with a that in the long term this be may cause unnecessary losses in meat large livestock population. Year 2000 improved to a complete “cold chain” as well as in valuable by-products. Un- statistics reveal that, of the global system, with the meat being cooled der these circumstances, commonly livestock population, Asia—including down at the slaughterhouse and then found in developing countries, the the Pacific countries—rears 35 per- transported in refrigerated trucks to establishment of slaughter facilities cent of cattle, 97 percent of buffaloes, controlled butcher outlets. The devel- of a sufficiently high standard but still 59 percent of pigs, 42 percent of opment of the meat sector, in partic- simple and inexpensive would im- sheep, 59 percent of goats, 46 per- ular in the rapidly expanding popula- prove the above conditions. For these cent of chickens, and 88 percent of tion centers, will have to move in this reasons the FAO has developed a ducks. direction for both public health and model project in which the main com- Over the last decades, Asia had environmental reasons (Garcia de ponent is a small-scale, modular average annual growth rates in live- Siles et al. 1997). slaughterhouse. In addition, designs stock production of up to 7 percent. The availability of shelf-stable meat have been prepared for the construc- In the medium term, Asia will contin- products is very important for a con- tion of a meat market in order to ue to display the world’s highest tinuous supply of animal protein and facilitate the integration of produc- growth rates for livestock, approxi- essential minerals during periods tion, processing, and marketing. Fur- mately 3 percent, compared with 1.7 when there is no fresh meat available. ther details of this slaughterhouse percent annual global growth. Shelf life ranging from a few days to a design and operation can be found in The Asia-Pacific region comprises number of months can be achieved, FAO publications (FAO 1988, 1994). three developed countries—Japan, depending on the processing meth- Australia, and New Zealand—and ods. Meat processing therefore is 2. Processing twenty-seven developing countries. essential to enhance food security Taking into consideration that an Animal welfare issues usually are and cope with periodic deficits in uninterrupted cold chain for meat higher on the agenda in the devel- meat supply. cannot be expected in many develop- oped Asian-Pacific countries than in However, in many developing coun- ing countries in the near future, the the developing countries. In particu- tries the hygienic conditions of the FAO is assisting developing countries lar, New Zealand and Australia have manufacturing process are generally in the use of existing national and stringent animal welfare laws and very poor. Machinery is obsolete, alternative regional meat preserva- detailed rules and regulations. places are dirty, and meat is handled tion. However, even in well-organized carelessly. animal welfare environments, un- 3. Training precedented animal suffering may The FAO The lack of adequately trained per- occur. Australia exports not only sonnel in the meat and dairy industry meat from cattle and sheep but also Contribution has been recognized as one of the live animals. Although the numbers of Dramatic changes in the current situ- main constraints limiting the livestock sent to not-too-distant ation of the meat sector are difficult improvement of the hygienic and Southeast Asian countries such as to achieve in the short to medium technical quality of meat. Training is Indonesia and the Philippines are term, as they would require consider- therefore a prioritized integral com- high, no major animal suffering has able investment in facilities and infra- ponent of FAO projects for meat and been reported, as transport distances structure. Developing countries can- dairy sector development. For strate- are relatively short. not afford this capital investment. gic delivery of training, FAO focuses The situation is different when

182 The State of the Animals II: 2003 lucrative Near East markets are sup- conditions, and there are also a few small cages. In Asia, where duck eggs plied with sheep and cattle for feedlots for cattle fattening. are very popular, layer ducks may also slaughtering upon arrival according Cattle prevail in India (46 percent be kept this way. to the Moslem halal method—cut- of Asia-Pacific’s total), where they are Traditional livestock production ting the throat without pre-stunning. used only for milk production. India systems generally create reasonable In the past many animals did not sur- also has the highest buffalo popula- conditions for animal well-being. vive the long voyage. To shorten tion in Asia, followed by Pakistan and However, there are problem areas. For transport distances, it is now China. Buffaloes in India, Pakistan, example, millions of cows in India, required that these shipments disem- Nepal, and Bangladesh are of the who have their role in socio-cultural bark exclusively from Western Aus- riverine type kept predominantly for tradition, are otherwise little used for tralian seaports. (As a consequence milk. Buffaloes in Southeast Asia are agricultural production, and are not of loss of life due to extreme high of the swamp type; they are not suit- adequately cared for, fed, and temperatures in the summer of able for milk production but serve for watered. Buffaloes play an important 2002, Australia announced it would draft power and are slaughtered for role in India as milk-producing live- ban cattle transport until cooler meat at the end of their working lives. stock, but there is little interest in weather returned.) New Zealand Regrettably, swamp buffalo popula- young male buffaloes, who are unused banned all live animal shipments to tions in Southeast Asia have been for meat production. Consequently, overseas markets some years ago. declining rapidly over the last ten to the rural practice is to separate male In Japan animal welfare is governed fifteen years, being replaced by motor- buffalo calves from their mothers by economic and public health fac- ized vehicles. It is feared that this shortly after birth and abandon them tors. Guidelines for Industrial Live- development will work against small to die. stock Rearing (Cabinet Office of farmers and deprive many of their In Asian countries with cold win- Japan 1987) and Slaughter Methods livelihood, as buffaloes may be more ters, the traditional livestock sector for Livestock (Cabinet Office of Japan cost-effective than motorized vehicles, suffers from very different problems. 1995) have been introduced. Due to and buffalo manure is the much-need- In Mongolia, for example, during the the emergence of food poisoning ed fertilizer for agriculture. course of two consecutive winters, from enterotoxins produced by Small ruminants (sheep and goats) millions of livestock died of starvation microorganisms in meat, slaughter in developing Asia are kept for meat during snowstorms. It is clear that guidelines were strengthened in only. action must be taken to provide bet- 2000, and more stringent require- Industrial livestock production of ter shelters and basic feed reserves ments for livestock transports and so-called short-cycle animals (pigs for the animals during the winter. holding pens at slaughterhouses must and chicken) for meat and eggs is The above are a few examples of be followed. increasing greatly in and around the livestock suffering on traditional In developing Asia the countries population centers, as per-capita farms. More pronounced and wide- with the largest human population meat consumption in urban areas is spread suffering—and not infrequent also account for the largest livestock increasing. The impact on livestock cruelty—occurs in Asian countries, as numbers. Livestock is used for food production is best illustrated by the elsewhere in the developing world, (meat, milk), industrial products example of China. Over the last two from the moment when livestock is (mainly leather), and draft power for decades, the annual per-capita meat selected for slaughtering. This stress- agriculture and transport. In rural consumption in China has gone up ful and often torturous period lasts areas manure from livestock still from 5 kilograms to more than 30 from the farm gate to the slaughter- plays an important role as a fertilizer. kilograms. Egg production accounts house. The poorer the infrastructure In the pig and poultry sector of devel- for comparable increases. Growth in the livestock marketing and oping Asia, there is a strong trend rates in most other Asian countries slaughterhouse sector, the more ani- toward industrial production. also are high, and one can imagine mal suffering occurs. China is by far the largest producer the challenges faced by industrial live- The vast majority of Asian livestock of pigs in Asia, due to the enormous stock producers regarding procure- is kept in China. China has made demand created by more than one ment of feed, environmental prob- enormous progress in the abattoir billion people. China also accounts lems with animal waste, and proper sector, in particular through provision for 55 percent of Asian chicken pro- organizing of livestock marketing and of large-scale and rather efficient duction and 78 percent of duck pro- slaughtering. slaughterhouses in the population duction. From the animal welfare point of centers. During the past two decades, Large and small ruminants in Asia view, the arguments against industri- transport of livestock by road, rail, and are kept primarily under traditional al livestock production in Asia are the boat also has been improved. The Min- rearing on pastureland. Around some same as those voiced worldwide: sows istry of Agriculture is the central large population centers, dairy cows confined for piglet production in nar- authority responsible for the supervi- may be kept under semi-industrial row boxes and layer hens confined in sion and control of abattoirs and pro-

The State of Meat Production in Developing Countries: 2002 183 vides recommended best practices for Some years ago there was a report sanitary inspection and proper trans- hygiene, transport, and animal wel- from India describing how the legs of port and handling of livestock. Pre- fare. While such guidelines are very young buffaloes were broken deliber- stunning is acceptable in this pre- helpful, training of meat sector per- ately by livestock handlers in order to dominantly Moslem country. Thailand sonnel in techniques and humane immobilize the animals in waiting and Vietnam have completed new treatment of animals still is lacking, pens or transport facilities. slaughterhouse projects where pre- nor is the subject of animal welfare One special aspect of large slaugh- stunning using proper equipment is adequately covered at veterinary and ter animals on the Indian subconti- carried out. Thailand has a thriving agricultural universities. Nevertheless, nent is the cross-border transport of poultry export industry which com- all large abattoirs have been equipped cattle and buffalo from India to Pak- plies with international standards for with tools, such as captive bolt pistols istan. India has the world’s largest animal welfare. In Thailand’s domes- and electrical tongs, for stunning of cattle population. The cow is a sacred tic slaughter sector, special govern- livestock. In some cases, technically animal to Hindus and cannot be ment entities have been set up that advanced boxes for electrical cattle slaughtered. Due to lack of resources deal with guidelines for humane stunning have been introduced. In in India, however, the cow cannot be treatment of slaughter animals; how- China’s vast rural areas, there remains fed adequately either. Up to 50 per- ever, binding laws have not yet been scope for modernization of the meat cent of Pakistan’s large slaughter ani- published. sector and improvements in humane mals come from India during certain Regarding animal welfare laws and treatment of livestock. periods of the year. Some of the ani- legislation, the Philippines is one of Indonesia also has a reasonable in- mals entering Pakistan illegally travel the most advanced countries of the frastructure in the slaughterhouse up to 1,000 kilometers further, into region. An animal welfare act, as well sector. Although Indonesia is a pre- Afghanistan, many dying en route as as several codes and regulations, are dominantly Moslem country, a rather they traverse this desert region with- in place. In each major slaughter- liberal approach is taken toward pre- out adequate food and water. house, one member of the veterinary stunning of animals; efficient electri- Most slaughterhouses in the sub- staff is responsible for animal welfare cal stunning equipment (for cattle) continent are obsolete. Stunning issues. The Philippine government’s and captive bolt pistols are widely equipment is not used. Ritual Moslem commitment is evidenced by the fact used. slaughter in Pakistan does not permit that the international Manila Confer- The situation for slaughter animals pre-stunning. In other areas, due to ence on Animal Welfare, an initiative in the other two large countries in the overcapacity and poor infrastructure, of the Department of Agriculture, was region, India and Pakistan, is very dif- slaughtering is carried out very inhu- to be held in 2003. The conference ferent. India has a number of slaugh- manely and in full view of other live goal was to produce a Manila Declara- terhouses producing buffalo meat for animals. Furthermore, as slaughter- tion on Animal Welfare, recognizing export. These abattoirs must comply house waste disposal systems also are animal welfare as a common objective with export requirements by using obsolete, animals often are kept wait- for all people and all nations. adequate livestock transport by rail or ing for slaughter amidst mountains of Many are of the opinion that stan- truck, good holding pens, and pre- waste—such as intestinal content, dards for animal welfare are perceived stunning with captive bolt pistols manure, and inedible carcass parts— differently in Asia than in the West. prior to bleeding. However, for the dumped around the slaughterhouses. Consequently, there is fear that it may rest of the slaughter animals, cen- In the other countries of the sub- be difficult to make a major impact in turies-old conditions prevail, the only region, Bangladesh and Nepal, there the Asian animal welfare sector. It is difference being that, because of the is almost no abattoir infrastructure, true that laws and regulation on ani- high demand for meat, all facilities and animals are slaughtered along mal welfare, which have been estab- for transport, holding, and slaughter- roadsides and rivers under the most lished in almost all countries of the ing are hopelessly over their capacity. primitive conditions. In Nepal over- region, are not strongly enforced at Small animals, such as pigs, and crowded road transports of buffaloes present by the authorities. large and small ruminants generally across several mountain passes in one On the other hand, there are are transported in trucks, most long journey, with the animals hardly encouraging developments—and con- loaded well over capacity. Over short- able to stand and in many cases lying siderable progress—in a number of er distances, these animals may be virtually on top of each other, pose an Asian countries toward the humane made to walk. For millions of large additional animal welfare problem. treatment of slaughter animals. It ruminants (mostly buffalo) in India, The slaughterhouse sector in must be acknowledged that much of the typical range for the journey to Southeast Asian countries (Myanmar, the progress was triggered by eco- the slaughterhouse can be as far as Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Philip- nomic factors and considerations for 300–400 kilometers, during the pines) is better organized. Malaysia, easier animal handling. The desirable course of which they lose as much as in particular, has a good slaughter- side effect, however, is less suffering 5 percent or more of their weight. house infrastructure with efficient for the animals.

184 The State of the Animals II: 2003 In Southeast Asia some peculiar cially designed boxes. Both methods chopped off the animal with one methods are used to transport live are recommended from the technical stroke. In traditional Indian pig small animals to market. Chickens and animal welfare point of view. slaughtering without pre-stunning, and ducks are tied head-down to bicy- The adequate electric stunning of the pig is thrown on his or her back. cles, rickshaws, and motorbikes. For- cattle using electrodes to heart and A short rope is tied round the muzzle tunately, such methods will disappear nose is absolutely painless and of par- to prevent biting and to help press automatically with the change of mar- ticular interest to Moslem countries. the head of the animal to the ground. keting systems, away from the tradi- However, the equipment is costly and A straight, clean cut is made anterior tional markets, where chicken are hence only warranted for larger to the sternum, which severs the slaughtered in front of the customer, slaughter operations. jugular vein, and with another cut the toward the newly emerging supermar- All cattle/buffalo slaughterhouses heart is punctured. In the rest of Asia, kets. The increasing popularity of in Asia outside the Moslem sphere of where no proper method for pig stun- supermarkets will have other indirect influence, and even occasionally ning is available, pigs are knocked positive repercussions for animal wel- there, have no objections to using down with the blow of a pole, ham- fare. Meat will have to meet certain captive bolt pistols, since their use mer, or axe. hygienic standards when a longer results in the immediate collapse and In the course of industrial Asian shelf life must be guaranteed, thus re- unconsciousness of the animal, so livestock production and slaughter- quiring that supplies come from prop- that slaughtering can start without ing, prospects are good that efficient, erly controlled slaughter plants. risk for the slaughter men. However, scientifically developed stunning Pigs in Southeast Asia are squeezed most medium and small slaughter- methods will be employed on a larger into baskets and transported on bicy- houses cannot cover the costs of cap- scale in Asia. At present the main cles, etc., to market and slaughter tive bolt pistols or, more importantly, constraints affecting the widespread facilities. In the absence of any alter- do not have access to cartridges and introduction of stunning equipment native transport means, this method spare parts. Instead, they must resort are the cost and the challenge of probably is acceptable, since the pigs to the inhumane methods of using a importing the equipment and spare are released upon arrival and the sharp-pointed knife to sever the parts from overseas. Efforts in some transport distances usually are short. spinal cord or bringing the animal Asian countries to manufacture stun- However, another method for indi- down with a hammer blow. ning equipment locally and at cheap- vidual transport of pigs, practiced in In camel slaughtering, also daily er prices have not been successful. the small to medium slaughterhouse practice in some parts of Asia, a very Currently new approaches are being sector in Thailand, inflicts great suf- inhumane method is the severing of taken by veterinary authorities in fering on the animals. Pigs being the Achilles’ tendons, which leads to some countries. The assistance of moved to slaughterhouses are forced the collapse of the animal in full con- development projects and NGOs is into crates made of steel bars. These sciousness. The animals may also be envisaged. crates are so small as to allow almost immobilized by bending the joints of In the Philippines national veteri- no movement. Pigs are kept waiting the fore and hind legs. This forces nary authorities, in cooperation with inside the crates, sometimes from the animal into a painful position, engineering departments, developed morning to night, without water and where he or she may remain for a program to manufacture electrical ventilation. They will be killed, still many hours before the Halal throat tongs for pigs, captive bolt pistols for confined to the crate, by sticking a cut is carried out. bovines, and the ammunition neces- long knife into their necks. Fortu- In Moslem ritual slaughtering, cat- sary for captive bolt pistols. The FAO, nately, this method of transport and tle and buffaloes are thrown on the in cooperation with some other donor killing, which is very labor-intensive, ground with a sudden pull, their organizations and HSI, is committed will disappear gradually with the necks stretched, and the large blood to cooperate in the project. introduction of industrialized pig vessels cut with a big, sharp knife. In It would be most beneficial if inex- slaughtering. It is more economical many Moslem communities, electri- pensive electrical stunning equipment to transport pigs collectively on cal stunning or use of non-penetrative for pigs could be made available. The trucks and keep the whole group captive bolt stunners is acceptable; economic benefits of import versus in- together in a holding pen before others, however, are adamant in refus- country development of captive bolt slaughtering. ing any kind of pre-stunning. Time is pistols need to be analyzed, and, In large-animal slaughtering, effi- ripe for Moslem authorities to discuss whether the pistols are imported or cient immobilization must be cou- the issue and to study and evaluate not, a supply of suitable ammunition pled with immediate unconsciousness available new technical methods for for them must be assured. Responsi- of the animal. Most industrial cattle stunning. ble veterinary authorities in the indi- slaughterhouses in Asia use captive Jhatka is a ritual slaughter method vidual countries should become bolt pistols for this purpose; a few practiced by Sikhs in northern India involved in the distribution of the even use electrical stunning in spe- on sheep and goats only. The head is ammunition to the slaughterhouses.

The State of Meat Production in Developing Countries: 2002 185 Table 7 Livestock Population in South Africa, 1961–2001 (in million heads)

Percent Overall Species 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 Growth

Cattle 12.527 11.234 13.2 13.5 13.74 9.68

Pigs 1.492 1.205 1.348 1.539 1.540 3.22

Poultry .0187 .0263 .0313 .0883 .1193 537.97

Sheep and Goats 37.9 33.1 31.6 32.6 28.8 (24.01)

Goats 5.13 5.36 5.79 6.2 6.55 27.68

If such a system could be brought into to Europe, for provision to local niche under extensive grazing systems, function, a great step forward toward markets or for feeding to captive many in communal grazing areas. humane treatment of slaughter ani- predators, such as lions. While high numbers of cattle are mals in Asia would be made. There is a variety of farming sys- fattened in feedlots, a large number tems in South Africa, from very tradi- also are kept in extensive grazing sys- tional and extensive to intensive and tems. Humane modern (Table 9). The diverse cul- tures influence how many animals are Legislation Slaughter in farmed. In 1962 South Africa’s first animal South Africa The vast majority of poultry are welfare legislation, the Animals Pro- farmed under intensive systems for tection Act No. 71, was promulgated. both egg and meat production. In This act covers all animal species and Introduction recent years there has been an does not exclude any sector of animal South Africa is a vast and diverse increase in the production of free- utilization (Table 10). country; however, only 12 percent is range products; although this still is a Other acts relating to animals, arable. Lack of water is one of the relatively small niche market, con- such as the Livestock Brands Acts most severe constraints faced by the sumers are becoming more aware and 1962 (Act No. 87 of 1962), do not farming community. Because of this, opting to purchase these products necessarily incorporate welfare crop production is not a viable activi- despite their higher cost. requirements. The SPCA (society for ty over large parts of the country, and The majority of pigs also are farmed the prevention of cruelty to animals) extensive livestock (especially sheep) under intensive systems. The tether- movement enforces specific welfare production is undertaken in the drier ing of sows in not permitted. Phase- legislation, with qualified and autho- areas, particularly in the western and out of existing tethering systems has rized inspectors trained through a central parts of the country (Table 7). been nearly completed, with only two national course to perform these producers still using a limited num- functions. Investigations are under- Species Utilized ber of tethers. taken and, where appropriate, offend- for Slaughter Although some sheep are fattened ers are charged and prosecuted. in feedlots, the majority are farmed Under certain sections of the Animals Poultry, pigs, cattle, and sheep repre- under extensive grazing systems. The Protection Act and regulations per- sent the largest numbers of animals vast majority of goats are farmed taining to the act, authorized inspec- slaughtered for commercial produc- tion in abattoirs. The number of goats slaughtered is difficult to determine because in rural areas many are kept Table 8 and slaughtered for home consump- Number of Animals Slaughtered tion (Table 8). in South Africa, 2001 (in million heads) Although not bred for this purpose, equines also are slaughtered. Surplus, Cattle and Buffaloes Pigs Poultry Sheep and Goats unwanted, and non-viable equines are purchased and slaughtered for export 2.79 2 .3689 10.71

186 The State of the Animals II: 2003 tors have the power to arrest, seize relevant evidence, and seize animals Table 9 in need of immediate care. Commercially Utilized Species/ Codes of Practice Products in South Africa A number of codes of practice exist and, while they are not legally en- Species Main Product Farmed for (excluding by-products) forceable, they are accepted as the Cattle Meat norm as underwritten by the different Milk sectors of the livestock industry. The Hides and other by-products Animals Protection Act is enforceable Sheep Meat in all situations where animals are Wool/pelts utilized, kept, or slaughtered. Goats Meat Although specific requirements are Mohair set down in the relevant abattoir leg- islation, charges can be made against Calves Veal/calf meat perpetrators of cruelty as defined by Poultry Eggs the Animals Protection Act. Convic- Meat tion on charges of animal cruelty can result in fines, imprisonment, and Ostriches Feathers Skin confiscation of animals. Meat The Department of Agriculture has appointed inspectors who monitor Pigs Meat the conditions at abattoirs, but the Rabbits Meat focus is on hygiene, of both the facili- Pelts ty and the carcasses. These inspectors also are in a position to ensure that Game Meat the abattoir regulations are adhered Trophies/tourism to in terms of facilities, handling, and slaughter methods. Failure to comply Slaughter The manner in which animals are with the legislation can result in fines slaughtered is as diverse as these and either temporary or permanent Requirements groups, and the slaughtering of ani- closure of the abattoir (Table 10). South Africa has a wide range of cul- mals for ritual as well as food purposes tures and beliefs; eleven official lan- is very important to many (Table 11). guage groups represent this diversity. However, in order to ensure meat

Table 10 South African Legislation Incorporating Animal Welfare

Name of Legislation Purpose of Legislation

The Animals Protection Act No. 71 of 1962 Protect animals Define offenses Define responsibilities of animal owners The Meat Safety Act, 2000 (Act No. 40 of 2000) Define acceptable practices associated with the and regulations slaughtering of animals The Performing Animals Protection Act No. 25 of 1935 Protection of animals Relating to animals used for safe-guarding and entertainment Standing Regulations under the Animal Slaughter, Meat, To define the manner in which animals are handled, and Animal Products Hygiene Act, 1967 (Act No. 87 of 1967) held, and slaughtered To ensure standards set out are adhered to in the production of animal products The Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, To provide controls over societies for the prevention 1993 (Act No. 169 of 1993) of cruelty to animals. To define specific standards that must be adhered to

The State of Meat Production in Developing Countries: 2002 187 sold to the public conforms to recog- toirs, which slaughter only a few ani- abattoirs is undertaken in the same nized standards, products offered for mals per week, have been approved. manner as slaughter for commercial sale must be derived from animals These small abattoirs are not required purposes, and animals are pre- slaughtered in approved abattoirs and to have the same infrastructure as the stunned. in compliance with specific condi- larger abattoirs. They supply meat tions set down in legislation. Abat- directly to their local communities, Kosher Slaughter toirs operate according to a grading “warm” off the hook. Cold rooms, The pre-stunning of animals is unac- system, with A grade being the high- etc., are not required; however, pre- ceptable for meat to be considered est. The system dictates the number stunning is required (Table 12). kosher. Through negotiations with and type of animals that may be Slaughtering of animals outside the Jewish community, advances have slaughtered on a daily basis, and the abattoirs is permitted only for home been made concerning the manner in facilities required. The manner in consumption and not for commercial which animals are restrained prior to which animals may be handled, off- use or gain. In such cases the abattoir slaughter and in achieving post-stun- loaded, and held-over prior to slaugh- legislation does not apply, but the ning of cattle and calves in twenty ter are specified in the regulations, Animals Protection Act remains seconds. which currently are being revised. enforceable. Illegal slaughter does As much as slaughter without pre- Pre-stunning of animals (including occur—individuals may set up “bush” stunning is of concern, the manner in poultry) in abattoirs is a legal require- abattoirs, where animals are slaugh- which animals are handled and pre- ment, although exemption from pre- tered and the carcasses filtered into sented for cutting of the throat is in stunning may be granted in cases of the commercial market. many cases of equal or greater con- animals slaughtered for religious pur- Stock theft is rife in South Africa. cern. Shackling and hoisting of live poses, i.e., kosher and halal. In an attempt to curb this, the Live- animals is totally unacceptable in In order to accommodate the for- stock Brands Act has been revised to South Africa and is a prosecutable merly disadvantaged sectors of the make marking of stock mandatory. offense. community, much smaller grade abat- The majority of halal slaughter in

Table 11 Slaughter Methods Used by Different Cultural Groups and Others in South Africa

Type Most Commonly Brief Description Used Species of Slaughter Methods

Kosher (Jews) Cattle, calves, Animals are restrained using specific equipment and have their sheep, poultry throats cut without pre-stunning. Post-stunning is undertaken in most instances. Slaughter normally takes place in an abattoir.

Halal (Moslems) Cattle, sheep, Most halal slaughter is undertaken in the same manner as poultry, goats for commercial slaughter, and pre-stunning is undertaken. In some instances no pre-stunning is undertaken and the throats are cut. Slaughter normally takes place in an abattoir, however for certain occasions animals are slaughtered at communal site or at private homes, without pre-stunning.

Traditional (African) Cattle, goats, sheep Animals may sometimes be shot or pre-stunned. In most instances pre-stunning does not occur and cattle are poll stuck, then cast and their throats cut. Sheep and goats are cast and their throats cut. Other methods include stabbing, neck-breaking, etc. Slaughter takes place outside of abattoirs.

Home Consumption All species Animals, especially large stock, may be shot prior to bleeding. The majority of animals, such as sheep, have their throats cut without pre-stunning. Slaughter takes place outside of abattoirs.

Commercial All species Animals are pre-stunned and then bled. Slaughter takes place in a registered and approved abattoir.

188 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Table 12 Stunning Methods in Abattoirs in South Africa

Species Stunning Methods

Large stock—Cattle, horses, Captive bolt pistol donkeys, large boars/sows Use of firearm in some circumstances

Small stock—Sheep, goats, pigs Electrical stunning with the use of stunning tongs applied to the head Captive bolt in some circumstances/where there is no electricity

Poultry Electrical stunning by positioning the head in a fixed head-stunning unit Electrical stunning via current in water bath

Rabbits Electrical stunning by positioning the head in a fixed head-stunning unit

Ostriches Electrical stunning with the use of stunning tongs Electrical stunning by positioning the head in a fixed head-stunning unit

The restraint method currently undertaking the slaughtering, and Ostrich Slaughter used for cattle is a rotating stun box, the reason for the slaughter. Slaugh- In 1993 South Africa was supplying with feet clamps. The cattle are indi- ter generally takes place on private approximately 90 percent of the vidually moved into a stun box and property. In most cases the animals world demand for ostrich products their feet are clamped together with are restrained and cast, and the and the export of fertile eggs or live hydraulically operated metal clamps. throat is cut. Restraint and casting of birds was not permitted. The single- The box is then rotated, and the ani- cattle often is attempted by stabbing channel marketing of ostrich and mal, lying on his or her side and pre- the animal behind the poll to sever ostrich products ceased with deregu- vented from moving by the restraint the spinal cord and render the animal lation in 1993, and the market conse- of the feet, is suspended by the feet. immobile. Although still conscious, quently opened, although the export The head is pulled back with the aid the animal has limited movement, of breeding material still was strictly of a “devil’s fork,” a semicircular and the cutting of the throat can be controlled. As a result, and with an metal frame which gives the operator performed in relative safety. increase in the demand for ostrich leverage to hold the head and neck in Pre-stunning of animals is recom- products, an increase in the number an upside down, still position. This mended and encouraged. In some of producers and abattoirs was seen. allows the shochet (a Jewish slaugh- cases participants have allowed the Eventually breeding stock was per- terman) free access to the arched SPCA to pre-stun the animal by mitted to leave the country. Ship- throat, providing relative safety for means of a captive bolt pistol. There ments of live birds have been investi- personnel but at great expense to the remains, however, a great deal of gated and monitored as far afield as animal. resistance to pre-stunning. Malaysia and the United Arab Emi- Attempts currently are being made In some cases the animal is rates. This created concern in the to install an upright slaughter box, required to vocalize prior to death to international welfare community, as which will eliminate the need to indicate that the ancestors have attempts were made to establish rotate cattle for the cutting of the accepted it. While some animals, par- ostrich farming in various countries throat. ticularly goats, will vocalize readily, where climate, management, and spe- others are inhumanely treated until cialist knowledge was not available. Traditional Slaughter they do so. While ostriches are valued for their The slaughtering of animals plays an Traditional festivals and occasions skins, feathers, and meat, the manner important role in traditional African also may dictate the manner in which in which some producers were har- culture. It is undertaken at various the animal is treated and killed. This vesting the feathers was found to be events, such as marriages, births, is a very sensitive issue and, unfortu- unacceptable. Eventually a code of deaths, and initiation rites, and for nately, intervention by animal welfare practice was drawn up with the indus- numerous reasons, such as celebra- in these ceremonies often is per- try, detailing the requirements for tion and cleansing rites and commu- ceived (erroneously) as racially moti- feather harvesting and making it ille- nication with ancestors. Methods of vated and in conflict with constitu- gal to pluck “green” feathers. Only traditional slaughter of farm animals tional rights of individuals and certain “ripe” feathers may be vary according to the tribal group organizations. plucked, and clipping of other feath- ers is permitted. The process is moni- tored and controlled. The State of Meat Production in Developing Countries: 2002 189 Ostriches’ physiological and behav- are not going to be used for trophy teams have been formed to investi- ioral requirements are different from purposes means that shots to the gate this issue, and attempts have those of other farm animals; conse- brain are favored. Head shots also been made to encourage the govern- quently the manner in which they are limit the damage to the carcass and ment either to legislate against this held, handled, and slaughtered is the resultant loss in edible meat. practice or at the very least to regu- more problematic. Due to the posi- Crocodiles are farmed primarily for late it. At the present time, the only tioning and small size of the brain, their valuable skin, which is used in controls exerted by the government stunning with a captive bolt pistol is the fashion industry. They are reared are those relating to animal health not reliable; therefore ostriches are communally and, when they reach the and conditions imposed by the coun- electrically stunned. desirable size, they are slaughtered. try of destination. Animal welfare is Ostriches are potentially very dan- They are presented for slaughter by not a criterion. As a result a code of gerous and can inflict life-threatening isolating an individual from the other practice was drawn up by the NSPCA injuries with their powerful legs. This animals, sometimes placing a sack and other members of a subcommit- influences the manner in which they loosely over the snout to calm the ani- tee of the Livestock Welfare Coordi- are restrained both before and after mal. Then the animal is shot in the nating Committee in 2000 to detail slaughter. The head of the bird must brain with a firearm, at close range. minimum requirements for live be held manually for correct place- export. ment of the stunning tongs or placed Exportation in a small stunning box and of Animals Acknowledgements restrained prior to electrical current Gunter Heinz expresses his sincere being switched on. Following stun- Due, in part, to the vastness of the country and also for economic rea- gratitude to Hamid Ahmed (Pak- ning the ostrich collapses into a sit- istan); Kohei Amamoto (Japan); Ho ting position and the legs and feet sons, animals are moved great dis- tances to central sale points or abat- Hon Fatt (Singapore); and D. thrash wildly. In most abattoirs the Narasimha Rao (India) for their valu- stunning area is partitioned with steel toirs. Transportation of livestock by rail is no longer permissible, so that able contributions and advice to the sheets to protect workers from the Asia Pacific section of this essay. powerful, spontaneous kicking of the ground transport is now undertaken unconscious bird. Immediately follow- by road. Large numbers of animals (predominantly sheep, goats, and cat- Notes ing stunning, after the bird has 1All data presented on the evolution of meat pro- dropped, a hinged, heavy metal bar is tle) are imported into South Africa duction have been obtained from FAOSTAT Sta- placed over the legs and secured in from neighboring Namibia. Often tistics Database (FAO 2002). these animals are in transit for up to 2Cattle and buffaloes, pigs, poultry, and sheep position. This is to minimize kicking and goats. and allow the workers the opportuni- three or four days, resulting in 3Six world regions were defined: Africa, Asia, ty to place the shackle over the legs exhaustion, dehydration, bruising, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, North injuries, and even death. America, and Oceania. so that the ostrich can be hoisted and 4Six subregions have been defined: Andean bled. Investigation into improved Domestic, wild, and farm animals Countries, Brazil, Caribbean, Central America, restraint and stunning methods is routinely have been transported by air Merco sur, and Mexico. ongoing. to various destinations and for various reasons. International Air Transport Slaughter of Game Association regulations specify the Literature Cited manner in which these animals can Cabinet Office of Japan. 1987. Guide- Game—animals such as impala, be handled, contained, and moved. springbok, blesbok, kudu, and lines for industrial livestock rearing. Due to the high cost, moving animals Tokyo. warthogs—are presented at the abat- by air generally is not undertaken for toir in carcass form for dressing and ———. 1995. Slaughter methods for animals who are to be slaughtered, livestock. Tokyo. processing. The stress (and costs) of since they have a lower financial value live capture, the danger in handling, Chambers, P.G., and T. Grandin. than those destined for breeding. 2001. Guidelines for humane han- and the inability to restrain the ani- In recent years, with the opening mals humanely for slaughter dictate dling, transport and slaughter of up of international trade, there has livestock. Rome: FAO. that these animals be shot on site and been a marked increase in the expor- field dressed. Delgado, C., M. Rosegrant, H. Stein- tation of slaughter animals by sea, feld, S. Ehui, and C. Courbois. Shooting of game for commercial although this is undertaken on a rela- use generally is undertaken as a 1999. Brief: Livestock to 2020: The tively small scale compared with the next food revolution. Washington, culling operation. The numbers numbers of animals exported from involved and the fact that the animals D.C.: International Food Policy such countries as Australia. Task Research Institute. At http://

190 The State of the Animals II: 2003 www.ifpri.org/pubs/catalog.htm. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO). 1988. Standard design for small-scale modular slaughterhous- es. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper 73. Rome: FAO. ———. 1994. Manual para la insta- lación del pequeño matadero mod- ular de la FAO. FAO Animal Produc- tion and Health Paper 85. Rome: FAO. ———. 2002. FAOSTAT Statistics Database. Rome: FAO. http: //apps.fao.org. Garcia de Siles, J.L., G. Heinz, J.C. Lambert, and A. Bennett. 1997. Livestock Products and Food Secu- rity. World Congress on Food Hygiene, August 1997. Mann, I. 1984. Guidelines on small slaughterhouses and meat hygiene for developing countries. Geneva: World Health Organization. Rosegrant, M.W., M. Agcaoili-Sombil- la, R.V. Gerpacio, and C. Ringler. 1997. Global food markets and U.S. exports in the twenty-first century. Paper presented at the Illinois World Food and Sustainable Agri- culture Program conference “Meet- ing the Demand for Food in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities for Illinois Agricul- ture,” Urbana-Champaign, May 28.

The State of Meat Production in Developing Countries: 2002 191 The State of Wild Animals in the Minds and Households 13CHAPTER of a Neotropical Society: The Costa Rican Case Study

Carlos Drews

Introduction ur daily choices and behaviors about wild animals—whether they arrangements. Contrary to the num- determine to a large extent keep them and how they care for ber of sources available with informa- Othe impact of our lives on the them in their homes—may serve as a tion about social attitudes toward ani- environment and on our fellow crea- lens through which to better observe mals in the United States (see tures. The sharing of our living quar- the relationship between attitudes Herzog, Rowan, and Kossow 2001), ters with native wildlife is one dimen- and behavior in the field of animal surveys based on extensive samples sion of such choices and conduct. protection. are scant for the Neotropics. Currently, there are two obvious man- The study of attitudes in a society Nassar-Montoya and Crane (2000) ifestations of living with wildlife: the provides insight into variables that reviewed some of the information highly questionable acquisition and may be pertinent to people’s everyday about attitudes toward animals in keeping of wild animals as pets (for decisions and practices involving ani- Latin America in a series of essays example, parrots) and the coloniza- mals. This essay addresses the rela- written by experts expressing their tion of our living quarters by animals tionship between attitudes, knowl- perceptions of such attitudes. An addi- (for example, bats). The ways in edge, and behavior in the context of tional source of information for this which each person manages these sit- the protection of wild animals in the analysis is the national survey about uations are the result of tradition, Neotropics and ventures to draw the relationship between Costa Ricans education, and the scheme of values some conclusions about the state of and wild animals carried out in 1999. that governs one’s beliefs, percep- wild animals from this perspective. The survey includes a formal analysis tions, and actions. Opposition to The Neotropics, a biogeographical of attitudes, perceptions, knowledge, keeping wild animals as pets based on region that extends from the Yucatan and practices involving wildlife, with ethical considerations and tolerance peninsula to the southern tip of an emphasis on pet keeping. A profes- of the presence of bats in the attic are South America, includes some of the sional surveying organization adminis- manifestations of an amicable, com- most biodiverse countries of the tered personal interviews to 1,024 passionate, and respectful attitude world. Its nations share a common adults and 177 minors, aged nine to toward wild animals. As a working history of Iberian colonization but are seventeen, from a representative, hypothesis, an analysis of the rela- nonetheless comparatively heteroge- nationwide sample of 1,024 house- tionship between how people think neous in their cultures and social holds (for methodological details see

193 Drews 2001, 2002a).1 The instrument imported into the United States try (Rede Nacional De Combate Ao for the study of attitudes, a battery of between 1989 and 1997 (Franke and Trafico De Animais Silvestres 2001).2 questions subject to factorial analyses, Telecky 2001). An estimated 38 million animals in was based on Stephen Kellert’s con- In Latin America there is a con- Brazil are taken yearly from the wild ceptual and methodological frame- stant, and by-and-large illegal, for the wildlife trade. Of that number work (e.g., Kellert and Berry 1980; demand for wildlife, especially for a considerable proportion escape Kellert 1996). In an attempt to pro- psittacids and other birds to keep as injured, die during capture, or are vide a robust picture of the relation- pets (e.g., Bolivia: Martínez 2000; discarded because of their poor con- ship between Costa Rican society and Colombia: Nassar-Montoya 2000; dition, and about 4 million individu- wildlife protection, attitudes toward Chile: Muñóz-López and Ortiz-Latorre als are illegally traded in the country. hunting are included in the analysis. 2000; Ecuador: Touzet and Yépez Birds make up the great majority of Consequently, the analysis sets Costa 2000; Mexico: Benítez-García and these animals, accounting for 82 per- Rica as a case study and discusses the Durán-Fernández 2000; Panama: cent of confiscations between 1999 possible implications of the findings Rodríguez 2000; Salvador: Ramos and and 2000. The Internet emerges as a for the rest of the region. Data for Ricord de Mendoza 2000; Venezuela: new and powerful medium for a clan- Costa Rica shown below come from De Alió 2000). Such demand has been destine wildlife market. In 1999 Rede that survey, unless otherwise indicat- inferred mainly from the detection of Nacional De Combate Ao Trafico De ed. In 2000 a similar, nation-wide sur- a large volume of illegal trade, confis- Animais Silvestres found 4,892 adver- vey was carried out in 1,012 cations, and donations of unwanted tisements involving Brazilian fauna in Nicaraguan households. Some prelim- pets to rescue centers and zoos (con- illegal transactions. By virtue of the inary results of that study are also tributions in Nassar-Montoya and sheer numbers of animals involved in included in this chapter (Zegarra and Crane 2000). the chain of extraction, trade, and Drews 2002). End consumers are rarely aware of captivity, this issue stands out as the animal welfare and species conser- probably the most important deter- vation implications of such trade in minant of the state of the wild ani- Animals live animals. Injury and death during mals in the Neotropics. capture, transport, and quarantine Involved in are common. The number of animals lost in the process greatly exceeds the Reasons Wildlife Trade numbers that reach the end con- An estimated 30,000 primates, 2–5 sumers (Redford 1992). The survival for Concern million birds, 2–3 million reptiles, of wild populations can be compro- Pets have been commonly and affec- and 500–600 million ornamental fish- mised from overexploitation. These tionately kept in Middle America es are traded globally each year to sat- same concerns apply to the trade of since pre-Columbian times (e.g., Mex- isfy the demand for live animals for animals for the pet market within ico: Benítez-García and Durán-Fer- the pet trade, zoos, and laboratories tropical countries, but the lack of data nández 2000). Animals at home are (Nilsson 1977; Hemley 1994). Most of has obscured thus far the magnitude part of Costa Rican culture and rou- these animals are native to tropical of the phenomenon. Beissinger tine: 71 percent of households keep countries and wild caught (that is, (1994), for example, pointed out the at least one animal (Drews 2001). taken from wild populations rather lack of information on—and the Overall 68 percent of Costa Rican than produced in captivity) (e.g., urgent need to quantify the demand adults report keeping a pet (domes- Clapp and Banks 1973; Clapp 1975). for—parrots in Latin America as one tic, wild, or both). These values are These estimates do not include the of the challenges facing those working high by international standards, great proportion of animals who die for their conservation. Local use, con- exceeding the incidence of pets in prior to entering international trade, sumption, and trade of wild animals Germany, Netherlands, the United which, in the case of birds, could (Carrillo and Vaughan 1994), includ- States, Australia, and Japan (Drews result in some 100 million individuals ing felids and parrots for pets, have 2001, Kellert 1993a). The proportion being extracted yearly from the wild been recognized as having a stronger of households in Costa Rica keeping (e.g., Inskipp 1975). The Neotropics impact on wild populations in Central dogs (53 percent) is 3.6 higher than supplies a great volume of wild ani- America than international trade the proportion of households keeping mals, both legally and illegally, to (Barborak et al. 1983). cats (15 percent). Cats are much less North America, Europe, and Asia Recently, however, a colossal effort popular than dogs as companion ani- (e.g., Poten 1991; Cedeño and Drews by the Brazilian organization Rede mals in Costa Rica than they are in 2000). Green iguanas (3.4 million Nacional De Combate Ao Trafico De the United States or Australia.3 In animals) from South and Central Animais Silvestres has generated a Nicaragua the proportion of house- America, for example, ranked first wealth of information about wildlife holds keeping dogs and cats, 56 per- among the non-native reptile species trade in the largest Neotropical coun- cent and 17 percent respectively, is

194 The State of the Animals II: 2003 similar to Costa Rica. quarter of all cases, the idea to Nature, now the World Conservation The proportion of households that acquire a wild animal came from a Union) criteria and/or national legis- keep livestock is higher in Costa Rica minor. The widespread belief among lation (Solís et al. 1999). With the than in the United States or Ger- Costa Rican (Drews 1999a, 2000a) exception of white-faced capuchin many. While 6.4 percent of U.S. and Nicaraguan adults that keeping a monkeys, these species are all listed respondents and 10 percent of Ger- wild animal fosters love and respect under the Convention on Internation- man respondents raised livestock in for nature in children probably also al Trade in Endangered Species of the preceding two years (Kellert helps trigger the purchase. Wild Fauna And Flora (CITES), indi- 1980; Schulz 1985, respectively), in Conditions in captivity suggest that cating global concern about the Costa Rica 25 percent of households the welfare of wild animals in people’s potential harm to their wild popula- kept livestock at the time of the sur- households is severely compromised tions from international trade. Local vey. The proportion of households (Drews 2000a). The pet is kept in an trade of these species to satisfy the that keep horses in Costa Rica (4.5 enclosure smaller than a large televi- illegal pet market poses an additional percent) and Nicaragua (4.4 percent) sion set in 77 percent of the cases, burden on the viability of their wild is three times higher than the 1.5 per- and without the company of any con- populations, in addition to other pres- cent recorded in the United States specifics in 75 percent of cases. Diets sures such as habitat destruction. In (American Veterinary Medical Associ- are by-and-large inadequate, and only Costa Rica the yearly extraction rate ation 1997). 16 percent of keepers of wild animals of parrots from the wild to satisfy the There are few studies of the inci- have ever given veterinary care to national demand for pets is in the dence of wild animals kept as pets in their animals. An average survivor- range of 25,000–40,000 chicks tropical households. Wild, native ship of four years for captive parrots (Drews 2000b). This figure does not species are found in 24 percent of (Drews 2000b), animals with a lifes- take into account mortality during Costa Rican households (Drews pan of several decades, testifies to the capture and transport, which would 2001). This incidence is similar in inadequacy of the typical husbandry at least double the estimate (Pérez Nicaragua (22 percent) (Zegarra and situation. In spite of this, however, a and Zúñiga 1998). This Costa Rican Drews 2002) and higher than the great majority of pet keepers in Costa figure alone exceeds the volumes incidence in a sample suburb in Pana- Rica and Nicaragua state that their exported from Central America for ma (14 percent, Medina and Montero animals fare well. There is an evident the international pet market (Drews 2001). Although parrots are the need to disseminate information in preparation), just as Beissinger majority of the wild animals kept as about what determines the well being (1994) had anticipated. The yearly, pets, there are at least 45 animal of an animal. mostly illegal, extraction of parrots in species commonly kept in Costa Rica, The majority of wild animal pur- Venezuela for international trade is including other birds, reptiles, mam- chases were spontaneous: 82 percent on the order of some 5,000–75,000 mals, amphibians, fishes, and inverte- in the case of parrots, 61 percent in individuals (Boher-Bentti and Smith brates. These are typically taken from the case of turtles, and 63 percent of 1994; Desenne and Strahl 1991, their natural habitat to satisfy the pet the fish (Drews 1999a). Eight percent 1994). If the thus far unknown inci- market. The extraction from the wild of adults who kept a wild animal at dence of parrots in Venezuelan house- and the keeping of such animals is by- home at some point reported cases of holds is similar to those in Costa and-large illegal and often involves venomous stings or bites that caused Rican households, it is quite likely endangered species. Over half of the bleeding; half of these cases involved that the national demand there also respondents have kept a parrot at minors. This fact, in addition to the exceeds the volumes exported.5 These some point in their lives. A conserva- burden of work associated with the calculations show that the internal tive estimate suggests that about care of the animal (which typically pet market is a stronger threat to wild 151,288 parrots are kept currently as falls onto a female member of the populations and compromises the illegal pets in Costa Rica (Drews family), probably led 39 percent of well being of more individuals, than 2001). The preference for parrots as the pet keepers to express reserva- does international trade. The impor- pet birds in Costa Rica and Nicaragua tions about keeping wild animals as tance of studying and quantifying pet- is in line with such preference in pets (Drews 2000a). Some 23 percent keeping practices and the associated other societies.4 In the United States, asserted that they would rather not market in Neotropical countries is for example, parrots correspond to 65 keep the animal they already had. evident, therefore, both in the con- percent of species of pet birds kept Only half of the captive animals were text of species conservation strate- (Kellert 1980). replaced after they died or escaped. gies (also Beissinger 1994; Morales The initiative to obtain a wild ani- All parrot species, primates, and and Desenne 1994) and in the con- mal comes mainly from adults. The felids documented as pets in Costa text of animal protection considera- presence of minors in the household, Rica are endangered or vulnerable tions associated with the capture, however, increases the likelihood that under IUCN (formerly International handling, care, and captive fate of an animal will be kept as a pet. In a Union for the Conservation of these numerous individuals.

The State of Wild Animals in the Minds and Households of a Neotropical Society: The Costa Rican Case Study 195 tudes in these four countries.6 The ing of animals for recreation or even Attitudes relatively high importance of moralis- sustainable use (see below). Such a tic traits was similar in the United relatively consistent trait is probably toward Animals States (from Kellert 1993a) and in the product of the cultural homo- in Costa Rica Costa Rica. Germany stands out in geneity of Costa Rican society. In the dimension of concern for the eth- 1924 a series of legal measures were A nationwide survey in Costa Rica, ical treatment of animals, however, by taken to safeguard the well being of based on Stephen Kellert’s conceptu- virtue of a score much higher than on animals, including, among several reg- al framework for the study of atti- any other attitude. In fact, most Euro- ulations for the husbandry and care of tudes, revealed in 1999 a society with peans are more negative toward the livestock, a ban on bullfighting involv- an “animal friendly profile,” based on use of animals in research and test- ing physical injury and death of the five attitude dimensions toward ani- ing, as well as toward factory farming bull, cockfighting, dogfighting, cat mals (Drews 2002a). Overall Costa practices, and are more supportive of fighting, and the use of slingshots Rican adults have a strong sentimen- organic farming than are Americans against birds. A common theme of tal attitude, that is, an expression of (Herzog, Rowan, and Kossow 2001). these protective attitudes and mea- feelings of affection, toward animals. In contrast, the moralistic attitude sures is that the suffering and cause of In contrast, the materialistic attitude, garnered one of the lowest attitude death of the animals involved are visi- which regards animals as resources scores in Japan. The utilitarian and ble: bleeding injuries result from (Kellert’s utilitarian attitude) and dominionistic attitude scores were fights, bad handling, or the use of a praises acts of control over them particularly low in relation to other weapon. In contrast, the suffering of (Kellert’s dominionistic attitude), is attitudes in Germany and Costa Rica caged animals, for example, is subtle weak. This reflects a prevailing oppo- (low materialistic attitude), and rela- and not easily visible to an unin- sition to the act of hunting per se: tively high in Japan. The schematic formed person. A cognitively more because of harm inflicted on individ- attitude, which includes aesthetic demanding process is required to ual animals rather than because of its and negativistic elements, was of appreciate the animal’s suffering, one potentially detrimental effect on nat- intermediate importance in Costa that combines common sense with ural populations. There is a strong Rica. The negativistic attitude was additional information. The use of inquisitive attitude, corresponding to relatively strong in Japan and in the wild animals in circuses and other a widespread interest in learning United States, whereas in Germany it public performances was banned in about the biology of animals and their scored relatively low. Costa Rica in July 2002. The average habitats. High scores on the ethical The profile of Costa Rican attitudes audience for such performances is not attitude indicate concern for the eth- toward animals contrasts greatly with directly confronted with a visible suf- ical treatment of animals and nature. that of another tropical country, fering of the animals involved. This The schematic attitude emphasizes Botswana, where the prevailing atti- ban and a recent series of publicity the role of aesthetic appearance in tude of the public was utilitarian campaigns against the keeping of wild the preferences for certain animals (Mordi 1991). The next most pro- animals as pets in Costa Rica by gov- and acknowledges feelings of aver- nounced attitude in Botswana was the ernment agencies and non-govern- sion, dislike, or fear of some animals. theistic, an attitude introduced by mental organizations (compiled by Scores for this attitude were weakly Mordi in his study design, in which Trama and Ramírez 2002) are signs of positive. That said, the attitude pro- the population dynamics of wildlife an increasing awareness of animal file of Costa Ricans is probably incom- was believed to be controlled by the protection issues in this society. plete, given the relatively small bat- supernatural. Other attitudes with tery of questions used in this study. high scores in Botswana were the sci- Kellert (1993a) compared the atti- entistic, the neutralistic, and the neg- tudes toward wildlife in the United Attitudes ativistic. Humanistic feelings toward States, Germany, and Japan using a animals were rare in Botswana, prob- toward standardized methodology. Direct ably because wild animals cannot be comparisons of attitude score levels friends of the public and meat at the Animals in between these countries and Costa same time (Mordi 1991). Rica are not possible due to differ- Costa Ricans feel protective toward the Neotropics ences in the composition of question animals, as reflected in their attitudes Current attitudes toward animals in clusters for each attitude and in the and law. They relate to wildlife Latin America are shaped by a multi- scoring method. The relative impor- through strong affection, aesthetic cultural heritage. Attitudes toward tance of certain attitudes, however, is appreciation, ethical concern, and a wildlife in the Caribbean coast of amenable to comparisons with Costa strong desire to learn. Overall, the Costa Rica, for example, can be relat- Rica. Feelings of affection toward ani- general public condemns expressions ed to the history of colonization by mals scored high among other atti- of mastery over wildlife and the hunt- various ethnic groups, e.g., African,

196 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Caribbean, Hispanic, and their result- ing blends in modern culture. There- fore, marine turtles, for example, may have a different significance in differ- ent cultures: as deity, merchandise, food, medicine, aphrodisiac, subject of scientific research, protected ani- mal, managed animal, tourist attrac- tion, or art (Vargas-Mena 2000). These categories are not necessarily mutually exclusive for any given per- son. With the addition of two cate- gories—the animal as subject of superstition and as pet—they inspired an analysis of attitudes toward wildlife in Colombia that illus- trated the influence of indigenous and colonizing cultural traits (Nassar- Montoya 2000). Ramos and Ricord de Mendoza (2000) offer a description of current views on wildlife in El Sal- vador citing these attitudes: utilitari- an or consumptive, cruel or contemp- tuous, dominionistic, compassionate, and naturalistic or scientific. Ele- comparisons of attitudes among Although overall participation in ments of Kellert’s typology can be Latin American societies are ham- hunting was small in Costa Rica, 13 associated with most of the above- pered by the different methodologies percent of the adults ate meat of a mentioned cultural meanings and used to characterize them. Neverthe- wild animal during that year. This views on animals. less, the results of this Costa Rican result is surprisingly high given that, In general, a utilitarian attitude, study suggest that the Neotropical with few exceptions, there is no legal devoid of awareness about the threats region may be more heterogeneous in access to wild animal meat in public to wildlife and the importance of its its attitudes toward animals than pre- establishments in that country. protection, seems common among viously thought. The Costa Rican pro- Social attitudes and public opinion Latin Americans (contributions in file is probably not representative of toward hunting have been studied Nassar-Montoya and Crane 2000). Latin America. For instance, while 59 mostly in developed nations (e.g., the Not just commercial exploitation but percent of Costa Rican adults disap- United States: references in Herzog, also subsistence hunting for food can prove of keeping wild animals as pets Rowan, and Kossow 2001; Germany: lead to population declines of various (Figure 1), in Nicaragua only 39 per- Schulz 1985; Japan: Kellert 1993a). Neotropical wild animals (Bedoya- cent of adults share that disapproval. Although figures from such surveys Gaitán 2000). Ignorance about the need to be interpreted and compared finiteness of wildlife as a resource can with caution, in the light of differ- be high among societies that com- Hunting ences in the phrasing of questions monly utilize animals (e.g., Botswana: The proportion of the population that and their impact on the outcome of Mordi 1991). Previous studies in participates in hunting is smaller in the study (Herzog, Rowan, and Kos- Colombia and El Salvador and on the Costa Rica than in the United States. sow 2001), there are some recogniz- Caribbean coast of Costa Rica sug- Only 2.4 percent of Costa Rican able trends. The general public in gested that the utilitarian, materialis- respondents said to have hunted or these nations disapproves of recre- tic view of wild animals as food and as captured a wild animal, excluding fish, ational hunting per se, with some a source of income is possibly the during the year previous to the sur- allowances for subsistence hunting most prevalent in the region. Howev- vey.7 Kellert (1993a) reported that 14 and meat consumption.9 This pattern er, according the recent national sur- percent of Americans, 4 percent of is found in Costa Rica, too. vey, in Costa Rican society, the pre- Germans, and 1 percent of Japanese Neither hunting nor hunters enjoy vailing attitudes toward animals are hunted during the two years previous a generalized acceptance in Costa the sentimental and inquisitive, to the corresponding studies. Every Rica. The majority (89 percent) of whereas utilitarian views on wildlife fifth Costa Rican adult fished in a river respondents consider recreational are not popular (see also public opin- and every tenth adult fished in the sea hunting an act of cruelty (Table 1). ion about hunting, below). Direct during the year previous to the study.8 This is a well-established stance in

The State of Wild Animals in the Minds and Households of a Neotropical Society: The Costa Rican Case Study 197 Table 1 Adults’ Acceptance of Hunting in Costa Rica

Question Definitely In General In General Definitely Sample Yes Yes No No Size (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent)

Do you agree with the use of venison as long as deer are not endangered? 18.5 26.2 19.2 36.1 1,006

Do you admire the skill and courage of a person who hunts successfully in the wild? 11.9 15.3 19.3 53.5 1,017

If there are enough crocodiles in Costa Rica, do you approve of the hunting of some to sell their hides? 7.4 9.6 21.2 61.8 1,016

Do you consider any kind of hunting for entertainment or sport an act of cruelty to the animals? 71.3 17.5 4.5 6.8 1,020

Do you think that the main reason to protect deer is to safeguard the supply of venison? 28.5 24.8 15.5 31.2 1,010

Note: These questions were part of a large battery of items in a nationwide survey carried out in 1999 about the relationship between society and wildlife. They did not appear clustered in the questionnaire. The difference between the total sample of 1,021 adults interviewed and the sample size reported for each question correspond to missing or “I don´t know” answers.

Costa Rican society, with no signifi- age (Figure 2).10 Two thirds of the able opposition to hunting per se cant differences related to gender, adults interviewed do not admire the (Kellert 1993a). In the United States, urban or rural setting, socioeconomic skill and courage of hunters (Table 56 percent of respondents felt that level, or education. The proportion of 1). This Costa Rican stance is similar hunting was morally wrong (Prince- respondents sharing strongly this to that of Japanese and German ton Survey Research Associates 1991, opinion increases significantly with respondents, who expressed consider- cited in Herzog, Rowan, and Kossow 2001). A majority of Americans objected to the activity if it was justi- Figure 2 fied only on the basis of its sporting or trophy values (Kellert 1989, 1993a; Public Opinion on Hunting Rutberg 1997). In contrast, a majori- for Entertainment ty of Americans supported hunting if Question the meat was utilized. In Costa Rica Proportion of Costa Rican respondents answering “Definitely Yes” to there is less disapproval of hunting the question “Do you consider any kind of hunting for entertainment for deer meat (55 percent) than of or sport an act of cruelty to the animals?” by age group. hunting for crocodile hides (83 per- 100 cent). Female respondents disapprove of hunting for the use of venison and 80 hides significantly more strongly than 11 60 do males. The more likely accep- tance of hunting for meat than for hides or for recreational purposes in

Percent 40

general mirrors a similar trend in the 20 United States and Japan (Kellert 1993a). The opposition to hunting for 0 venison and hides in Costa Rica is 9–13 14–17 18–2930–49 50+ probably a matter of ethical principle, Age in Years irrespective of species conservation considerations (see phrasing of ques- n=1,190 respondents tions in Table 1).

198 The State of the Animals II: 2003 A slight majority of respondents justified protection measures for deer on the grounds of safeguarding the supply of venison, a utilitarian reason (Table 1). Most of the opponents of this utilitarian motive were well-edu- cated, urban adults of high socioeco- nomic status. A higher education level was associated with a stronger rejection of hunting for venison or hides, less admiration of the skill and courage of hunters, and a stronger disapproval of utilitarian reasons for the protection of wildlife. The overall disapproval of hunting by the Costa Rican public shown above reduces the viability of projects such as commercial utilization of ani- mals taken from the wild for their meat or hides, the establishment of hunting grounds, and the conceivable promotion of Costa Rica as an inter- national destination for trophy and sport hunters. This country maintains a “green” profile in the eyes of the international community and bene- bats in people’s homes is three times 3. Most respondents perceive the bats fits from this image through the higher in rural than in urban areas. At as vermin, dirty, ugly, carriers of dis- income generated from ecotourism. least 87,020 household countrywide ease, and boring. About half consider Currently, therefore, Costa Rica val- share their shelter with bats, a very them dangerous. A fifth of the inter- ues its live animals more highly than conservative estimate given that their viewees attribute supernatural pow- it does carcasses or products thereof. presence is often unnoticed.12 A fifth ers to these animals. Female adults There are no legal exports of wild ani- of interviewees knew of bats inhabiting have a more negative perception of mals for the international pet market a nearby school and one quarter the bats than do males. from Costa Rica (Gómez and Drews reported their presence in a nearby Although in some cases a colony of 2000). In the context of a non-con- church. The species of bats living in bats under the roof may cause bad sumptive use policy, the use of native buildings feed on insects, nectar of odors and stains on the ceiling, the wildlife for pets within the country is flowers, or fruit. They are harmless and majority of respondents did not per- contradictory. Taking live parrot free of diseases that could be trans- ceive the presence of these animals as chicks from nests may not be gener- mitted to humans. The vampire bat is problematic (Figure 4). Interviewees ally regarded as hunting and keeping not commonly found in people’s quar- who reportedly had bats in their them alive in captivity may not be ters. Perceptions of bats worldwide are homes, however, considered these a seen as consumptive. loaded with prejudices and supersti- problem in 44 percent of the cases, in tion, which have turned these animals contrast to only 28 percent of those into victims of dislike and unjustified who did not notice bats at home.14 Living with Bats eradication, and Costa Rica is no There were no significant differences In the tropics people commonly share exception. between these two groups with regard their homes with bats, albeit often un- Changing attitudes toward bats is a to any of the remaining attributes knowingly. Modifications of the land- challenging goal. Understanding the shown in Figure 3. scape through logging and through nature of the relationship between Perceptions of bats are closely urban and agricultural development the society concerned and these ani- linked to the level of education (Fig- have reduced the number of natural mals is a prerequisite for such an ure 4). Extremes on the negative side roosts for these nocturnal mammals. endeavor. Costa Rican adults were of the attributes studied are found Several species, however, find ade- asked to select one of four choices mainly among the less educated. quate shelter in buildings. In Costa along a semantic gradient for various Superstition and fears seem to fade 13 Rica at least every tenth adult is aware attributes. The percentage of an- along with increased education. The of the presence of bats in his or her swers inclined toward a negative per- tolerance of bats at home reflects home (Drews 2002b). The incidence of ception of the bats is shown in Figure knowledge about their biology,

The State of Wild Animals in the Minds and Households of a Neotropical Society: The Costa Rican Case Study 199 responsibility in attending to the needs of other species, and success in challenging the negative myths about bats that still prevail in Costa Rica. This exercise suggests that environ- mental education efforts are a prom- ising avenue toward a more animal friendly society. It is illustrative of 80 similar processes that govern the per- ception that the bush is hostile, the 70 urge for biological sterility in urban 60 settings, and the simplistic dichoto- 50 my between good and bad organisms. The readiness to share the living 40 space with live members of the 30 national biodiversity without resort- 20 ing to their control in captivity is a firm step toward a harmonious co- 10 existence with nature.

Linking Dangerous Vermin Dirty With Supernatural Powers Attitudes and Knowledge between thought and action is not are that individual attitudes toward to Practices usually straightforward and can be wild animals influence people’s be- The decision to obtain a wild animal quite complex. Biophilia, the innately havior, and that attitudes are influ- to keep at home is conceivably the emotional affiliation of human beings enced by culture, and as such are product of highly heterogeneous to other living organisms (Wilson amenable to changes over time. These influences, including cultural up- 1984), can be conceptually linked to assumptions, if true, should enable bringing and surrounding, attitudes, values and attitudes toward animals the fostering of respect and compas- social condition, education, knowl- (Kellert 1993b). Biophilia probably sion through example, guided experi- edge of natural history, tradition, contributes to the positive feelings of ences, and relevant information, con- gender, and family composition, as Costa Ricans toward wild animals, veyed emotionally and intellectually, well as logistical and legal considera- then backfires as it encourages the about the role of the living environ- tions (Drews 1999b). Aesthetic keeping of wild animals, condemning ment in people’s lives. (Values educa- appeal of the animals, compassion, them to an alien environment and per- tion constitutes a synthesis of cogni- affection, and a desire to please and manent captivity. The contradiction tive and affective learning, pertinent stimulate children are important between attitudes and practices is fur- in this context [c.f. Kellert 1996]). motives for the acquisition of wild ther illustrated by the fact that, The teaching of values needs to animals as pets in Costa Rica. The despite a stronger affinity with animal accompany any education effort ori- sentimental attitude was stronger in protection among households of high ented toward encouraging animal pro- those who decided to keep a wild ani- socioeconomic status, the percentage tection and biodiversity conservation. mal at home than in those adults who of households with wildlife did not dif- Understanding the link between did not initiate the acquisition. Thus, fer among the socioeconomic strata attitudes and practices poses an keepers provide wild pets inadequate (Drews 2000a).15 At the root of such acute challenge to the design of care despite their strong affection for contradictions may be the invisibility awareness campaigns. Herzog, animals. The result supports the of the animal’s suffering. Rather than Rowan, and Kossow (2001) analyzed hypothesis that a marked sympathy changing the attitudes of Costa Ricans social attitudes in the United States for and false empathy for the pets per- toward animals, the challenge is to toward the use of animals in research, petuates this practice in Costa Rica increase the awareness about the ani- the wearing of fur, hunting, farm ani- (Drews 1999b). mals’ needs and thereby trigger the mal issues, diet choice, and public There are further contradictions ethical concern for their well being. support of animal protection philoso- between attitudes and people’s behav- The underlying assumptions of any phy. The study illustrates the exis- ior, showing that the relationship such environmental education efforts tence of contradictory results, both

200 The State of the Animals II: 2003 from methodological constraints and Previous research suggested that 1). The proportion of respondents flaws and from a “real” lack of corre- most Costa Ricans have a fairly super- who disagree with that practice spondence between attitudes and ficial understanding and awareness of among nine to eleven year olds, the action. For example, in general, pub- environmental problems (Holl, Daily, youngest of the sample, is nearly half lic opinion in the United States has and Ehrlich 1995). that of the adults. This proportion become more supportive of animal A slight majority of Costa Rican increases steadily with age towards protection issues in the past fifty adults do not consider acceptable the adulthood, reaching 59.5 percent of years. However, although the majority keeping of wild animals as pets. This the Costa Rican adults interviewed of Americans have favorable views of tendency, however, is not mirrored (Drews 1999a, 2000a). This suggests the animal rights movement (Roper among minors aged nine to seventeen a progressively increasing awareness Center for Public Opinion 1994), (Figure 1). Nature-related values about ethical arguments against the their daily behaviors, including meat- seem to develop later in children than keeping of wildlife at home.17 Given eating, are not necessarily compati- other moral values. Young children the central role that children can play ble with such perception. Positive typically view nature in highly instru- in the family initiative to obtain a wild feelings toward animals do not neces- mental, egocentric, and exploitative animal, this age group becomes a key sarily lead to kind treatment, respect, ways (Kellert 1996). In the course of target for awareness education—in and consideration of the animal’s further development, however, these the hopes of speeding up their acqui- needs (e.g., Herzog, Rowan, and Kos- values change in emphasis toward less sition of moralistic values of nature, sow 2001). The strength of an atti- utilitarian, negativistic, and domin- which may prevent or hinder the tude, and its associated beliefs and ionistic ones. American children acquisition of a wild animal. emotions, may be decisive to its like- between thirteen and seventeen years The belief that a wild animal kept as lihood of being translated into corre- of age begin to comprehend relation- a pet stimulates in children love and sponding behaviors (Herzog, Rowan, ships among creatures and habitats, respect for nature is probably erro- and Kossow 2001). Some individuals as well as people’s ethical responsibil- neous. Being able to observe a wild may have attitudes toward animals ities for exercising stewardship animal at close range is a thrilling and that are peripheral or superficial. toward the natural world. This is stimulating experience. If that animal Such a collection of preferences and reflected in a sharp increase in moral- is in a cage, however, detached from isolated opinions has been referred to istic, ecologistic, and naturalistic val- its habitat and natural behavior and as “non-attitudes” or “vacuous atti- ues of nature (Kellert 1996). Costa deprived of the freedom to come and tudes” (Eagly and Chaiken 1993). Rican children seem to follow this go as it pleases, the experience is These may have little real salience in pattern, with regard to their increas- much less rewarding and perpetuates a person’s life but can affect respons- ing disagreement with people keep- the idea that people can control and es on opinion polls. The treatment of ing wildlife at home with age (Figure subdue nature at will. It is plausible animals is not an issue of high priori- ty to most people. Adults who keep wildlife have bet- ter biological knowledge than those who never kept wildlife as pets (Drews 2002a). Costa Ricans ranked highest in the percentage of correct answers to five questions about animals, in comparison to U.S. and Japanese cit- izens (calculated from Kellert 1993a, 80 16 Figure 5). Such knowledge of natur- 70 al history per se, however, does not translate into more animal friendly 60 practices, as seen by the widespread 50 keeping of wildlife as pets under con- 40 ditions of concern. Specific key 30 aspects seem to be dimly represented 20 in biological curricula, such as the 10 social needs of wild animals, their drive for dispersal, exploration, and 0 coverage of wide areas in search of resources and mates, the effects of stress generated by constrained free- dom of movement, among others.

The State of Wild Animals in the Minds and Households of a Neotropical Society: The Costa Rican Case Study 201 that outdoor activities—a guided con- (Drews 1999c). At the turn of the Notes frontation with the habitat of these century, however, various countries 1With four million inhabitants and 51,100 km2, Costa Rica is a small country. species, their ecological role, and have well-established rescue centers, 2Rede Nacional de Combate ao Tráfico de Ani- their individual needs—stimulates the and information about the peculiari- mais Silvestres (National Network for the Fight interest in and reverence for nature ties of rescue techniques for Neotrop- against Illegal Wild Animal Trade, www.renc- tas.org.br). more strongly than does the caged ical animals is becoming available. 3Dogs are kept 1.2 to 1.3 times more often animal in the backyard. Such has been Academics from the fields of biolo- than cats in U.S. households (AVMA 1997 and the approach taken by the biological gy, ethology, and veterinary medicine American Pet Products Manufacturers Associa- tion 2000, respectively), and 1.5 times more education program of the Guanacaste have a key challenge ahead: the pro- often than cats in Australian households Conservation Area in Costa Rica, duction of material that visualizes the (www.petnet.com.au/statistics.html, accessed which hopes to produce better citi- suffering of wild, Neotropical animals March 17, 2000). 4Some species of parrot is kept in 91 percent zens by increasing their biological lit- kept as pets, in relation to their social of households that keep wildlife in Nicaragua. eracy (Valverde 2000).18 and ecological needs in the wild. An 5Venezuela has a population of about 23 mil- efficient integration of such material lion inhabitants, nearly six times more than Costa Rica. If extraction rates for the national pet mar- in a society with an affectionate and ket are similar in these countries, Venezuela Lessons from inquisitive attitude toward animals would need about 150,000–240,000 parrot should trigger ethical concern about chicks to satisfy this demand. 6The humanistic attitude, which is similar to and for the the habit of keeping wild animals as the sentimental dimension identified in Costa pets. A look at perceptions of bats has Rica, was the most common perspective of ani- Neotropics shown that education is a promising mals in a U.S. sample of adult citizens (Kellert Any progress toward reducing the lev- 1989). avenue for the improvement of social 7Males represented 80 percent of the 24 peo- els of trade and the incidence of wild attitudes toward wild animals. Ulti- ple who reportedly hunted the previous year. animals kept as pets will have a sig- mately, animal-friendly attitudes Among these 24 people, 46 percent reported hav- nificant and strong positive impact on ing hunted more than once in that year. should translate into animal-friendly 830 percent of male and 13 percent of female the state of wild animals in the actions. The absence of parrots in adults fished in a river, 16 percent of male and 4 Neotropics. Progress in such a reduc- Neotropical households and the toler- percent of female adults fished in the sea. tion of numbers seems distant. 9The percentage of people participating in ance of bats in the attics will show the hunting has decreased in the United States in the Nonetheless the information platform success in the endeavor to move past thirty years (Herzog, Rowan, and Kossow about trade, pet keeping habits, and toward a more compassionate, biolog- 2001). attitudes toward animals has 10Spearman’s correlation coefficient r=1.0, ically literate society, respectful of n=5, p<0.05. improved considerably in the past five wild animals. 11Chi-square=18.7, df=3, p<0.001, chi- years. Similarly awareness campaigns square=14.9, df=3, p<0.01, respectively. and more efficient networking 12According to the national census of 2000, Acknowledgements there are 937,210 homes in Costa Rica. between similarly minded organiza- 13 I am grateful to Humane Society E.g., rated from dangerous to harmless, with tions in the region are contributing four other options between them. Frequencies of International (HSUS/HSI, Washing- to progress in this direction. The the two options showing an inclination toward a ton, D.C.) for funding the Costa negative perception were pooled to calculate per- human resources and organizational Rican and Nicaraguan surveys and the centages shown in Figure 4. Significant differ- apparatus dedicated to wildlife pro- ences between males and females are indicated in preparation of this manuscript. tection, both at a government and Figure 3 by asterisks (chi-square tests, NS= not Stephen Kellert provided advice and significant, * = p<0.05, *** = p<0.001). private level, are growing toward their 14 documents during the early stages of Chi-square=10.7, df=3, p<0.02. consolidation. There are indications 15In Nicaragua the incidence of wildlife kept the survey. The Regional Wildlife Man- of an increasing public awareness and as pets was significantly higher among middle agement Program of the National and high strata households than among house- concern about wildlife protection in University of Costa Rica and person- holds of low socioeconomic level. Costa Rica and other countries of the 16Respondents were asked in Costa Rica, the nel from Unimer Research Interna- Neotropics: the use of wild animals in United States, and Japan to state for each of the tional (San José, Costa Rica) provid- following five statements whether it was true or circuses has been banned in Costa ed logistical support. My sincere false: (1) spiders have ten legs, (2) most insects Rica, the state of Rio de Janeiro have backbones, (3) a seahorse is a kind of fish, thanks to the people of Costa Rica (Brazil), and some municipalities of (4) snakes have a layer of slime to move more eas- who were interviewed and shared ily, and (4) all adult birds have feathers. Colombia since 2001. 17 their practices, attitudes, and knowl- In line with this view, both ethical principles Confiscated animals from the ille- and logistical considerations account, in about edge about wildlife in a most forth- gal trade are the tip of an iceberg. equal proportions, for 74 percent of reasons put coming manner. forward for not having ever had a wild animal at Their proper attention in rescue cen- home. A further 5 percent indicated dislike for ters is one of the many tasks that a wild animals, and only 4 percent noted that keep- society needs to accommodate in its ing wild animals as pets is illegal. 18www.acguanacaste.ac.cr. animal protection agenda. There has been slow progress in the field of wildlife rescue in the Neotropics

202 The State of the Animals II: 2003 estrategia para su conservación. ———. 1999c. Rescate de fauna en el Literature Cited Heredia, Costa Rica: Editorial de la Neotrópico: cerrando el milenio. In American Pet Products Manufacturers Universidad Nacional EUNA. Rescate de fauna en el neotrópico, Association (APPMA). 2000. Cedeño, Y., and C. Drews. 2000. Com- ed. C. Drews, 495–520. Heredia, National pet owners survey ercio internacional de fauna sil- Costa Rica: Editorial Universidad 1999–2000. Greenwich, Conn.: vestre en Centroamérica entre Nacional. APPMA. 1992 y 1996. Technical report. Pro- ———. 2000a. Caracterización gen- American Veterinary Medical Associa- grama Regional en Manejo de Vida eral de la tenencia de animales sil- tion (AVMA). 1997. U.S. pet owner- Silvestre, Universidad Nacional, vestres como mascotas en Costa ship and demographics sourcebook. Heredia, Costa Rica. Rica. In Actitudes hacia la fauna en Schaumburg, Ill.: Center for Infor- Clapp, R.B. 1975. Birds imported into Latinoamérica, ed. F. Nassar-Mon- mation Management, AVMA. the United States in 1972. Washing- toya and R. Crane, 45–55. Washing- Barborak, J., R. Morales, C. MacFar- ton, D.C.: U.S. Department of Inte- ton, D.C.: Humane Society Press. land, and B. Swift. 1983. Status and rior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Spe- ———. 2000b. Aspectos del mercado trends in international trade and cial Scientific Report—Wildlife No. en torno a la tenencia de animales local utilization of wildlife in Central 193. silvestres como mascotas en Costa America. Turrialba, Costa Rica: Clapp, R.B., and R.C. Banks. 1973. Rica. In Actitudes hacia la fauna en Wildlands and watershed program, Birds imported into the United Latinoamérica, ed. F. Nassar-Mon- CATIE. States in 1971. Washington, D.C.: toya and R. Crane, 147–160. Wash- Bedoya-Gaitán, M. 2000. Cacería y U.S. Department of Interior, ington D.C.: Humane Society Press. conservación de fauna en la comu- Bureau of Sport Fisheries and ———. 2001. Wild animals and other nidad indígena Ticuna de Buenos Wildlife, Special Scientific pets kept in Costa Rican house- Aires. In: Actitudes hacia la fauna Report—Wildlife No. 170. holds: Incidence, species, and num- en Latinoamérica, ed. F. Nassar- De Alió, L.W. 2000. El uso de la fauna bers. Society and Animals 9(2): Montoya and R. Crane, 177–188. silvestre como mascota en 107–126. Washington D.C.: Humane Society Venezuela. In Actitudes hacia la ———. 2002a. Attitudes, knowledge Press. fauna en Latinoamérica, ed. F. Nas- and wild animals as pets in Costa Beissinger, S.R. 1994. La conser- sar-Montoya and R. Crane, Rica. Anthrozoös 15(2): 119–138. vación de los psitácidos del 129–136. Washington, D.C.: ———. 2002b. Convivencia con mur- neotrópico: Retos para los biólogos, Humane Society Press. ciélagos en Costa Rica. Ambientico gerentes, y gobierno. In: Biología y Desenne, P., and S. Strahl. 1991. 103: 12–13. http://www.ambienti- conservación de los psitácidos de Trade and the conservation status co.una.ac.cr/drewsmurc.htm. Venezuela, ed. G. Morales, I. Novo, of the family Psittacidae in Eagly A.H., and S. Chaiken. 1993. The D. Bigio, A. Luy, and F. Rojas- Venezuela. Bird Conservation Inter- psychology of attitudes. Orlando, Suárez, 141–147. ISBN 980-07- national 1: 153–169. Fla.: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich 1717-X, Caracas: privately pub- ———. 1994. Situación poblacional y College Publishers. lished. jerarquización de especies para la Franke, J., and T.M. Telecky. 2001. Benítez-García, M.A., and L. Durán- conservación de la familia Psittaci- Reptiles as pets. Washington, D.C.: Fernández. 2000. Aspectos socio- dae en Venezuela. In: Biología y The Humane Society of the United culturales y políticos en las conservación de los psitácidos de States. actuales actitudes hacia la fauna Venezuela, ed. G. Morales, I. Novo, Gómez, J.R., and C. Drews. 2000. silvestre en México. In Actitudes D. Bigio, A. Luy, and F. Rojas- Movimientos internacionales de hacia la fauna en Latinoamérica, Suárez, 231–272. ISBN 980-07- flora y fauna de los apéndices ed. F. Nassar-Montoya and R. Crane, 1717-X. Caracas: privately pub- CITES en Costa Rica entre 1992 y 98–117. Washington D.C.: Humane lished. 1998. Technical report. Heredia, Society Press. Drews, C. 1999a. Wildlife in Costa Costa Rica: Programa Regional en Boher-Bentti, S., and R. Smith 1994. Rican households—A nationwide Manejo de Vida Silvestre, Universi- Comercio ilegal de guacamayas y survey. Technical report, Washing- dad Nacional. loros. In: Biología y conservación ton, D.C.: Humane Society Interna- Hemley, G., ed. 1994. International de los psitácidos de Venezuela, ed. tional. wildlife trade: A CITES sourcebook. G. Morales, I. Novo, D. Bigio, A. ———. 1999b. Simpatía y empatía Island Press, Washington, D.C. Luy, and F. Rojas-Suárez, 277. ISBN hacia la fauna: Las raíces de tenen- Herzog, H., A. Rowan, and D. Kossow. 980-07-1717-X. Caracas: privately cia de mascotas silvestres. In 2001. Social attitudes and animals. published. Rescate de fauna en el neotrópico, In: The state of the animals: 2001, Carrillo, E., and C. Vaughan, eds. ed. C. Drews, 31–52. Heredia, ed. D. Salem and A. Rowan, 55–69. 1994. La vida silvestre de Costa Rica: Editorial Universidad Washington, D.C.: Humane Society mesoamérica: Diagnóstico actual y Nacional. Press.

The State of Wild Animals in the Minds and Households of a Neotropical Society: The Costa Rican Case Study 203 Holl, K.D., G.C. Daily, and P.R. Universidad de Panamá. BioScience 42(6): 412–422. Ehrlich. 1995. Knowledge and per- Morales, G., and P. Desenne. 1994. Rede Nacional de Combate ao Tráfico ceptions in Costa Rica regarding Plan de acción y conservación de de Animais Silvestres. 2001. 1° environment, population, and bio- los psitácidos venezolanos. In relatório nacional sobre o tráfico de diversity issues. Conservation Biol- Biología y conservación de los fauna silvestre. Brasilia: Rede ogy 9: 1548–1558. psitácidos de Venezuela, ed. G. Nacional De Combate ao Trafico De Inskipp, T.P. 1975. All heaven in a Morales, I. Novo, D. Bigio, A. Luy, Animais Silvestres. rage: A study of the importation of and F. Rojas-Suárez, 299–307. ISBN Rodríguez, J. 2000. Situación de la birds into the United Kingdom. Lon- 980-07-1717-X. Caracas: privately vida silvestre en Panamá. In Acti- don: Royal Society for the Protec- published. tudes hacia la fauna en Lati- tion of Birds, published in coopera- Mordi, A.R. 1991. Attitudes toward noamérica, ed. F. Nassar-Montoya tion with the Royal Society for the wildlife in Botswana. New York: and R. Crane, 119–128. Washing- Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Garland Publishing Inc. ton, D.C.: Humane Society Press. Kellert, S.R. 1980. Phase II: Activities Muñóz-López, E., and A. Ortíz- Roper Center for Public Opinion. of the American public relating to Latorre. 2000. Rehabilitación y 1994. Question US–PSRA. animals. Technical report, Washing- actitudes hacia la fauna silvestre en 092194, R24S. Times Mirror. July ton, D.C.: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Chile. In Actitudes hacia la fauna 12. Service. en Latinoamérica, ed. F. Nassar- Rutberg, A.T. 1997. The science of ———. 1989. Human-animal interac- Montoya and R. Crane, 71–84. deer management: An animal wel- tions: A review of American atti- Washington, D.C.: Humane Society fare perspective. In The science of tudes to wild and domestic animals Press. overabundance: Deer ecology and in the twentieth century. In Ani- Nassar-Montoya, F. 2000. Actitud y population management, ed. W. J. mals and people sharing the world, pensamiento sobre la fauna sil- McShea, H.B. Underwood, and J.H. ed. A.N. Rowan, 137–175. Hanover vestre en Colombia. In Actitudes Rappole. Washington, D.C.: Smith- and London: University Press of hacia la fauna en Latinoamérica, sonian Institution Press. New England. ed. F. Nassar-Montoya and R. Crane, Schulz, W. 1985. Einstellung zur ———. 1993a. Attitudes, knowledge, 27–43. Washington, D.C.: Humane natur. Ph.D. diss., Ludwig-Maximil- and behavior toward wildlife among Society Press. ians-Universität. the industrial superpowers: United Nassar-Montoya, F., and R. Crane, eds. Solís, V., A. Jiménez, O. Brenes, and States, Japan, and Germany. Jour- 2000. Actitudes hacia la fauna en L.V. Strusberg. 1999. Listas de nal of Social Issues 49: 53–69. Latinoamérica. Washington, D.C.: fauna de importancia para la con- ———. 1993b. The biological basis Humane Society Press. servación en Centroamérica y Méx- for human values of nature. In The Nilsson, G. 1977. The bird business: A ico. San José, Costa Rica: IUCN- biophilia hypothesis, ed. S.R. Kellert study of the importation of birds ORMA, WWF-Centroamérica. and E.O. Wilson, 42–69. Washing- into the United States. Washington, Touzet, J.M., and I. Yépez. 2000. ton, D.C.: Island Press. D.C.: Animal Welfare Institute. Problemática del tráfico de la fauna ———. 1996. The value of life. Wash- Pérez, R., and T. Zúñiga. 1998. Análi- silvestre en el Ecuador. In Actitudes ington, D.C.: Island Press. sis del comercio de psitácidos en hacia la fauna en Latinoamérica, Kellert, S.R., and J.K. Berry. 1980. Nicaragua. Managua, Nicaragua: ed. F. Nassar-Montoya and R. Crane, Phase III: Knowledge, affection and WCS/WWF. 57–69. Washington, D.C.: Humane basic attitudes toward animals in Poten, C.J. 1991. A shameful harvest: Society Press. American society. Washington, America’s illegal wildlife trade. Trama, F., and O. Ramírez. 2002. D.C.: U.S. Department of the Inte- National Geographic 180 (9): Decomisos de fauna silvestre en rior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 106–132. carreteras: Un indicador del éxito Martínez, N. 2000. Situación actual Princeton Survey Research Associ- de campañas de concientización? del manejo de la fauna silvestre en ates. 1991. Great American TV Poll Technical report. Heredia, Costa Bolivia. In Actitudes hacia la fauna #2—USPSRA. 91TV02.R30. Spon- Rica: Programa Regional en Manejo en Latinoamérica, ed. F. Nassar- sored by Troika Productions and de Vida Silvestre, Universidad Montoya and R. Crane, 3–11. Wash- Lifetime Television. Nacional. ington D.C.: Humane Society Press. Ramos, L.A., and Z. Ricord de Men- Valverde, J.F. 2000. Programa de edu- Medina, C., and A. Montero. 2001. doza. 2000. Tenencia de fauna sil- cación biológica en el área de Gua- Censo de la fauna silvestre en cau- vestre en El Salvador. In Actitudes nacaste, Costa Rica. In Actitudes tiverio en la comunidad de Nueve hacia la fauna en Latinoamérica, hacia la fauna en Latinoamérica, de Enero, Corregimiento de Amelia ed. F. Nassar-Montoya and R. Crane, ed. F. Nassar-Montoya and R. Crane, D. de Icaza, Distrito de San Migueli- 85–95. Washington, D.C.: Humane 214–219. Washington, D.C.: to, Panamá. Honors diss., Panama Society Press. Humane Society Press. City, Panama: Escuela de Biología, Redford, K.H. 1992. The empty forest. Vargas-Mena, E. 2000. Significados

204 The State of the Animals II: 2003 culturales de la tortuga verde (Che- lonia mydas) en el Caribe costarri- cense. In Actitudes hacia la fauna en Latinoamérica, ed. F. Nassar- Montoya and R. Crane, 161–176. Washington, D.C.: Humane Society Press. Wilson, E.O. 1984. Biophilia. Cam- bridge: Harvard University Press.

The State of Wild Animals in the Minds and Households of a Neotropical Society: The Costa Rican Case Study 205 Horse Welfare Since 1950 14CHAPTER Katherine A. Houpt and Natalie Waran

Introduction

here are approximately 6.9 down in lateral recumbency, but they days of Anna Sewell’s Black Beauty million horses in the United do not provide a natural social envi- (2001), published originally in 1877, TStates, more than in any other ronment that even tie stalls—where is that a horse seldom is kept by one country in the world (American horses are stabled closely one to owner for his or her entire adult life. Horse Council 2000) (Table 1). That another—provide. Typically a stalled Often a horse changes hands—and fact alone should inspire Americans horse seldom has access to a natural, careers—a number of times over his to improve equine welfare, although high roughage diet and is fed limited or her lifetime. After leaving the it must be said that the state of amounts of high-concentrate feed breeding farm, an animal may start domesticated horses is better now and/or hay that are quickly con- out as a race horse, then be sold and than it was fifty years ago. sumed. Such management leaves a retrained as a hunter, jumper, event The advances that have been made horse in a virtual wooden box with horse, or equitation horse when his or in veterinary medicine, including sur- long periods of physical inactivity. her racing career is over. He or she gical technique and, especially, anes- This unnatural state leads to the may then be sold several times when thesia, mean that diagnosis of an development of stall aggression, stall outgrown by one owner, found to be intestinal torsion or displacement is walking, weaving, wood chewing, or unsuitable for another’s level of expe- no longer an automatic death sen- cribbing, or to difficulty in handling. rience, or not competitive enough for tence. Improvements in surgery for Controlling these “vices” often is a third. In mid-life or later, he or she lameness and in anti-inflammatory done using inhumane methods. may then be used as a lesson, rental, drugs have eliminated such painful A situation unchanged since the or camp horse, and finally, when practices as blistering or pin-firing a lame horse’s lower limbs, ostensibly to expedite the healing process. Table 1 Improvements in nutrition and in Number of Horses and Participants control of infectious disease have by Industry, 1999 allowed many horses to live into their twenties, thirties, or beyond. Activity No. of Horses No. of Participants Horse husbandry has improved in one respect: unlike in days past, few Racing 725,000 941,400 horses are kept tied with halter and Showing 1,974,000 3,607,900 lead rope in narrow “tie” stalls in dark and dirty stables. But horse hus- Recreation 2,970,000 4,346,100 bandry has worsened in another: more horses live in box stalls or iso- Other* 1,262,000 1,607,900 lated in small, grassless corrals than Total 6,931,000 7,062,500** in natural herds on pasture now that fewer horse owners live in rural areas. *Includes farm and ranch work, police work, rodeo, and polo. **The sum of participants by activity does not equal the total number of participants Box stalls (typically 10–12 feet because individuals could be counted in more than one activity. square) allow the horse to turn Source: American Horse Council around, walk several paces, and lie

207 infirm, unrideable, or simply too old Cruelty can occur if the horse is to be useful, be sold at auction and injured in the handling process, badly Table 2 sent to slaughter. Relatively few hors- frightened, whipped to be persuaded Horses Slaughtered es die of old age, although some for- to move, or not properly stunned tunate retirees may be euthanized (Reece, Friend, and Stull 2000). The and Processed at due to age-related ailments. greater equine suffering occurs not at Packing Plants in At the turn of the millennium, the slaughter but during transport and in the United States most pressing welfare issues of the the pens used to confine the horses domestic horse surround conditions before and after transport. Many found in slaughter and transport to slaughter-bound horses begin their Year Number slaughter; pari-mutuel racing; the journey far from Texas and obviously 1990 345,900 pregnant mare urine (PMU) industry; must be transported long distances the competitive and show industry; as a result. Heat stress is an addition- 1991 276,700 and in the development of husbandry- al factor in the summer months. 1992 243,500 related stereotypes. (Urban carriage There have been several studies of horses are a highly visible problem in transport to slaughter under simulat- 1993 169,900 some localities, since they usually are ed or actual transport conditions. 1994 107,000 part of a local tourist industry, but Horses transported for twenty-eight they often generate concern out of hours in summer can lose 10 percent 1995 109,900 proportion to their relatively small of their body weight, which results in 1996 105,900 numbers.) considerable dehydration (Friend et al. 1998). After transportation for 1997 87,200 twenty-four hours, 15 percent of the 1998 72,100 Slaughter horses (three of twenty) in the Friend et al. study were judged unsuitable 1999 62,813 and Transport for further transport on the basis of 2000 47,134 weakness or high body temperature. to Slaughter The more crowded the horses, the 2001 56,332 Sound, well-behaved, well-trained more likely they are to fall and, once horses are relatively scarce and can down, to be trampled. In another The number has dropped substantially in the past ten years. be expensive as a result. There is, study horses transported in more however, an oversupply of horses who crowded (less than 1.3 square meters Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service are lame, suffer from chronic obstruc- per horse) conditions had fewer tive pulmonary disease or are other- injuries but were more dehydrated wise infirm, or are unmanageable, and had greater changes in white miliar horses, who normally establish unwanted, untrained, or past their blood cell counts (Stull 1999). Provi- dominance through physical intimi- useful life. sion of water in the trailers during dation in corrals prior to loading The fate of most of these “problem” rest stops would help the horses com- (Grandin, McGee, and Lanier 1999). horses is to be slaughtered. Most pensate for the water they are losing The Grandin, McGee and Lanier horses are sold for slaughter for as sweat, but not all horses in the study found that 8 percent of horses human consumption (primarily out- trailers would be willing to move to arriving at a slaughter plant exhibited side the United States) rather than water since that would involve enter- serious welfare problems. In addition for pet food, or are rendered, as they ing another horse’s personal space 30 percent had visible bite wounds. were fifty years ago. They are slaugh- (Gibbs and Friend 2000). Double- Examination of the carcasses revealed tered at one of two slaughter plants in decker (or possum belly) trucks cause bruises on 25 percent of all the the United States, both in Texas. The more injuries to horses in the upper slaughtered horses, more than 50 number of horses being slaughtered levels than do single-deck trucks percent of which were kick or bite is decreasing, as fear of zoonotic dis- because the entrances are narrow wounds. Other problems included eases and competition from other (Stull and Rodick 2000). The per- foot and limb injuries such as frac- countries increase (Table 2). centage of injured horses was 29 per- tures, wounds (including infected Horses at slaughter are stunned cent for double-decker trailers and 8 wounds), and thinness to the point of with a captive bolt pistol, then exsan- percent for single deck trailers. Corti- emaciation. Owner neglect must have guinated, which should result in a sol, body temperature, and white been the major cause of the poor painless death. As with all slaughter blood cells were found to be affected body condition of the latter horses. procedures, however, much depends by transport. The greatest cause of The federal Commercial Transport upon the competence of the person- injury to transported horses, however, of Equines for Slaughter Act, passed nel using the equipment provided. was fighting, caused by mixing unfa- in 1996, stipulates that double-deck-

208 The State of the Animals II: 2003 er trailers can no longer be used to Horses may race only seven to tion) three-day event, for example, transport equines, the ceilings of twelve times a year but may typically forty-four were identified as Thor- equine transport trailers must be six stay in training almost year-round. oughbreds, including five of the even- feet (three meters) high, and horses One way to reduce the number of tual top ten finishers, although not all must be rested and watered every musculoskeletal injuries in racehors- necessarily ever had raced (Sorge twenty-eight hours. In 2002 Repre- es is to determine the factors associ- 2002). Nevertheless many Thorough- sentative Connie Morella of Maryland ated with injuries. Length of pre-race breds do eventually end up at slaugh- introduced H.R. 3781 in Congress; conditioning is an example. A humer- ter. McGee, Lanier, and Grandin the bill would ban slaughtering of al fracture was found to be most like- observed 1,473 horses at auction and horses for meat. Such a ban could ly to occur when the horse returns to 1,348 horses at slaughter plants actually increase equine suffering if training after a two-month period out (2001). They found that Thorough- horses were transported for slaughter of training. Apparently lack of high- bred or Thoroughbred type horses to Mexico, where there are fewer ani- speed workouts can lead to disuse constituted about 7 percent of all mal care laws, or if horses were osteoporosis (Carrier et al. 1998). auction horses and 16 percent of all allowed to starve to death because Musculoskeletal injuries of all types slaughter horses. they could no longer bring a few hun- were found to be more likely to occur Another problem in racing is age- dred dollars from slaughter buyers at when horses are exercized less related. Centuries ago the Jockey auction. (Cohen et al. 2000). Nonfatal injuries Club in Britain declared that all Thor- Local health codes and lack of land were most likely to be sesamoid, oughbred horses would be given a leave those owners who euthanize old metacarpal, or carpal fractures (Est- birth date of January 1 to avoid hav- or ill horses at home (probably the berg et al. 1998). Track design is ing to print updated programs during most humane ending for a horse) few another important potential cause of the racing season reflecting the options for body disposal other than injury during racing. Increasing the changing ages of horses born through commercial renderers. More retire- radius of corners, the degree of bank- the late spring and summer. This tra- ment homes for elderly horses are ing, and the placement of inclines on dition is also followed in the United needed. Care must be taken that straight sections will reduce strain on States. Because horses typically begin horses at these facilities live in com- the outside leg and consequently race training and competition as two patible groups and have adequate reduce low-grade injuries. and three year olds—far before they feed available. All too often good Training methods that reduce the mature physically—this tradition has intentions may lead to welfare prob- load the horse carries may also led to breeding mares to give birth lems when inadequate funds are avail- reduce injury. Using a treadmill or a earlier and earlier in the calendar able and/or the managers of retire- swimming pool allows the horse to year so that the foal will be as old as ment homes are not experienced in exercise without carrying a rider, possible when he or she races. The equine management. whose weight increases the load on motivation in turn has led to great the horse’s bones (Evans 2002). advances in the study of equine repro- There are no statistics concerning duction, aimed at bringing mares Racing injuries during training, but because into breeding condition months Although Standardbreds, Arabians, it is estimated that only 50 percent of before the natural spring season. Quarter horses, and other breeds are Thoroughbred foals actually race, the Mares can be “tricked” into spring- raced in the United States, Thorough- injury rate must be high. The cata- like seasonal readiness by the use of bred racing is the best known. More strophic injuries, particularly those in artificial light in their barns, but such than 54,000 Thoroughbred races televised races, are most likely to be interference with the natural cycle were held in 38 states in 2002 (Jock- highly publicized. For example Land- can cause problems. Some mares are ey Club 2003). Racing raises several seer, a Thoroughbred, sustained a very dangerous during the transition important welfare issues, including fracture during a Breeders Cup race from the non-breeding to the breed- the rate of injury among horses rac- in October 2002 and was euthanized ing season, when they come into heat ing or in training; the use of medica- immediately. but do not ovulate and, hence, are tion (both legal and illegal); the rac- Thoroughbreds “off the track,” who exposed to high levels of estrogen for ing of two-year-old horses; insurance are no longer usable or profitable for long periods. Stallions, although less claims on ill or suffering horses; and racing, can usually be sold for riding, seasonal than mares, can have prob- the fate of the overwhelming majority either as hunters, three-day eventing lems: they are more apt to exhibit of racehorses who have no monetary prospects, or trail/companion horses. poor libido or to “savage” (aggres- value to the breeding industry. The Such animals may excel at the very sively attack) mares bred in the win- rate of injury during an actual race is top of competition. Of the seventy ter than those bred in the spring. relatively low (3.3 per thousand race horses identified as starters in the The horses that suffer the most starts). The rate of fatal injury is 1.4 2002 Rolex Kentucky CCI**** (the from this unnatural breeding season, per thousand starts (Mundy 2000). highest level of internation competi- however, are the foals. Foals born in

Horse Welfare Since 1950 209 January or February in the northern motivation for water, but it is not life half of the United States are subject- The Pregnant threatening (Houpt et al. 2001). In ed to cold barn temperatures, which response to the negative publicity in may slow the development of stand- Mare Urine the media, however, and criticism by ing and teat seeking. Horses born in Industry an expert committee invited to tour New York are more likely than those the farms, the limit on volume of The use of horses for production of in Florida to acquire insufficient urine collected per farm was eased in estrogen came to the attention of the maternal antibodies (Leblanc et al. 1999. Automatic waterers still are public approximately ten years ago. 1992). The primary cause of this fail- used and controlled, ostensibly to The resulting criticism of the PMU ure of passive immunity is probably keep the stalls drier and to prevent industry and the industry’s response climatic; the foal is slower to move in the mares from dunking their hay are a good example of humane prob- the cold. Failure of passive immunity into the water. (Hay dunking and lem solving. allows the foal to fall victim to infec- playing with an automatic waterer so Equine estrogens were, until tions of the umbilical cord, respirato- that the water spills on the floor are recently, almost the only substances ry tract, etc., because he or she has annoying behaviors that are tolerated available for treatment of the symp- not yet acquired immunological pro- by non-PMU horse owners, but the toms of menopause and the preven- tection. Inclement weather may keep problem is exacerbated in PMU hors- tion of osteoporosis in women. Other the mare and foal indoors so that the es by the close proximity of the hay benefits of this so-called hormone young horse does not learn to recog- and water sources.) replacement therapy were a reduc- nize his or her mother in a group and In the PMU industry, mares remain tion in the risks of heart disease and does not get the exercise needed for in their stalls for days to months at a age-related cognitive decline. Preg- optimum muscle development. A time because of the inclement weath- nant mares produce the most estro- change in the Thoroughbred industry er in north central America during gens and produce the most between to “true” birthdays would wreak the winter and because of the labor the third and ninth months of their havoc for a year or two but would be and dangers to the horses involved in pregnancies. They are, therefore, the in the best interests of the horse. removing the harnesses and releasing mares used in the PMU industry. They Standardbred horses, who raced in the horses outside. The issue of lack foal and are rebred on pasture during harness pulling a lightweight two- of exercise has been addressed exper- the spring and summer. During the wheeled cart called a sulky, are not so imentally by two groups. When fall and winter, the mares are housed easy as Thoroughbreds to retrain for released after confinement for two in barns in tie stalls while straddling other uses because they trot or pace weeks, the industry median time rubber harnesses suspended from the rather than canter, and their gaits are between opportunities for the horse ceiling that are used to collect urine. not comfortable for a rider (although to exercise, mares showed compen- Public criticism of the PMU indus- some are bought by those who eschew satory increases in locomotion in try focused on the mares’ restricted modern technology, such as the comparison to mares exercised daily. access to water, their lack of exercise Amish and Mennonites, as driving ani- The behaviors in the stalls of exer- during the long months of housing, mals). McGee, Lanier, and Grandin cised and confined mares were simi- and the fate of the foals born but not (200l) found that 4 percent of the lar (Houpt et al. 2001). Physiological- utilized by the PMU industry. horses at both auctions and slaughter ly the confined mares were not Producers limited the mares’ plants were Standardbreds. stressed (Freeman et al. 1999), but in access to water for economic reasons. An unpublicized welfare issue late pregnancy they tended to be Because the volume of urine collect- involves those horses who are suc- more edematous in the legs and ed from each farm was limited and cessful at racing and/or breeding and abdomen (Houpt et al. 2001). Stereo- producers were paid on the basis of therefore are insured for a large typic behaviors did not develop in the grams of estrogen produced, it was in amount of money. Insurance compa- mares chronically confined in tie their best economic interest to con- nies may insist that an insured horse stalls, probably because in both stud- centrate the urine. They did so by pro- who suffers from a permanently ies the horses were provided with free viding small amounts of water period- painful condition be kept alive to choice hay, which will most closely ically from automatic waterers. Water avoid paying the horse’s value. Con- simulate the natural grazing pattern. intake was reduced gradually in the versely an unsuccessful horse may be Flanngian and Stookey (2002) fall, to 3–4 1/100 kg body weight, as worth more dead than alive: a 1994 observed 110 horses on ten PMU compared to 5–6 l/100kg of intake federal investigation of a scheme to farms and found a prevalence of when water is freely available. This kill horses for insurance money stereotypic behavior of 5 percent, less degree of water restriction increases resulted in 23 indictments of riders, than that observed by McGreevey et osmotic pressure of the plasma and trainers, and owners (Englade 1996; al. (1995a) in box-stalled Thorough- produces clinical signs of dehydration Chronicle of the Horse 1998). breds. Although the mares could not and behavioral signs of increased lie in lateral recumbency, they could

210 The State of the Animals II: 2003 lie in sternal recumbency (McDonnell zontal edges of feed and water buck- et al. 1999). Horses unaccustomed to Managing the ets and wood surfaces such as stall tie stalls may be reluctant to lie down, boards and fences (e.g., Winskill et al. but this reluctance is unrelated to the Performance 1996). Wind-sucking involves the size of the horse: draft horses laid Horse same contraction of neck muscles down, but some Thoroughbreds did and apparent engulfing of air, but Horses kept for performance or com- not (Houpt et al. 2001). Recent stud- without grasping, and often is accom- petition, as well as many companion ies have shown that horses will work panied by an audible “grunt” (Karlan- horses, generally spend a great deal of harder for a grain reward than for der, Mansson, and Tufvesson 1965; time intensively housed and man- release from a tie stall and will work Baker and Kear-Colwel1 1974; aged. The stabled/stalled horse expe- as hard for access to another horse as Kusaari 1983). Traditionally horse riences different pressures from those for release from confinement. When owners have believed the horses who kept less intensively. Although food, tested repeatedly at fifteen-minute crib do so because they are bored water, veterinary care, grooming, and intervals after release, horses chose and/or hungry. The traditional view is shelter are provided, such conditions to spend thirty minutes in a paddock that the horse who is hungry will swal- deviate considerably from the behav- with other horses but elected to low air while cribbing that will fill his ioral patterns of the wild or free-rang- spend more time if they were con- or her stomach. However recent work ing horse. Stereotypic patterns of fined for more than twenty-four hours has demonstrated that horses do not behavior, such as weaving; cribbing (Lee 2000). gulp in and swallow air while per- and its associated behavior, wind- The issue that has not been studied forming this behavior, as previously sucking; wood-chewing; head-nod- is the fate of PMU foals. Originally believed. When the air movements in ding; and stall-walking, are particu- most of the foals were of draft-breed the respiratory tracts of wind sucking larly associated with stabling. These type, for which there was less of a mar- horses were traced, it became appar- sorts of behaviors have been estimat- ket, rather than of lighter-build, riding ent that little or no air is swallowed ed to affect 10 to 40 percent of sta- type; they were sold as weanlings and (McGreevy et al. 1995b). bled horses in the United Kingdom eventually slaughtered for meat after Recent survey studies have investi- (Nicol 1999) and, in general, more of a period in a feedlot. The welfare prob- gated the causes and effects of some these behaviors are seen in racing lems of transport to and handling at commonly observed equine stereo- Thoroughbreds. Stereotypic behav- slaughterhouses in general have been types (e.g., McGreevy, French, and iors such as these are considered to dealt with, above, but conditions in Nicol 1995; McGreevy et al. 1995a; be abnormal since they represent the feed lots have not been studied. Luescher et al. 1998; and Redbo et al. qualitative and quantitative differ- The young horses are not stalled and 1998). These consistently relate the ences in behavior when compared presumably have plenty of food, but incidence of stereotypes to a number with the behavior seen among free-liv- issues of their environment (mud, of management factors, including ing horses. Stereotypes are rarely manure, disease, aggression among social isolation and the feeding of observed in free-ranging horses, diffi- the horses, crowding, etc.) have not concentrates with little access to cult to explain in functional terms, been addressed. In response to criti- fiber. Despite the problems inherent undesirable to horse owners, and con- cism of the PMU industry for produc- in conducting longitudinal studies of sidered to be indicative of welfare ing horses virtually for the meat mar- the development of stereotypic behav- problems the horse has had or is cur- ket, more “light” (as opposed to ior, the results of work on weaning rently experiencing (Cooper and draft-type) horses now are used for and on feeding practices following Mason 1998). The behaviors general- breeding, and some of the resulting weaning (Nicol 1999) show the ly are considered to be “stable vices,” foals are being sold as sport or plea- importance of feeding fiber and of and are viewed as unsoundness, lead- sure horses (Freeman 2000). The avoiding high grain diets during early ing to a reduction in a horse’s desir- main problem in selling them is one of development. Horses have evolved to ability and value (Houpt 1982; timing and location—a large number digest a high fiber diet and to spend Luescher, McKeown, and Dean 1998). of foals are available all at one time, up to sixteen hours foraging each day. As more research into the causes of which makes them difficult for the Intensively managed horses are ex- these behaviors is completed, it is existing market to absorb, and they pected to perform energy-consuming becoming clear that the traditional are in in North Dakota, Alberta, or tasks, and they require a controlled views held about these behaviors are Saskatchewan, far from the populous diet rich in the nutrients that enable incorrect. When viewed by the layper- U.S. east and west coasts, where them to do so. Being stabled (stalled) son, cribbing apparently involves the demand would be greater. also presents problems in that horses grasping of a surface (usually hori- have no control over the timing of zontal) in the teeth (McGreevy and their feeding, the type of food, the Nicol 1998a) and the swallowing of amount of contact they have with air. Cribbing surfaces include hori- conspecifics or even the amount of

Horse Welfare Since 1950 211 exercise they have. All of these factors 1998; Nicol et al. 2001); increased win in competitions. The competition lead to problems. The stabled social contact (Cooper, McDonald, may be conformation, high jumping, (stalled) horse may be highly motivat- and Mills 2000); and even mirrors in barrel racing, or dressage, but in all ed to seek social contact or to have the stable (Mills and Davenport in cases if the horse does not win, an access to food, and this can lead to press; McAfee, Mills, and Cooper effort will be made to improve perfor- behavioral frustration. Undesirable 2002). Initial results from such stud- mance. Sometimes these efforts in- behavior such as stall-walking and ies are encouraging, and further work volve more training, but at other weaving may be the result of the ani- is required in this area. times the welfare of the horse can be mal attempting to deal with his or her Restriction of normal social behav- compromised. This is probably more frustration. Providing horses with a ior and the feeding of a low fiber, high likely to happen when the person who high grain diet may ensure that they grain diet are the two main factors owns the horse and who expects the have enough energy for performance, consistently related to the perfor- horse to win is not the same as the but a high grain diet has been shown mance of stereotypic behavior in trainer or manager whose livelihood to cause changes in the digestive sys- horses. Horses used for performance depends on satisfying the goals of the tem (etc.), leading to cribbing (Nicol purposes should be prevented from owner. et al. 2001). developing such undesirable behav- Various studies have been carried iors by ensuring that management Hoof and Pastern out to determine the effectiveness of and housing are considered from the the current and new methods for deal- horse’s perspective. Horses are social Manipulation ing with stereotypic behavior. Many grazing animals. They have physical Allowing the horse’s hooves to grow stables used for housing racehorses and behavioral needs (see Cooper and to a length incompatible with normal are fitted with weaving bars, or grills, McGreevy 2002) that can be met un- gait in order to obtain an exaggerated that are supposed to stop (or block) a der conditions of domestication gait in the show ring, myectomy (cut- horse from being able to perform the through such measures as feeding ting the muscles of the tail), and tail behavior. Weaving grills (McBride and high fiber diets, allowing social con- setting harnesses on “gaited” horses Cuddeford 2001), anti-cribbing de- tact, changing early weaning and such as American Saddlebreds are vices (such as collars) (McGreevy and feeding practices, giving the animals examples of the at least mildly un- Nicol 1998a), and pharmacological greater control of their environment, comfortable methods used to im- intervention (Dodman et al. 1987) all removing restrictions on highly moti- prove a horse’s performance. If de- have been shown to be of little value in vated behavior, and understanding spite these interventions the horse’s permanently stopping the behaviors. the degree to which the horses have performance does not improve, he or Recent studies also have measured had to adapt in order to serve human she is sold as the first step in the the horses’ physiological distress needs. descent to auction and perhaps the responses, such as heart rate and slaughterhouse. adreno-cortical activity (Broom and More invasive are such practices as Johnson 1983), to test if there are any Performance- “soring,” in which a caustic com- underlying effects on horse welfare of pound is applied to the pasterns treatment for stereotypic behavior enhancing and (above the hooves) of Tennessee Walk- (Lebelt, Zanella, and Unshelm 1998; ing horses, then chains linked around McGreevy and Nicol 1998b; McBride Conformation- the pasterns so that resulting wounds and Cuddeford 2001). Generally these will be abraded as the animal moves. studies have found that preventative enhancing The pain encourages the animals to measures alone cause more problems Techniques lift their forelegs high and carry their for the horses, probably because they weight back on their hind quarters in There are three types of horses: those treat the symptoms rather than the an exaggerated gait, or “lick,” an who labor symbiotically with farmers underlying cause of the behavior. The action admired by judges. The Horse or ranchers to plow, to handle live- horses appear to be more stressed Protection Act passed in 1970 pro- stock, or to pull loads; those who live when prevented from performing the hibits soring, but there is insufficient as companion animals and who may or behavior, indicating a compromise of funding to allow veterinary inspectors may not have to carry a rider for a few horse welfare. A number of alterna- to ensure compliance. Lay inspectors hours a week; and performance hors- tive, less invasive approaches have are used, but they usually are affiliat- es. Performance horses have a very dif- been studied. These include foraging ed with the industry in some way ferent relationship with their owners devices designed to allow the horse to (DeHaven 2000). One suggestion to from that of pleasure or companion “trickle-feed” and “work” for food improve compliance has been to hire horses. Although the owner of a per- (e.g., Winskill et al. 1996; Henderson veterinarians who are not equine formance horse may like or even love and Waran 2001); feed additives such practitioners but who could, after a the horse, his or her main goal is to as fiber and anti-acids (Johnson et al. training course, examine horses at

212 The State of the Animals II: 2003 shows in their immediate area. This process is not only uncomfortable for tion, American Animal Hospital Asso- would eliminate the need for—and the horse but also unethical from a ciation, and Association of American possible conflict of interest by—lay competitive standpoint. Although evi- Veterinary Medical Colleges [Brown examiners. dence of gingering can be detected by and Silverman 1999] found that Other issues of horse welfare seem thermograph, the testing technique horse owners reported they would pay to be purely cosmetic but are rooted is too sensitive to use in the field an average of $1,827 for a 75 percent in competitive advantage. These are (Turner and Scoggins 1985). chance of curing their horse of an ail- exemplified by the treatment of the The optimal tail carriage for West- ment and $828 for a 10 percent tails of show horses. ern pleasure horses is just the oppo- chance. They further reported that site of that of Arabians. The ideal they would pay an average of $165 per Tail Docking Western pleasure horse is relaxed and month to keep their horse healthy.) The original purpose of tail dock- submissive to the rider’s riding aids Other horse owners may experience ing, or amputation, may have been to (legs, seat, hands, and voice), a state a reversal of fortune or circumstance prevent tangling of the tail of a dri- expressed through a flaccid tail. Such yet be reluctant to part with a horse ving horse with the reins, especially if a look has been so well rewarded by due to personal attachment or unwill- the driver was standing on the ground judges of Western pleasure classes ingness to sell at a loss. The horse’s rather than high above the wagon or that to achieve it, if not the reality of care may suffer as a result. carriage. Long tails would interfere voluntary submission, unethical ex- with the driver’s ability to control the hibitors have enervated the tail by horse while plowing. Another reason cutting the nerves or have used local Carriage Horses for tail docking is convenience of har- anesthesia to temporarily prevent tail Approximately one thousand to two nessing, since a docked tail does not lashing. (The latter is often a sign of thousand horses are used to pull car- have to be threaded through the crup- resistance to the rider’s aids and thus riages in various North American per or breeching. Because very few a disobedience to be penalized.) Evi- cities (Merriam 2000). The most horses are used for plowing in the dence of these practices can be de- urgent problem for these horses is United States, the only reason for tected electromyographically (Coul- heat stress: carriage rides typically docking today is cosmetic. It is prac- ter and Luttgen 1994). Other are purchased by tourists, and ticed with Hackneys and draft horses. practices to induce calmness are tourists travel during the summer In addition to the immediate pain of working the horse to near-exhaustion months when temperatures are high. docking, horses with shortened tails before an event or administering a In southern regions, hours of opera- suffer because they cannot defend small dose of a tranquilizer such as tion should be limited to cooler times themselves from flies. Docked horses acepromazine to chemically calm the of the day and evening. Horses should also cannot effectively signal aggres- animal. have access to water every two hours. siveness by lashing their tails from Walking or, worse yet, trotting on a side to side, or signal exuberance by paved surface, possibly up and down raising the tail. Pleasure Horses hills, increases the chance of horses Pleasure horse owners have the clos- developing lameness. Carriage drivers Other Tail est bonds with their horses. They are may be ignorant of basic horse health most likely to affect their horses’ wel- and therefore may not notice lame- Manipulations fare negatively through ignorance of ness, dehydration, signs of colic, or The tail also is important in showing basic horsemanship or an inability to other health or welfare issues. Car- two different types of performance support the horses financially. riage horses should be examined horses—Arabians and Western plea- An ignorant owner may overfeed a every few weeks by a veterinarian. sure horses (the latter of whom typi- horse, let a horse eat poisonous lawn Some horses may suffer from long- cally are Quarter horses or color- clippings, or overwork a horse who is term exposure to air pollution, par- breed horses). out of condition—just a few of the ticularly if they are driven in high traf- Arabians are judged for their alert- myriad mistakes that can have disas- fic areas. Use in high traffic areas also ness and spirit. An aroused horse, terous consequences to a horse’s well- can increase the number of horse- especially a playful one, will carry his being. automobile collisions. Carriage hors- or her tail high. Exhibitors may try to Many young horse owners can bare- es should have their work hours regu- mimic that natural high tail carriage ly afford to feed a horse, so that any lated and their living quarters kept by gingering their horses. Gingering veterinary care, even preventative, is clean, well bedded, and ventilated. involves placing ointment with a high out of the question. (They may be concentration of ginger into the unaware of the true cost of horse horse’s rectum and anus. The horse ownership over and above that of the raises his or her tail in response to animal’s feed. A joint survey by the the irritation of the chemical. The American Veterinary Medical Associa-

Horse Welfare Since 1950 213 Kluwer Academic Publishers. chemical and hygiene assessment Literature Cited Cooper, J.J., L. McDonald, and D.S. of stabled horses provided continu- American Horse Council. 2000. The Mills. 2000. The effect of increasing ous or intermittent access to drink- economic impact of the horse visual horizons on stereotypic weav- ing water. American Journal of Vet- industry in the United States. ing: Implications for the social erinary Research 60: 1445–1450. Washington, D.C.: American Horse housing of stabled horses. Applied Friend, T.H., M.T. Martin, D.D. Housh- Council. Animal Behavior Science 69: older, and D.M. Bushong. 1998. Baker, G.J., and J. Kear-Colwell. 67–83. Stress responses of horses during a 1974. Aerophagia (wind-sucking) Coulter, S.B., and P.J. Luttgen. 1994. long period of transport in a com- and aversion therapy in the horse. Electromyographic examination of mercial truck. Journal of the Amer- Proceedings of the American Associ- tail altered horses. Equine Practi- ican Veterinary Medical Association ation of Equine Practitioners 20: tioner 16(4): 14–17. 212(6): 838–844. 127–130. DeHaven, W.R. 2000. The Horse Pro- Gibbs, A.E., and T.R. Friend. 2000. Broom, D.M., and K.G. Johnson. tection Act—A case study in indus- Effect of animal density and trough 1983. Stress and animal welfare. try self-regulation. Journal of the placement on drinking behavior London: Chapman and Hall. American Veterinary Medical Asso- and dehydration in slaughter hors- Brown, J.P., and J.D. Silverman. 1999. ciation 216(8): 1250–1253. es. Journal of Equine Veterinary Sci- The current and future market for Dodman, N.H., L. Shuster, M.H. ence 20(10): 643–650. veterinarians and veterinary med- Court, and R. Dixon. 1987. Investi- Grandin, T., K. McGee, and J.I. ical services in the United States gation into the use of narcotic Lanier. 1999. Prevalence of severe (executive summary). Journal of antagonists in the treatment of a welfare problems in horses that the American Veterinary Medical stereotypic behavior pattern (crib- arrive at slaughter plants. Journal Association 215(2): 161–183. biting) in the horse. American of the American Veterinary Medical Carrier, T.K., L. Estberg, S.M. Stover, Journal of Veterinary Research 48: Association 214: 1531–1533. I.A. Gardner, B.J. Johnson, D.H. 311–319. Henderson, J.V., and N.K. Waran. Read, and A.A. Ardans. 1998. Asso- Englade, K. Hot blood. 1996. New 2001. Reducing equine stereotypes ciation between long periods with- York: St. Martin’s Press. using the Equiball™. Animal Wel- out high-speed workouts and risk of Estberg, L., S.M. Stover, I.A. Gardner, fare 10: 73–80. complete humeral or pelvic frac- B.J. Johnson, R.A. Jack, J.T. Case, Houpt, K.A. 1982. Oral vices of hors- ture in Thoroughbred racehorses: A. Ardans, D.H. Read, M.L. Ander- es. Equine Practice 4: 16–25. 54 cases (1991–1994). Journal of son, B.C. Barr, B.M. Daft, H. Kinde, Houpt, K., T.R. Houpt, J.L. Johnson, American Veterinary Medical Asso- J. Moore, J. Stoltz, and L. Woods. H.N. Erb, and S.C. Yeon. 2001. The ciation 212(10): 1582–1587. 1998. Relationship between race effect of exercise deprivation on the Chronicle of the Horse. 1998. “Final start characteristics and risk of cat- behavior and physiology of straight Insurance Fraud Defendants Have astrophic injury in Thoroughbreds: stall confined pregnant mares. Ani- their Day in Court,” Chronicle of the 78 cases (1992). Journal of the mal Welfare: 10: 257–267. Horse, May 29. American Veterinary Medical Asso- Jockey Club, The. 2003. http/home. Cohen, N.D., S.M. Berry, J.G. Peloso, ciation 212(4): 544–549. jockeyclub.com/factbook. Accessed G.D. Mundy, and I.C. Howard. Evans, D.L. 2002. Welfare of the race- March. 2000. Association of highspeed horse during exercise training and Johnson, K.G., J. Tyrrell, J.B. Rowe, exercise with racing injury in Thor- racing. In The welfare of horses, ed. and D.W. Petherick. 1998. Behav- oughbreds. Journal of the American N. Waran, 181–201. Dordrecht: ioral changes in stabled horses Veterinary Medical Association Kluwer AcademicPublishers. given non-therapeutic levels of vir- 216(8): 1273–1278. Flanigan, G., and J.M. Stookey. 2002. giniamycin. Equine Veterinary Jour- Cooper, J., and G.J. Mason. 1998. The Day-time time budgets of pregnant nal 30: 139–142. identification of abnormal behavior mares housed in tie stalls: A com- Karlander, S., J. Mansson, and G. and behavioral problems in stabled parison of light versus draft mares. Tufvesson. 1965. Buccostomy as a horses and their relationship to Applied Animal Behavior Science method of treatment for aeropha- horse welfare: A comparative 78: 125–144. gia (wind-sucking) in the horse. review. Equine Veterinary Journal Freeman, D.A. 2000. The pregnant Nordisk Veterinar Medicin 17: Supplement 27: 5–9. mares’ urine industry—Manage- 445–458. Cooper, J., and P. McGreevy. 2002. ment and research. Journal of the Kusaari, J. 1983. Acupuncture treat- Stereotypic behavior in stabled American Veterinary Medical Asso- ment of aerophagia in horses. horses: Causes, effects, and preven- ciation 216: 1239–1242. American Journal of Acupuncture tion without compromising horse Freeman, D.A., N.F. Cymbaluk, H.C. 11: 363–370. welfare. In The welfare of horses, Schott II, K. Hinchcliff, and S.M. Lebelt, D., A.J. Zanella, and J. ed. N. Waran, 99–124. Dordrecht: McDonnell. 1999. Clinical, bio- Unshelm. 1998. Physiological cor-

214 The State of the Animals II: 2003 relates associated with cribbing McGreevy, P.D., N.P. French, and C.J. 475–481. behavior in horses: Changes in Nicol. 1995. The prevalence of Reece, V.P., T.R. Friend, and C.R. thermal threshold, heart rate, plas- abnormal behaviors in dressage, Stull. 2000. Equine slaughter trans- ma B-endorphin, and serotonin. eventing, and endurance horses in port—Update on research and reg- Equine Veterinary Journal Supple- relation to stabling. Veterinary ulations. Journal of the American ment 27: 21–27. Record 137: 36–37. Veterinary Medical Association Leblanc, M.M., T. Tran, J.L. Baldwin, McGreevy, P.D., P.J. Cripps, N.P. 216(8): 1253–1258. and E.L. Pritchard. 1992. Factors French, L.E. Green, and C.J. Nicol. Sewell, A., I. Andrew (Illus.), N. Lewis that influence passive transfer of 1995a. Management factors associ- (foreword). 2001. Black Beauty: His immunoglobulins in foals. Journal ated with stereotypic and redirect- grooms and companions: The auto- of the American Veterinary Medical ed behavior in the Thoroughbred biography of a horse. London: King- Association 200(2): 179–183 horse. Equine Veterinary Journal fisher Press. Lee, J.Y. 2000. Motivation of horses 27: 86–91. Sorge, M. 2002. James C. Wofford for release from straight stall con- McGreevy, P.D., J.D. Richardson, C.J. handicaps the Rolex Kentucky finement and for exercise. Masters Nicol, and J.G. Lane. 1995b. A radi- CCI**** field. The Chronicle of the thesis, Cornell University. ographic and endoscopic study of Horse. April 19. Luescher, V.A., D.B. McKeown, and H. horses performing an oral stereo- Stull, C.L. 1999. Responses of horses Dean. 1998. A cross-sectional study typy. Equine Veterinary Journal 27: to trailer design, duration, and on compulsive behavior (stable 92–95. floor area during commercial trans- vices) in horses. Equine Veterinary Merriam, J.G. 2000. Urban carriage portation to slaughter. Journal of Journal Supplement 27: 14–18. horses, 1999—Status and con- Animal Science 77: 2925–2933. McAfee, L.M., D.S. Mills, and J.J. cerns. Journal of the American Vet- Stull, C.L., and A.V. Rodiek. 2000. Cooper. 2002. The use of mirrors erinary Medical Association Physiological responses of horses to for the control of stereotypic weav- 216(8): 1261–1262. 24 hours of transportation using a ing behavior in the stabled horse. Mills, D.S., and K. Davenport. In commercial van during summer Applied Animal Behavior Science press. The effect of a neighbouring conditions. Journal of Animal Sci- 78: 159–174. conspecific versus the use of a mir- ence 78: 1458–1466. McBride, S.D., and D. Cuffeford. ror for the control of stereotypic Turner, T.A., and R.D. Scoggins. 1985. 2001. The putative welfare-reduc- weaving behavior in the stabled Thermographic detection of gin- ing effects of preventing equine horse. Animal Science. gering in horses. Equine Veterinary stereotypic behavior. Animal Wel- Mundy, G.D. 2000. Racing. Journal of Science 5(1): 8–10. fare 10: 173–189. the American Veterinary Medical U.S. Department of Agriculture McDonnell, S.M., D.A. Freeman, N.J. Association 216(8): 1243–1246. National Agricultural Statistics Ser- Cymbaluk, H.C. Schott, II, K.W. Nicol, C.J. 1999. Stereotypes and vice (USDA NASS). 1990–2001. Hinchcliff, and B. Kyle. 1999. their relation to management. In Annual slaughter release. Behavior of stabled horses provided Proceedings of the British Equine Winskill, L.C., R.J. Young, C.E. Chan- continuous or intermittent access Veterinary Association Specialist ning, J. Hurley, and N.K. Waran. to drinking water. American Jour- Days on Behavior and Nutrition, 1996. The effect of a foraging nal of Veterinary Research 60: ed. P.A. Harris, G.M. Gomarsall, device (a modified Edinburgh food- 1451–1456. H.P.S. Davidson, and R.E. Green, ball) on the behavior of the stabled McGee, K., J.L. Lanier, and T. 11–14. Harrowgate, England: horse. Applied Animal Behavior Sci- Grandin. 2001. Characterizations BEVA. ence 48: 25–35. of horses at auctions and in slaugh- Nicol, C.I., A.D. Wilson, A.I. Waters, ter plants. Animal sciences P.A. Haris, and H.P.B. Davidson. research reports: 2001. Fort 2001. Crib-biting in foals is associ- Collins, Colo.: Colorado State Uni- ated with gastric ulceration and versity Department of Animal Sci- mucosal inflammation. In Proceed- ences. ings 35th International Society for McGreevy, P.D., and C.J. Nicol. 1998a. Applied Ethology Congress, ed. J.P. Prevention of crib-biting: A review. Garner, J.A. Mench, and S.P. Equine Veterinary Journal Supple- Heekin, 40. Davis, Calif.: Center for ment 27: 35–38. Animal Welfare. ———. 1998b. Physiological and Redbo, I., P. Redbo-Torstensson, F.O. behavioral consequences associat- Odberg, A. Hedendahl, and J. ed with short-term prevention of Holm. 1998. Factors affecting crib-biting in horses. Physiology behavioral disturbances in race- and Behavior 6: 15–23. horses. Animal Science 66:

Horse Welfare Since 1950 215 Wild Horses and Burros in the 15CHAPTER United States

Allen Rutberg

reatment of wild horses and Horse and Burro Act of 1971 (P.L. 92- Reno, Nevada. (Because these horses burros has improved remarkably 195). One of the great success stories were shot on state rather than federal Tover the last fifty years. In the of animal protection, the 1971 act lands, they were not protected by the mid-twentieth century, free-ranging declared it to be federal policy that 1971 act.) The international outrage horses and burros suffered horribly at “wild free-roaming horses and burros generated by this senseless killing the hands of “mustangers” who cap- shall be protected from capture, stimulated the formation of an unusu- tured them at will and whim, some- branding, harassment or death; and al coalition of wild horse advocates, times using the most brutal of tech- to accomplish this they are to be con- animal welfare groups, ranchers, and niques, including aerial pursuit and sidered in the area where presently prosecutors to lobby for new state leg- shooting or crippling key herd mem- found, as an integral part of the nat- islation making the malicious killing bers. The horses were packed into ural system of the public lands” (16 of unbranded livestock a felony. In livestock trucks hurt, bleeding, and U.S.C. §1331). (The “public lands” June 1999, less than seven months exhausted, and shipped to slaughter are defined as federal land managed after the shooting, Nevada S.B. 396 without stopping for rest or watering by the Bureau of Land Management was signed by the governor after hav- (Ryden 1999). Unprotected by law, [BLM] and the U.S. Forest Service, ing been passed unanimously by both only the good will of a few ranchers which therefore excludes national houses of the legislature (Nevada protected these abused animals. Pub- parks and national wildlife refuges.) Legislature, 70th Session Bill Informa- lic awareness of the plight of the wild The act charged the BLM with locat- tion, http://www.leg.state.nv.us/70th/ horses began to grow in the late ing, inventorying, and managing Reports/). According to the Reno 1950s, in large part because of the these animals. Regrettably, the Gazette Journal (Associated Press efforts of Velma Johnston, better BLM—which truly is a land manage- 2002), the judge presiding over the known as “Wild Horse Annie,” a Neva- ment agency—was unprepared and trial of the three men accused of da-born rancher who witnessed, docu- ill-equipped to undertake this charge. killing the horses reportedly received mented, and publicized the cruelties Passage of the act was the clearest tens of thousands of letters from peo- of the mustangers. First shocked to possible statement that the American ple upset about the case. action after following a blood trail public would not and will not tolerate from a truck transporting mustangs any kind of cruelty or abuse of wild to slaughter, Johnston roused the horses. This message has been rein- What is a American public, and especially forced repeatedly in the form of public schoolchildren, to demand action outrage, widespread media coverage, Wild Horse? from Congress (Ryden 1999). Con- and a generous influx of reward money The dramatic shift in the treatment gress first responded with the “Wild that occurs whenever wild horses are of wild horses reflects a deeper shift Horse Annie” Act of 1959 (P.L. 86- reported to have been shot, maimed, in American public attitudes towards 234), which banned pursuit of or otherwise abused. In December horses and other animals. Most clearly unbranded horses on federal land by 1998, for example, thirty-three Americans have come to view wildlife aircraft or motor vehicle. Later Con- unbranded, free-roaming horses were more from a moralistic and humanis- gress enacted the Wild Free-Roaming found dead of gunshot wounds near tic perspective and less from a domin-

217 ionistic perspective, although utilitar- adopted horses is discouraged, just as because of the contraceptive agents ian views still are strong regionally breeding of animals adopted from an under test (steroid hormone implants, (Kellert 1996). And wild horses and animal shelter is discouraged. Under some of which were effective), but burros are wildlife, aren’t they? the humane perspective, wild horses because some subjects were misfitted The answer to that question are wild, but only up to a point: when with collars, while others were sepa- depends on whom you ask and when necessary managers should intervene rated from their home ranges and you ask, which is one reason why it by providing feed and water, control- died of dehydration (National Re- often is so difficult to resolve issues ling the population, or carrying out search Council 1991). In 1992 howev- concerning wild horse management. euthanasia of hopelessly sick or er the BLM began working with The Many (but not all) ranchers whose injured animals to assure the health Humane Society of the United States livestock share the public lands with and well-being of individual animals (HSUS) to support field trials using wild horses and burros continue to and prevent mass starvation. Yet the porcine zona pellucida (PZP) vac- view them as misplaced livestock. another group of wild horse advocates cine; this work followed up on the ini- These ranchers see the wild horses takes the position that wild horses tial successes of trials on Assateague and burros as, at best, useless and, at and burros are and should be treated Island National Seashore (ASIS), worst, pests who destroy the range on as truly wild animals who are part of Maryland, carried out by Kirkpatrick, the meager productivity of which they and subject to natural ecological Turner, and Liu (Kirkpatrick, Liu, and depend. Many wildlife managers view processes. From this perspective flows Turner 1990; Kirkpatrick 1995; Turn- the wild horses and burros as undesir- a non-intervention philosophy and a er et al. 1997). A decade of research able because they cannot be hunted strong hands-off approach to manage- since then has produced a one-year, or because they are exotics who divert ment, including an acceptance of suf- one-shot PZP immunocontraceptive resources from native species or in- fering and death as a result of “natur- vaccine. While work continues to de- terfere with natural processes. al” processes. When these diverse velop a longer-acting vaccine, the BLM But there also are deep differences positions are applied to specific also is carrying out extensive field among those who consider them- issues, controversy follows. testing and developing the policies selves advocates for horses. For exam- and infrastructure necessary to begin ple many wild horse advocates ride, widespread field application of the show, breed, and buy and sell horses, Can Wild PZP vaccine (Turner et al. 2001, and their attitudes toward wild horses 2002). But public pressure will be are strongly shaped by that experi- Horses Survive required to assure that improved ence. Some with this background process and improved science lead to hold fundamentally utilitarian atti- on Public healthy herds of wild horses and bur- tudes and see wild horses as little ros. more than domestic horses with cer- Lands? After passage of the 1971 act, the tain exciting breed characteristics or The BLM has made a number of BLM located and delineated 304 pub- developmental potential. Horse advo- improvements in its range manage- lic lands “herd areas” which were cates with a strong utilitarian per- ment practices over the last five years. known to support wild horses. spective tend to support aggressive It has strengthened the scientific foun- Because they were “snapshots” of management of wild horses, includ- dation of its horse and burro manage- herd locations, it is unlikely that ing removal of selected animals from ment by introducing population mod- these herd areas fully circumscribed the herds to attain certain color, con- eling into its herd management plans the areas used by the horses and bur- formation, behavioral, or breed stan- and directly monitoring genetic diver- ros. For a variety of reasons—some dards (e.g., “Spanish”) in the wild sity in a number of populations (e.g., sensible, some dubious—the BLM population; breeding of adopted wild Singer and Schoenecker 2000). The chose to manage horses and burros horses; and formation of “shadow” BLM also is standardizing its range on only 215 of these designated “herd herds of domestic horses that match inventory methods and its processes management areas,” or HMAs; from certain attributes of the wild popula- for making land use decisions, both of the remainder, horses were removed tion. Often they consider some herds which have varied widely from state to permanently. As of 1998 the number to be intrinsically more valuable than state and district to district, and have of HMAs had dropped to 211, with others because of their genetic or furnished ample opportunities for 204 being the target goal for 2005 phenotypic attributes. Other wild abuse (General Accounting Office (BLM 2002, n.d.). Moreover fourteen horse protectionists may take a posi- [GAO] 1990; BLM 1997). HMAs did not support any wild horses tion based on traditional humane In addition the BLM has been fund- or burros in 1998 (BLM n.d.). (Part of philosophies, in which all wild hors- ing research on wild horse contracep- the reduction was caused by the es—regardless of appearance, genet- tion since the 1980s. The first trials transfer of land, including several ics, or behavior—are considered were disastrous; scores of wild horses burro HMAs, from the BLM to the equally valuable, and breeding of died and more suffered terribly, not National Park Service by the Califor-

218 The State of the Animals II: 2003 nia Desert Protection Act of 1994.) AUMs in 2001, a decline of 63 percent al colossus. But the good news has Thus there has been a gradual ratch- over 40 years (BLM 2001 and previ- often been shadowed by frustration eting down of habitat available to wild ous). Horses are not principally to and horror. Throughout its existence horses and burros. blame for the deterioration of public the adoption program has been Whether wild horse and burro num- lands. Over the 270 million acres of plagued by accounts of failed adop- bers have increased or declined his- federal land grazed by livestock, live- tions (many wild horses require extra torically is debatable. According to stock outnumber horses on the range patience and training), and of wild BLM figures, the number of wild hors- by approximately a hundred to one, horses diverted for exploitation and es reported in the year 2000 (43,629) and most public lands do not contain sale-for-slaughter by duplicitous closely matches the 42,666 wild hors- wild horses (GAO 1990). But regard- “adopters.” es reported in 1974; burro numbers less of where the blame lies, the land Again the BLM has taken great have clearly declined, from 14,374 is poor, and the margin of subsistence strides in improving the efficiency reported in 1974 to 4,995 reported in vanishes rapidly when it is stressed and humaneness of the adoption pro- the year 2000 (BLM 1996, BLM further by fire or drought. Year after gram. Roundups have been increas- 2000). However the reliability of BLM year the BLM carries out unplanned ingly professionalized, making them numbers has often been questioned. “emergency gathers” of horses and safer for horse and wrangler alike. In fiscal year 2001, the BLM began burros to head off catastrophic mor- Tracking of animals within the adop- implementing a five-year plan (“The tality due to dehydration or starva- tion pipeline has been improved dra- Strategy to Achieve Healthy Range- tion. In many areas horses and cattle matically, with systems in place to lands and Viable Herds”) to reduce alike will need to be removed to allow identify animals who have been the number of wild horses and burros the land to recover its productivity shipped to multiple adoptions with- on the range to approximately and resilience. out success. Gelding of stallions is 27,000, on 204 HMAs. This is a cause strongly encouraged, and horses in for concern, not just because of the increasing numbers receive some total reduction in numbers, but also The Adopt-a- training prior to adoption. Through a because the reduction would set aver- series of cooperative agreements, the age herd size at just over 130, which Horse Program BLM has vastly expanded its ability to suggests that many HMAs will contain Since the mid-1970s, the BLM has monitor adopted horses and provide herds that are too small to be geneti- relied principally on the Adopt-a- mentors to new adopters. The BLM cally and demographically viable in Horse and Adopt-a-Burro programs to has even established cooperative the long term (Singer and Schoe- dispose of surplus animals removed agreements with U.S. slaughterhous- necker 2000). In 1996 there were from the public lands. Roughly every es so that the BLM can be notified almost sixty HMAs with target popu- three to five years in a given herd when horses bearing the distinctive lations at fifty or below (BLM 1996). management area, horses or burros BLM freeze marks are identified on Ultimately however what will deter- are rounded up (often with the use of site. Nevertheless the BLM’s adoption mine whether wild horses and burros helicopters) and sent through a sys- pipeline typically adds 5,000–8,000 survive is the condition of the range tem of corrals in the field, after which horses and burros each year to an on which they depend. A century and some are returned to the range and already overcrowded domestic popu- a half of overgrazing public lands by others designated for adoption. Some lation. The result is that some horses, livestock means that horses and bur- adoptions occur on site, but most ani- wild or otherwise, will be neglected or ros compete with livestock and wild- mals enter an “adoption pipeline” in sold to slaughter. life for a very slender resource base which they may be held in corrals or To a large extent, the adoption pro- (GAO 1988, 1990). Deterioration of pastures for varying lengths of time gram drives the whole wild horse and the public lands is reflected not only before being sent out to satellite loca- burro program. In fiscal year 2000 in the impetus to further reduce tions for adoption. The horses remain the operations budget for off-the- horse numbers, but also in the government property for at least one range management—capturing, decline in BLM-licensed grazing allo- year, after which title may pass to the housing, caring for, feeding, trans- cations for livestock. In Nevada, for adopter (16 U.S.C. §1333 (c)). This porting, and adopting “surplus” hors- example, where about half of all fed- program, which adopted out 185,326 es and burros—was twelve times the erally protected wild horses live, BLM horses and burros between 1972 and size of the budget for monitoring the grazing allotments for livestock 2001 (BLM 2001), is the BLM’s best range and inventorying horses (BLM declined from 3.13 million AUMs showpiece—and a destructive and 1999). Under the 2001–2005 “Strate- (animal-unit-months, roughly the unshakeable addiction. Scores of gy” plan, the BLM expanded its amount of forage a cow eats in a favorable articles tell heartwarming capacity so as to hold approximately month) in 1960 to 2.10 million AUMs stories about adoption successes, 20,000 horses and burros in short- at the time the act was passed in humanizing what usually is perceived term and long-term holding facilities; 1971, then to a mere 1.7 million as an impersonal and uncaring feder- recent accounts suggest that capacity

Wild Horses and Burros in the United States 219 has been filled (BLM 2002, Smith threaten their long-term survival— ———. 1999. Final FY2000 statistics. 2002). At this writing approximately unless population and reproduction Data table. October 25. half of the program budget is being can be disconnected. At Assateague ———. 2000. Public land statistics. spent maintaining these horses (J. Island National Seashore, Maryland, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department Fend, BLM, personal communication, the National Park Service (working of the Interior, BLM (available at July 2002). with The HSUS) has led the way in http:// www.blm.gov: 80/ natacq/ The adoption habit leaves precious humane and sensitive management of plsOO/). few resources for monitoring or wild horses. Since 1995 ASIS has ———. 2001. Public land statistics. improving the condition of the hors- been balancing the needs of horses Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department es’ rangelands or observing the wild with the needs of their fragile barrier of the Interior, BLM (available at horses themselves—which is, after all, island environment through an innov- http: // www.blm.gov: 80/ natacq/ what the whole program is supposed ative horse immunocontraception plsOl/). to be about. The adoption program program (National Park Service ———. 2002. Wild horse and burro also warps management goals in 1995). This program has stabilized management: Fiscal year 2003. other ways: it probably is not a coin- the resident wild horse population BLM Budget Justifications (avail- cidence that national wild horse pop- without the need for euthanasia, able at http://www.blm.gov/ bud- ulation targets historically have been roundups, adoptions, or direct han- get/2003just.html). set at levels that would produce sur- dling of the animals. A contraception ______. n.d. Wild horse information. pluses matching the number that the program, designed to minimize Taken from EOY statistics 9/30/98. BLM believes it can adopt out (e.g., effects on social structure, behavior, Data table. BLM 1992). and genetics, probably is the BLM’s General Accounting Office (GAO). The survival of wild horses and bur- best chance to sustain adequate num- 1988. Rangeland management: ros in the western United States bers on the range while reducing the More emphasis needed on declin- requires a commitment from the number of animals entering the adop- ing and overstocked grazing allot- BLM and the public to restore the tion program. After more than fifteen ments. GAO/RCED 88–80, Wash- condition of the land and to assure years of research into horse contra- ington, D.C. wild horses and burros their fair share ception, the BLM is close to having ———. 1990. Rangeland manage- of that land. The BLM remains and using that tool, and it should not ment: Improvements needed in fed- plagued by its multiple use mandate, falter now. eral wild horse program. a legal requirement to balance the GAO/RCED 90–110, Washington, needs of livestock, recreational users, D.C. resource extractors, wildlife, and wild Literature Cited Kellert, S.R. 1996. The value of life. horses and burros. That balance ulti- Associated Press. 2002. Fines, brief Washington, D.C.: Island Press. mately depends on who weighs in jail terms handed down in Nevada Kirkpatrick, J.F. 1995. Management most heavily in the land use planning horse shooting. http://www.rgj. of wild horses by fertility control: process. In the past livestock growers com/news/printstory.php?id+776 The Assateague experience. Sci. have brought the most weight to bear, 5. Accessed September 18. Monogr. NPS/NRASIS/NRSM- as they have the advantage of local Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 95/26, Washington, D.C.: National access to government and also are 1992. Strategic plan for manage- Park Service. suffering deeply, along with their ani- ment of wild horses and burros on Kirkpatrick, J.F., I.K.M. Liu, and J.W. mals, from the deterioration of the public lands. Washington, D.C.: Turner, Jr. 1990. Remotely deliv- land. By legal action and public pres- U.S. Department of the Interior, ered immunocontraception in feral sure, horse advocates must assure BLM. horses. Wildlife Society Bulletin 18: that the land is restored, and that ———. 1996. Tenth and eleventh 326–330. there are enough horses and burros, report to Congress on the adminis- National Park Service. 1995. Environ- in enough places, to guarantee their tration of the Free-roaming Wild mental assessment: Alternatives for survival in perpetuity. Horse and Burro Act for fiscal years managing the size of the feral horse To ensure the welfare of its 1992–1995. Washington, D.C.: U.S. population of Assateague Island adoptees (as well as strengthen its on- Department of the Interior/U.S. National Seashore (ASIS). Berlin, the-range management), the BLM Department of Agriculture. Md.: ASIS. must reduce the number of surplus ———. 1997. Report of the Wild National Research Council. 1991. horses and burros coming off the Horse and Burro Emergency Evalu- Wild horse populations: Field stud- range. If adoption demand deter- ation Team. Washington, D.C.: U.S. ies in genetics and fertility. Washing- mines population levels on the range, Department of the Interior, Bureau ton, D.C.: National Academy of Sci- then the BLM will always be under of Land Management (available at ence Press. pressure to reduce wild horse and http: //www.blm.gov:80/ nhp- burro populations to levels that pubs/97whb_eval/).

220 The State of the Animals II: 2003 Ryden, H. 1999. America’s last wild horses. Guilford, Conn.: Lyons Press. Singer, F.J., and K.A. Schoenecker, comps. 2000. Managers’ summa- ry—Ecological studies of the Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range, 1992–1997. Fort Collins, Colo.: U.S. Geological Survey. Smith, C. 2002. BLM struggles to save wild horses suffering from the drought. http://www.sltrib.com/ 2002/Aug/08182002/utah/utah.htm. Accessed April 7, 2003. Turner, J.W., Jr., I.K.M. Liu, D.R. Flanagan, K.S. Bynum, and A.T. Rutberg. 2002. Porcine zona pellu- cida (PZP) immunocontraception of wild horses (Equus caballus) in Nevada: A 10 year study. Reproduc- tion Supplement 60: 177–186. Turner, J.W. Jr., I.K.M. Liu, D.R. Flanagan, A.T. Rutberg, and J.F. Kirkpatrick. 2001. Immunocontra- ception in feral horses: A single inoculation vaccine provides one year of infertility. Journal of Wildlife Management 65: 235–241. Turner, J.W., Jr., I.K.M. Liu, A.T. Rut- berg, and J.F. Kirkpatrick. 1997. Immunocontraception limits foal production in free-roaming feral horses in Nevada. Journal of Wildlife Management 61: 873–880.

Wild Horses and Burros in the United States 221