The HSUS-United Egg Producer Agreement: Two Reactions | Animal Rights: the Abolitionist Approach

The HSUS-United Egg Producer Agreement: Two Reactions | Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach

AnimalAnimal Rights:Rights: TheThe AbolitionistAbolitionist ApproachApproach

…and…and AbolitionAbolition MeansMeans Veganism!Veganism!

Home About Books Audio Video Text FAQs Site Map Links Contact

Search THE WORLD « Animal Care and Control: The Sad Failure of New York City’s Municipal Shelter System IS VEGAN! The HSUS-United Egg Producer Agreement: Two 12 If you want it. 07 Reactions 2011 Posted by Gary L. Francione in Blog

Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to X subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.

www.TheWorldisVegan.com On July 7, 2011, the Humane Society of the United States and United Egg Producers announced that they would “work together to seek a federal law that would require larger cages and other improved conditions for the nation’s 280 million laying hens.” Wise Words

"Non-violence is the greatest force at The proposed legislation, if passed, will be phased in over the next 18 years and will the disposal of mankind. It is mightier require: than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man." cages that give hens up to 144 square inches of space each, compared with — Mahatma Gandhi the 67 square inches that most hens have today. They would also include so- called habitat enrichments, like perches, scratching areas and nesting areas, 56 Billion Per Year that allow the birds to express natural behavior. 1 buffaloes Translations 0 camels What will HSUS give as its part of the compromise agreement? HSUS has French 16 cattle 2,765 chickens German 148 ducks Portuguese agreed to give up on a push to ban cages entirely in exchange for the 22 goats Spanish 0 horses opportunity to work toward a single, nationwide standard mandating better 76 pigs conditions. The group also said it would shelve efforts to get initiatives onto Abolitionist Pamphlet 31 sheep the ballot in Washington and Oregon, and would agree not to conduct 35 turkeys undercover investigations at large egg farms unless it was aware of especially Number of animals killed in the world egregious practices. by the meat, dairy and egg industries, since you opened this webpage. This does not include the billions of fish HSUS calls this “historic”. There will, of course, be a big campaign to get the legislation and other aquatic animals killed passed and there will, of course, be all sorts of legal challenges. The “compassion show” annually. will go on for years. The requests for donations “to help the animals” will be endless. Based on 2007 statistics from the Food and Agriculture Organization of And the best case scenario is that the bill is introduced and passed quickly. What would the United Nations' Global Livestock the hens gain? They would get 124-144 square inches of space in an “enriched” cage, Now available in 19 languages! Production and Health Atlas. phased in over 18 years, and the “happy” eggs that they produce will have the stamp of Get this counter » approval of HSUS. This situation is analogous to those opposed to water boarding Books announcing that they had made an agreement to phase in padded water boards over an Blog Posts 18-year period. The HSUS-United Egg Producer There have been two very opposite reactions on the part of animal advocates to this Agreement: Two Reactions HSUS-UEP agreement. Animal Care and Control: The Sad Failure of New York Cityʼs Municipal First, some advocates are criticizing HSUS, claiming that this agreement is a sell-out. Shelter System They are correct that this is a disaster for animals but, in all fairness, what can one Commentary #24: Vegan Advocacy in expect from the Humane Society? the U.K. New Interview from the Documentary HSUS explicitly denies that it endorses animal rights or the abolition of animal Project, “Iʼm Vegan” exploitation. On the contrary, HSUS supports the Humane Farm Animal Care’s Certified The Abolitionist Approach in a Nutshell Humane Raised and Handled “happy meat” label and two high-level HSUS executives sit

http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/the-hsus-united-egg-producer-agreement-two-reactions/[8/5/11 5:14:35 AM] The HSUS-United Egg Producer Agreement: Two Reactions | Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach

Upcoming Debate: Abolition vs. on the board of Humane Farm Animal Care. Regulation What Michael Vick Taught Us Humane Society International (HSI), is an affiliate of HSUS and the CEO of HSI is an Elephants: They May Weigh More HSUS executive. One HSI branch in Australia, which describes itself as “the global arm Than Chickens But Not as a Matter of of HSUS,” sponsors a “happy meat” label for which it charges a fee. Morality In my latest book, The Animal HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle acknowledges that “the Humane Society is broad-minded The Logic of a Vegan Diet Rights Debate: Abolition or Two New Interviews: Citizen Radio when it comes to food. About 95 percent of our members are not vegetarian.” He adds: Regulation?, published by Columbia and NZ Vegan Podcast University Press, I debate the “Compassionate” Animal Use is abolitionist approach to animal Nonsense But I believe eating is a moral act, and we can make choices to minimize the rights with Professor Robert Garner, a leading defender of animal welfare Nothing to Do with Science suffering of (food) animals. We can buy cage-free eggs, buy pork that doesn’t reform. More » Why Veganism Must Be the Baseline come from factory farms, and avoid eating veal and foie gras. Upcoming Lecture at Hobart and William Smith Colleges Video Science Weighs In: Animal Welfare and Reform Is Useless

Our program is about responsible hunting and curbing the worst excesses Blog Archive and the most inhumane and unsporting practices. 2011 July (1) Sportfishing is not an issue, unless someone did something horrible, like dynamiting fish. Most of the work we’ve done in the marine realm has been May (2) Watch presentations about the April (5) protecting marine mammals and seabirds. Theory of Animal Rights and other March (8) topics, as well as keynote addresses and interviews given by Professor February (10) Pacelle also states: Francione. January (3) 2010 Abolitionist Designs 2009 Our board of directors is a national volunteer board of directors. Very few of them are vegetarian. I have been since I’ve been a teenager. Whatever I do 2008 in my personal life does not necessarily reflect the policies of HSUS and we 2007 support certified humane programs, we support other farmers, we work with 2006 farmers, we think farming is a noble profession.

I don’t think anyone can reasonably claim that our work is moving in the direction of eliminating animal agriculture as some of the folks in the industry keep repeating.

So joining forces with the egg industry to produce and promote “happy” eggs fits comfortably with what HSUS has been doing for decades. The HSUS-UEP agreement merely confirms-again-that HSUS is all about making deals with industry and making their non-vegetarian members feel that they are engaging in morally acceptable behavior when they buy the “happy” meat and dairy and eggs approved by HSUS.

What HSUS is doing is applying the meaningless concept of “humane” exploitation as it has been applied for the past 200 years. The only difference between HSUS 50 years ago and HSUS now is that HSUS today is promoting its philosophy of “feel good” exploitation to farm animals whereas 50 years ago, they were focused primarily on the animals that we fetishize as a cultural matter: dogs and cats.

The second reaction on the part of animal advocates who claim to be more progressive than HSUS to agree with HSUS that this agreement is some sort of “historic” event; a “landmark” for animals; a “step” toward animal rights.

That is just plain silly. “Enriched” cages involve torturing hens. Period. The torture may be Meta slightly “better,” just as padded water boards may be slightly “better.” But let’s be clear: the hens will continue to be tortured. And they will continue to end up in a Log in slaughterhouse. The only difference is that these tortured eggs will be declared to be WordPress “humane” by HSUS. This agreement will be counterproductive in that it will encourage the Mandigo theme belief that we can exploit animals in a “kind” or “compassionate” way.

Many animal advocates claim that people are going to continue to eat eggs so we have to do something for animals suffering now. But this agreement, like most of the “happy” exploitation arrangements promoted by HSUS and other organizations, including those who claim to be “animal rights” groups, does not take effect for many years-in this case, 18 years. To the extent that this agreement provides any benefit for animals, it will not

occur for many, many years. And even if “enriched cages” provide some welfare benefit, this sort of “reform” makes the public more comfortable about consuming eggs and that guarantees continued consumption.

The problem is that although we should expect nothing more from the “Humane” Society, other organizations that claim to promote animal rights, and ostensibly to endorse the abolition of animal exploitation, also support these sorts of agreements. Virtually all of the large animal groups in the United States and Europe have come out in support of one or more “happy” labels and virtually all are busy making deals with institutional animal users. And supposedly more progressive organizations have already come out in favor of the HSUS-UEP. Indeed, Farm Sanctuary is trying to claim credit, along with HSUS, for the agreement.

The only way that the paradigm of animal exploitation will ever shift is if we educate people to stop demanding animal products based on the recognition that animals are members of the moral community. That goal is not as idealistic as it might appear: most people agree that it is wrong to inflict “unnecessary” suffering or death on animals. They understand that this moral principle excludes suffering or death for reasons of pleasure or convenience or habit. That is why there was such a strongly negative reaction to Michael Vick’s use of dogs for fighting. Vick’s pleasure in watching dogs fight did not justify his infliction of suffering and death on the dogs. The same reasoning applies to our eating animals. There is no difference between sitting around the pit watching dogs fight and sitting around a summer barbecue roasting the corpses of tortured animals or enjoying the dairy or eggs from tortured animals.

We need to educate people that our continued exploitation of animals for food, clothing, entertainment, etc., is unjust; that it is not merely a matter of how we treat animals, but that we use them at all. The reaction to Vick teaches us clearly that people, or at least many people, can understand this idea and accept it. We need to get them to apply it to animals beyond dogs or cats. That can be done through creative, nonviolent education.

The only way that things will ever change is if we build a movement of people who see veganism as a clear moral baseline and where that movement can serve as a catalyst to shift the paradigm away from thinking of nonhumans as commodities for us to use exclusively as means to our ends.

And that will never happen as long as we think that “happy” exploitation is any sort of answer. The belief that “happy” exploitation will result in significant welfare benefits for animals and that this will lead to abolition in the future is simply wrong on both counts.

In conclusion: those who criticize HSUS for making such an agreement should recognize that this sort of thing is exactly what HSUS has been doing forever. It is the “Humane” Society. And “humane” is a meaningless concept in a context in which animals are chattel property. HSUS exists to make people who exploit animals feel better about exploitation. And those who claim that this is a “landmark” agreement for animals and will lead to significant welfare benefits in the near term and reduced use or abolition in the future, should recognize that promoting the notion of “compassionate” exploitation will never-can never-lead to the rejection of animal use. It will only reinforce and perpetuate that use.

Please understand that I in no way question the sincerity of those who support these partnerships with industry or the welfare reforms that are involved. I do, however, believe sincerely that they are wrong.

******

If you are not vegan, please consider going vegan. It’s easy to go vegan; it’s better for your health and for the planet; and, most important, it’s the morally right thing to do.

If you are vegan, educate everyone with whom you come in contact in a creative, nonviolent way about veganism. If we really do regard animals as members of the moral community; if we really believe that we cannot justify unnecessary animal suffering and death, then we cannot justify billions of animal death based on palate pleasure.

And please remember: veganism is not just a matter of reducing suffering; it’s a matter of fundamental moral justice. It is what we owe to those who, like us, value their lives and who want to continue to live.

The World is Vegan! If you want it.

1. The Absurdity of Competing “Humane” Labels: HSUS v. Perdue 2. A Disturbing Partnership 3. The Failure of Anticruelty Laws

4. A “Bright Spot”? 5. My Dinner at Erik’s “Happy Meat” Diner

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 12th, 2011 at 10:16 am and is filed under Blog. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments are closed.

http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/the-hsus-united-egg-producer-agreement-two-reactions/[8/5/11 5:14:35 AM]