sign in sign up
<<
Home , American Humane, Animal rights, Animal Welfare Institute, Beauty Without Cruelty, Friends of Animals, Humane Society

WellBeing International WBI Studies Repository

2001

A Social History of Postwar Protection

Bernard Unti The of the

Andrew N. Rowan The Humane Society of the United States

Follow this and additional works at: https://www.wellbeingintlstudiesrepository.org/sota_2001

Part of the Commons, Civic and Community Engagement Commons, and the Politics and Social Change Commons

Recommended Citation Unti, B., & Rowan, A.N. (2001). A social history of postwar animal protection. In D.J. Salem & A.N. Rowan (Eds.), The state of the 2001 (pp. 21-37). Washington, DC: Humane Society Press.

This material is brought to you for free and open access by WellBeing International. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of the WBI Studies Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Social History of Postwar Animal Protection 1CHAPTER

Bernard Unti and Andrew N. Rowan

Introduction he rise of concern for animals and World War II proved to be an infer- work, undersubsidized by municipal during the post–World War II tile social context for the considera- governments, and it usually overtaxed Tperiod was an unanticipated tion of animal issues, and the Ameri- the staff and financial resources of the result of convergent trends in demo- can humane movement became local SPCAs. The graphics, animal utilization, science, quiescent and ineffectual. This decline Association (AHA), the movement’s technology, moral philosophy, and in movement strength coincided with umbrella association during that peri- popular culture. Together, these fac- the beginning of an expansion of ani- od, catered mainly to the interests of tors brought certain forms of animal mal use in such major segments of the its constituent local societies, which use under greater scrutiny and creat- twentieth-century economy as agri- were increasingly absorbed with urban ed the structures of opportunity nec- culture, biomedical research, and animal control issues. essary to challenge and transform product testing. Humane advocates After World War II, the animal pro- those uses. These trends also spurred were either unaware of trends in ani- tection movement enjoyed the revival the revitalization and extension of a mal husbandry and animal research or that we discuss in this chapter. Con- movement that, in the nineteenth were unable to effect reforms in prac- temporary scholarship suggests that century, had been robust. Alongside tices that were increasingly hidden social movements are more or less older notions about the humane from view and often exempted from continuous, shifting from periods of treatment of animals, modern animal extant anticruelty statutes and regula- peak activity to those of relative protection introduced new and differ- tions. By 1950 animal protection, decline. The renaissance of animal ent premises that both reflected and once a vibrant reform, stood mired in protection during the past half centu- shaped emerging attitudes about the a phase of insularity, lack of vision, ry involved several distinct phases of relationship between and and irrelevance. . Such divisions are discre- nonhuman animals. During the first decades of the cen- tionary, but they can clarify impor- Organized animal protection in tury, the anticruelty societies had tant trends. This analysis relies on a America dates from the 1860s, when shifted their energy and resources three-stage chronology in considering like-minded citizens launched inde- away from the promotion of a coher- the progress of postwar animal pro- pendent, nonprofit societies for the ent humane ideology and a broad- tection, one that emphasizes revival, protection of based approach to the prevention of mobilization and transformation, and (SPCAs) in one city after another and cruelty. They focused their attention consolidation of gains. pursued their goals of kind treatment on the management of horse, dog, on a range of fronts. After a period of and cat welfare problems and to edu- considerable vitality, however, the cational activities tied to keeping. 1950–1975: movement lost ground after World The assumption of urban animal con- War I and its concerns dropped from trol duties by humane societies Revival the public view. Several generations of throughout the country made it diffi- A specific grievance, the issue of leaders failed to match the vision, cult to sustain broader educational “pound seizure,” rooted in existing energy, or executive abilities of the campaigns addressing the cruel treat- principles and policies, humane movement’s founding fig- ment of animals in contexts. precipitated the transformation and ures. The period between World War I Animal control was largely thankless revitalization of organized animal 21 protection in the early 1950s. At the ry animal use, and the abolition of the part of large institutional, govern- time, both the AHA and the wealthier steel-jawed leghold trap. However, mental, or economic interests with local and regional humane societies they also identified and campaigned substantial resources or excellent had narrowed their focus, for the against emerging administrative ties that allowed them most part, to companion animal issues that their predecessors had to secure and defend their positions. issues. The postwar boom in expendi- never faced. With the legislative achievements on tures on biomedical research greatly The revitalization of humane work slaughter and animal research, ani- increased the demand for laboratory took place during the peak years of mal protection gained a place on the animals, and in the mid-1940s, scien- the Cold War, a period in which some American political landscape. In 1966 tific institutions began to turn to protest movements faced serious the humane treatment of animals municipal shelters as a cheap source repression, and the boundaries of even inspired a five-cent postal- of research dogs and cats. Animal pro- acceptable protest were generally cir- service stamp. curement were developed and cumscribed. While animal issues were Opposition to , and the pro- usually passed without much difficulty. rarely deemed politically partisan in tection of in general, had not Responding to the situation, lead- nature, they were largely pursued been a high priority for humane orga- ers within the AHA attempted to with tactical moderation and rhetori- nizations in the pre–World War II negotiate with the biomedical cal restraint during this era. Thus, it period. However, wildlife concerns research community. This antago- is no surprise that the new advocates became prominent platforms for sev- nized some supporters, who attacked avoided absolutism, embracing prag- eral of the groups that joined the field the propriety of such negotiations. As matic and gradualist approaches. in the late 1950s and 1960s. The a result the AHA backed away alto- They directed much of their energy most notable were gether from the issue. This decision toward the objectives of federal legis- (1957), the Catholic Society for Ani- also generated discord, and several lation, regulatory reform, and the mal Welfare (1959, later to become important breakaway factions amelioration of cruel practices the International Society for Animal emerged from the resulting intra- through humane innovation and poli- ), and the Fund for Animals organizational dispute within the cy evolution. They developed in-depth (1967). Other groups focusing on AHA. Before long, there were two new critiques and proposals for reform of wildlife issues continued to emerge national organizations in the field the major areas of animal exploita- throughout the 1960s and early (Rowan 1984). tion. Cruelty investigations at both 1970s. During this same era—one of As it turned out, the same people the national and local levels played an exploding population levels, who parted ways with the AHA over its occasional role in advancing the rapid land and resource development, pound release policy quickly found work, and helped to place different and an unheard-of destruction of other reasons to chart a new course issues onto the public agenda. In the habitat—the somewhat different for the work of animal protection. meantime, the movement slowly question of global species survival Renewal began in earnest with the expanded. joined the goal of better treatment on formation, in 1951, of the Animal During the 1950s humane groups the humane agenda. Rising public Welfare Institute and, in 1954, of The squared off with the industry to sympathy for wildlife protection also Humane Society of the United States secure the enactment of the Humane led environmental organizations to (HSUS), both of which were founded Slaughter Act (1958). In the follow- emphasize the protection of animal by individuals formerly associated ing decade, humane groups confront- species, especially endangered ones, with the AHA. The new groups explic- ed widespread opposition from the in their work and fund raising. Ani- itly distinguished themselves from biomedical research community to mals became increasingly iconic in extant organizations and their win passage of the Animal Welfare Act campaigns for the protection of the approaches. Although they were in (AWA) (1966). To a great extent, the natural environment, and their com- sympathy with the problems and chal- earliest federal legislative victories of pelling appeal as fund-raising symbols lenges that local SPCAs faced, they the humane movement were the was heavily exploited. Certain did not become directly involved with result of elite politics in which well- animals, especially seals, , the management of animal shelters connected advocates conscripted whales, and pandas, entered the pub- or municipal animal control work. influential congressional sponsors lic as never before. Instead, they focused on areas of ani- (such as Hubert Humphrey) who were During the postwar period, the rise mal use that their predecessors had ready and able to push heavily con- of ecology as both a science and a either failed to address or had tested bills through to passage. The social movement underpinned calls neglected for some time. Among support of key members of Congress for an expanded moral community other accomplishments they revived made it possible for animal protec- that would include both animate and and revitalized early twentieth-centu- tion interests to overcome the natur- inanimate nature, including animals. ry campaigns devoted to humane al advantages that the animal-using In the late 1960s, a number of acade- slaughter, the regulation of laborato- groups had—namely, that they were mic philosophers and ethicists resur-

22 The State of the Animals: 2001 rected the debate over animals’ sta- doubt even on the uniqueness of tive accomplishments in the 1960s tus, which to a limited degree had the human ability to communicate and 1970s drew more on engaged their predecessors in both through language. These various mobilization and direct-mail contact classical (before A.D. 200) and early inquiries set the stage for a renewal of with supporters to generate the nec- modern times (1600–1900). The arguments over the moral status essary support for positive legislation. advent of serious philosophical and of animals. Animal protection groups began to academic debate concerning the The dissemination of such research explore tentative and situational treatment of animals changed not to a broad public audience through alliances with interest groups work- only the movement’s own frame of the mass media was another crucial ing in related areas, especially those reference, but also the way in which it stimulus. Television nature programs connected with environmental pro- was perceived by outsiders. If animal and relevant books and articles have tection. Thus, humane groups joined protection had suffered from the stig- catered to and encouraged a virtually environmentalists in successful leg- ma of being perceived as based large- limitless popular taste for informa- islative campaigns that resulted in ly in emotion and sentiment, the tion and insight concerning whales, the passage of the Endangered addition of rational argument and dolphins, , and other Species Act (1967), the Wild Free- debate was a crucial factor in its highly valued species. During the Roaming Horse and Burro Act toward wider legitimacy. same period, the television series (1971), and the Marine Pro- Renewed attention to animal cog- “Lassie,” Walt Disney productions, tection Act (1972). Gradually animal nition bolstered these reinvigorated and other animal-related program- protection became a pressure group ethical arguments concerning human ming that drew heavily upon anthro- movement with a realizable legisla- obligation to animals (Griffin 1976). pomorphism attracted mass audi- tive agenda and the capacity for In the latter half of the nineteenth ences and shaped public attitudes national mobilization. century, Darwin’s theory of evolution toward animals (Cartmill 1993; Payne Even so, a collective consciousness spurred a strong interest in animal 1995; Mitman 1999). among those sharing in the work was that led some to argue that The steady expansion of pet keep- slow to coalesce. Humanitarians did animals deserved better treatment. ing during the postwar period also not contest their public characteriza- By the early 1900s, however, the rise heightened popular interest in animal tion as an armchair army, composed of as a scientific para- capacities. It has been suggested that of “little old ladies in tennis shoes,” digm reduced the study of animal this continuing fascination with the although they took pride in the fact mind to an investigation of physiolog- intelligence and emotional faculties that their efforts were beginning to ical facts rather than an exploration of companion animals also led more bring results. While steady gains were of consciousness, and the argument people to question the mistreatment being made in protective legislation that animals deserved greater consid- or misuse of animals in numerous and public awareness, for the most eration, based on higher mental fac- other contexts (Serpell 1986). part, congressional offices still ulties, waned. From the early 1950s The principal areas of concern for assigned animal issues to junior aides onward, another cycle of intense humane groups in the late 1960s and or temporary interns. Notwithstand- interest in early 1970s included general wild- ing the substantial progress that had commenced, as scientists and others life protection, anti-hunting, anti-fur been achieved from 1950 to 1975, established and explored the cogni- and anti-, animal research, animal protection had yet to become tive, psychological, and social capaci- , wild horse and a “household” issue, and it rarely fea- ties of animals. This new generation burro round-ups, and companion ani- tured in the media or in popular cul- of scientists, including Konrad mal . Other issues, like ture. Few advocates thought of them- Lorenz and Niko Tinbergen, com- those of , cruelty to selves as participants in a movement. bined field observations with scientif- performing animals, and prac- By 1975, however, this would change, ic methods, and the result was a new tices, were largely neglected. Few as a sense of collective identity began discipline——the naturalis- humane organizations had either the to emerge, and new issues and actors tic study of animal behavior. Impor- resources or the assurances of public came into the field. tantly, the pioneering ethologists dis- and membership support for sus- cussed their works with explicit tained exploration of these concerns. reference to the mental and emotion- The two major legislative bench- al states of animals. A subsequent gener- marks of the postwar period, the ation of field scientists extended the and the AWA, discipline by showing that non-human depended less on coalition-building animals possessed many of the abili- with other interest groups than on ties previously assumed to be singu- securing the agreement of the regu- larly human. Researchers working lated parties under pressure from with in the laboratory cast elite politicians. Subsequent legisla-

A Social History of Postwar Animal Protection 23 decades of meager media attention tions formed in both large and small 1975–1990: and few tangible successes, as well as communities in every state. Their for newcomers primed by the public monthly meetings sometimes resem- Mobilization and discussion of , such bled the consciousness-raising ses- innovation was inspiring. His work sions of the early feminist movement, Transformation had dramatic results, including an incorporating personal testimony, Some animal organizations working elevation of the general standard of guest speakers, the distribution of lit- in the 1960s and 1970s were already campaigning throughout the humane erature, the circulation of petitions, beginning to rely on more extensive movement as others began to emu- the planning of actions and events, research and planning, more percep- late and extend his approach. Anoth- and the viewing of videos detailing tive political strategies, and the lan- er important outcome of the Spira- animal abuse in various contexts. guage of rights and liberation. A num- led campaigns was the formation of Incoming activists were not encour- ber of the people who emerged as key channels of dialog among govern- aged simply to send money to the figures in post-1975 activism began ment, industry, and the humane national groups; instead, they were their careers in the established orga- community. Spira proved especially conscripted into campaigns that tar- nizations. There was considerable skillful at mediating between the tra- geted animal exploitation in their continuity and cooperation between ditional humane societies, insurgent own locales. The movement also the older and the newer animal advo- factions, and the animal-use con- showed increasing reticulation, as cates. Many longtime adherents, stituencies in the interest of reform local organizations knit themselves including some of those who had (Singer 1998). together as part of larger state or been part of the 1954 breakaway fac- In the early 1980s, an important regional coalitions. tion and subsequent schisms, wave of group formation and move- The new generation of animal advo- continued to make important contri- ment expansion commenced. Several cates brought the message to the butions (Taylor 1989). key conferences gave rise to new public through high-profile tactics, These precedents notwithstanding, organizations and generated consid- such as demonstrations outside the it is still clear that the publication of erable momentum toward the devel- institutions where animals were used, ’s Animal Liberation in opment of a national grassroots including factory farms, stockyards, 1975 and the formation of Animal movement. The ideolo- restaurants, laboratories, fur salons, Rights International by gy that and other con- , , and bird shoots. About in 1976 inaugurated a new phase of temporary philosophers popularized 1984 activists began to employ civil the work. In his book Singer recast expressed itself powerfully in the disobedience measures, and the the cause as a justice-based move- rhetoric and platforms of these new movement’s reliance on sit-ins, site ment that underscored human oblig- organizations. They challenged the blockage, and similar tactics expand- ation to animals, while challenging arbitrariness of moral boundaries ed steadily through the rest of the traditional justifications for their that subordinated animals to human decade. National days of action focus- exclusion from ethical consideration. interests. Some began to conceive ing on such high-priority issues as Animal Liberation also gave the ani- and articulate broad demands that production, animal experimenta- mal protection movement a unifying the traditional movement had either tion, pigeon shooting, and fur took ideology (based more on reason than abandoned or never formulated. The on “high holiday” status, as activists emotion)—whose elements included groups that adopted progressive cam- honored their commitment by partic- anti-, equal consideration paign styles gained members at a ipation in mass rallies and protests on of interests, and the notion that ani- rapid rate during the mid-1980s, as these calendar dates. Some American mal liberation is human liberation— their confrontational and more mili- campaigners borrowed the tactic of around which most of its factions tant approaches appealed to both the from England, enter- could mobilize. media (which “discovered” animal ing the woods to challenge hunters Spira had interacted directly with rights after 1980) and to a public and the constitutionality of the other advocates of this new ethi- ready for protest drama and direct “harassment” laws passed to protect cal sensibility concerning animals, action. A number of single-issue them. They also took to the airwaves, notably Singer himself. More impor- groups also emerged, sharpening the challenging a wide range of animal tantly, he brought a lifetime of expe- focus of attack on relatively neglect- uses in mass media debates. This rience in the labor, civil rights, peace, ed problems of animal use in enter- expanded repertoire of protest kept and women’s movements to bear on tainment, food production, and so- the issue before the public and drew the problem of animal . Spira called sport. new participants into the work. was one of the first activists to apply The decade also saw an unparal- In the age of twenty-four-hour mass the methods and tactics of other leled expression of grassroots-level media and the hand-held video cam- postwar movements in the animal activism in support of animal protec- era, the growing reliance of animal protection arena. For movement loy- tion, as local and regional organiza- alists who had suffered through groups on casework and investigation 24 The State of the Animals: 2001 also proved to be very important. Peo- zations, a different form of profes- able change. The movement as a ple for the Ethical Treatment of Ani- sional recruitment aided the move- whole developed greater consistency mals (1981) set the standard for such ment’s growth. Animal-interest and adopted more progressive posi- work. When other groups began to caucuses began to form among attor- tions on a range of issues. Even in the adopt the investigative approach as neys, biologists, medical doctors, case of groups whose political ideolo- well, it had an energizing effect. The nurses, veterinarians, and psycholo- gy remained moderate, tactical radi- credibility of both individuals and gists, to name the most visible. These calization brought both practical organizations mounted in the wake of new groups were especially influential gains and new supporters. Finally, exposés that substantiated longstand- in the pursuit and implementation of greater informal interaction between ing allegations concerning abusive innovative ideas and tactics. They also the staff members of various organi- treatment of animals in a number of made it possible for the humane zations ensured better coordination realms, and provided crucial momen- movement to present stronger evi- of effort and approach. tum to the cause as a whole. A highly dence in support of its positions in Adherents of the animal movement publicized case involving the so-called legislatures, courts, and professional have often compared their cause to (1981 et seq.), arenas and to the public. other postwar movements for change, which focused on allegations of All of the foregoing developments especially the African American free- neglect in the laboratory of a - contributed to the emergence of a dom struggle and that of women’s land researcher, made it apparent science of animal welfare that has liberation. In a sense, the claim has that neglect and improper care of ani- slowly penetrated discussions of ani- been mainly putative. A few people mals could and did occur in American mals’ treatment in many fields of graduated from the civil rights and research facilities. Three years later a agricultural, industrial, and scientific feminist movements into the struggle scandal involving the treatment of endeavor, as well as in other contexts. for animals’ rights, but the evidence baboons at the head-injury laboratory In the wake of rising social concern for overlap of personnel and con- of the University of about animals, stituencies remains largely anecdotal. made it clear that the Silver Spring began to develop into an established In any case, it is more important that case had not been an anomaly. In scientific discipline drawing on the 1960s-era rights-based move- the wake of these and subsequent ethology, veterinary medicine, and ments generated a “master frame” episodes, advocates working in sup- psychology. A growing number of sci- (“the interpretive medium through port of the Dole/Brown amendments entists are applying their energies which collective actors associated to the AWA found it far easier to the reduction of animal suffering with different movements” in a given to demonstrate the value of the and similar objectives. The science of cycle of activity define and compre- proposed legislation. Investigative animal welfare has thus opened the hend their goals and targets), and a exposés of stockyards, cosmetics test- way for innovations and refinements in agency that proved helpful to ing laboratories, and other targets touching on animal use in a wide the formation of an animal rights spurred legislative and public aware- range of areas and established itself movement (Snow and Benford 1992). ness campaigns designed to restrict as an influence in policy debates The appropriation by animal advo- or suppress animal suffering in these on the use and treatment of nonhu- cates of the strategic thinking and and other social locations. man animals. mobilization methods characteristic Professionalization within the ranks If the decade of the 1980s saw of established justice-based move- of animal protection groups began in intense and widespread protest ments was significant and lay at the the 1970s at both the national and against animal exploitation, it was core of many of the dramatic victories local levels, as humane organizations also one of considerable media visibil- accomplished by animal rights groups attracted knowledgeable staff mem- ity for animal protection and great throughout the decade. bers who enhanced both the organi- change within the movement itself. The policies and ideology of the zations’ daily operations and their The entry of new groups into the Reagan administration also catalyzed ability to serve the cause. For many of competition for resources via direct animal protection, just as it affected the newly recruited professionals, the mail not only flooded the mailboxes a number of other movements that that Regan, Singer, and of potential supporters, but it also led appeared or reappeared during the other philosophers introduced to the established organizations to reinvent 1980s. The presence of an apparently debate made participation in the themselves in light of new pressures hostile administration led to the movement possible. By 1985 The and opportunities. Many of these resurgence of , environ- HSUS employed a large number of groups lagged in providing either mentalism, antimilitarism, and the staff members with professional and leadership or resources for advancing nuclear freeze movement, as well as academic credentials in a broad range the cause. The advent of dynamic animal protection. The proposed of disciplines related to animals and competition and the heightened executive branch budgets provided no their well-being. expectations of an increasingly mobi- support for the AWA during all eight Outside of the established organi- lized constituency spurred consider- years of President Ronald Reagan’s

A Social History of Postwar Animal Protection 25 tenure. At the same time, federal period. By the end of the 1980s, the while only 0.6 percent of men had agencies under the president’s author- animal protection movement had set (Kellert and Berry 1981). ity took a number of other steps that a number of reforms into play, and In the light of such findings, it is animal protectionists perceived as the argument that animals were worth noting that the rise of animal threatening to the well-being of both deserving of greater moral considera- protection in the nineteenth century domestic and wild animals. tion had penetrated public conscious- coincided with a period of sustained One measure of the movement’s ness. By then, too, however, govern- vitality within American feminism. success during this phase of its devel- ment, industrial, institutional, and Thus, one might plausibly speculate opment was the launching of coun- entrepreneurial interests with a stake that the post–World War II campaigns teroffensive tactics and campaigns by in animal use had mobilized with suf- for sexual equality have helped to its adversaries. Furriers, agribusiness ficient authority to slow the move- place issues tied to care, concern, and interests, product testing companies, ment’s momentum and influence. nurture on the public and political hunting and trapping groups, and The field of contest, the relevant par- agenda. While the principal organs biomedical research concerns collec- ties, and the issues themselves were and agents of modern feminism have tively spent tens of millions of dollars all in evolution. largely failed to embrace the issue of for public awareness campaigns and animal suffering and exploitation, other activities aimed at squelching many feminists have found the cause the animal movement. Their pressure Understanding on their own. A number of authors sparked a political backlash, too, as have argued that nurturing and care- congressional representatives intro- Animal giving values are higher priorities for duced legislation to shield animal women, and still more have attempt- use from the scrutiny and challenge Protection ed to draw explicit links between fem- of animal protectionists. Old stereo- Concern for animals has sparked a inism and animal protection. In fact, types were also revised—the dismis- considerable body of literary, histori- by the early 1990s, the feminist ethic sive symbolism of the “little old lady cal, philosophical, legal, scientific, of caring emerged as an alternative to in tennis shoes” was deemed no and cultural studies that focus on the the liberation- and rights-oriented per- longer adequate to the task. Targeted human-animal relationship. However, spectives of Singer and Regan ( institutions and individuals promoted in the late 1980s, the animal protec- 1990; Donovan and Adams 1996). instead the more threatening image tion movement itself, and its popular Extant research also indicates that of animal-rights terrorist in their reception, began to attract the atten- the majority of active animal advo- efforts to thwart the growth of public tion of scholarly analysts. This accu- cates are white, with middle- and sympathy with animal advocates. mulated scholarship focuses on the upper-class backgrounds. They appear Sidney Tarrow’s observation that movement’s social composition, its to be more highly educated than movement cycles are activated by tac- recruitment and mobilization meth- most Americans, and tend to live in tical innovation applies well to the ods, its overall accomplishments, and communities with populations of transformation and impressive growth general attitudinal surveys about 10,000 or more. A high percentage of of organized animal protection dur- the treatment of animals in Ameri- animal advocates have companion ing the period 1975–1990 (Tarrow can society. animals in the home and they are 1998). The emergence of a unifying The body of relevant scholarship generally not affiliated with tradition- ideology and new organizational actors concerning the social composition of al religious institutions. Many consid- committed to new strategies of protest the humane movement and its activi- er themselves atheists or agnostics and mobilization further reinvigorat- ties is limited. Nevertheless, a few (Plous 1991; Richards and Krannich ed the field of humane work after the conclusions are common to virtually 1991; Jamison and Lunch 1992; Her- renaissance of the 1950s and 1960s. all of the extant studies. The most zog 1993; Shapiro 1994). Institutions that had long gone striking is that women are more like- A 1990 survey based on controlled unchallenged now faced a strong and ly to be participants in animal protec- sampling was typical. The researchers tactically resourceful movement with tion work than are men. Indeed, lev- found their sample to be 97 percent a strong base of grassroots volunteers. els of female participation in humane white, 78 percent female, while 57 Animal protectionists registered a work appear to be as high as in any percent were in the 30–49-year age series of successes as the targeted other social movement not explicitly group (compared to 21 percent for interests struggled to reestablish tied to feminist objectives. Women the United States overall). Animal their accustomed dominance. A new have played a significant role in the advocates proved to be highly educat- generation of activists came into the formation of most of the newer orga- ed in comparison with the general groups most closely associated with nizations, and a 1976 survey using population (33 percent had higher tactical innovation and campaign suc- a national sample of 3,000 degrees compared with 7.6 percent of cess. However, all groups enjoyed reported that 2 percent of women had all Americans), and financially well off increasing membership during the supported an animal organization (39 percent had incomes of $50,000

26 The State of the Animals: 2001 or more, compared with 5 percent of among them. These causes tend to There is no apparent self-interest the national population, although it link people who share certain views for those involved in the work, yet ani- should be noted that educational and about reforms needed to improve mal protection, like other new social income levels are strongly correlat- modern life. Their movements aim for movements, also appears to confer ed). Seven out of ten respondents changes in the political system as well psychological benefits. Many animal reported having no living children, as in the systems of cultural produc- activists experience alienation from while nine out of ten had companion tion within the society. In other words, a wider society that does not value animals (compared with about four they seek fundamental changes in animals as much as they do. For such out of ten in a national sample). In social consciousness (Melucci 1985). people the emergence and rapid fact, respondents had an average of However, delineating the character of mobilization of a movement that 4.7 animals each, about five times such movements does not answer a unites like-minded individuals, that the national average (Richards and key question about their emergence investigates and challenges the abuse Krannich 1991). and expansion. If the new social and suffering of animals, and that How and why do people come to the movements do not recruit and mobi- attempts to enculturate the princi- cause? Here, too, academic studies lize from within preexisting networks, ples of animal protection within have begun to provide some insights then how and why do people enter society has considerable allure into the recruitment of adherents. and participate? (Shapiro 1994). Resource mobilization has been a Why do some people seem to care Some believe that attitudes dominant theory of social movement more about animals than do others? acquired in childhood can account for development. As its name implies, Indeed, why do they care enough to individuals’ disposition toward ani- resource mobilization theory posits join campaigns for animal rights and mals and their protection; according- that movements emerge when an well-being? Considerable progress ly, animal protectionists have laid a adversely affected or dissatisfied toward comprehension and assess- great emphasis on humane education population gains enough momentum ment of the animal protection move- of children. A 1984 survey stressed to attract or combine the resources ment has come with the emergence the significance of childhood experi- necessary to advance its own interests of studies that combine research on ence on distinguishing individuals’ through organization and protest the social psychology of attitudes attitudes toward animals, and the (McAdam 1982). Such explanations of toward animal use with theories developmental origin of concern for movement dynamics usually rely on about mobilization and organization. animals has begun to attract atten- the study of recruitment networks: in Childhood experience, social condi- tion (Kellert 1985; Myers 1988). the civil rights era, for example, tioning, the manifestation of an Despite a growing number of studies churches were the earliest and most empathic style, and identification that focus on humane education, significant sites of conscription and with the oppressed have all been con- however, we know very little about its engagement. sidered as factors in the development effectiveness and impact. Resource mobilization theory has of regard for animals (Shapiro 1994). While underutilized, the communi- been judged inadequate for the study One of the few sociologists to write ty study approach has also helped to of the so-called “new social move- extensively about the animal protec- shed light upon the social composi- ments,” which pursue quality-of-life tion movement, James Jasper, pro- tion of the humane movement. Just or lifestyle objectives as distinct from poses that greater attention be paid as importantly, however, community the material or class-based goals of to the social-psychological identity studies have made it possible to more traditional social movements. formation of activists. In the model explore the outcomes of animal pro- Resource mobilization, its critics he proposes, one or more greater or tection campaigns in a number of charge, overlooks the cultural compo- smaller “moral shocks” (discrete cases. These studies frame the efforts nents of social movement formation, events, experiences, or realizations) of activists and their opposition inter- and its inattention to identity, cul- raise a sense of outrage or responsi- actively, taking into account the ture, and meaning as factors in lead- bility within individuals. These shocks evolutionary character of specific ing people to join movements has led spur them to seek out or form orga- campaigns and of humane work as scholars to the new social movement nizations (Jasper 1997). The animal a whole. For instance, Einwohner’s framework (Morris and Mueller protection movement, then, does not study of a statewide organization sug- 1992). New social movements draw bring new supporters into the work by gests that the importance of cultural supporters whose own basic rights are exposure through a preexisting social assumptions about protesters, as well secure and who are typically well inte- network like a church, women’s as the targeted practices and behav- grated into their society. Examples rights group, or union. More typically, iors, are as vital to the assessment of include the anti–nuclear power, envi- it “collects” them from a pool of citi- the movement’s outcomes as is a study ronmental, disarmament, and alter- zens within whom some critical expe- of its tactics, organizational strategy, native medicine movements. It is rience or insight has sparked a sense and structures of opportunity. Grove’s proposed that animal protection falls of empathy with animals. study of confrontations over animal

A Social History of Postwar Animal Protection 27 experimentation in a post-citizenship causes (environmen- Such judgments overlook the fact university town explores how stake- talism and anti-nuclear activism, for that movements cannot perpetually holders on either side acted to redress example), animal protection carries be novel or operate at constantly high certain perceived deficits in their with it an implicit ambivalence about levels of protest activity. Even the approach to the issue. For example, science and technology and frequent- most enthusiastic adherents tire and the animal activists emphasized more ly has drawn on the potent and popu- may curtail their levels of participa- rational and dispassionate lines of lar of the uncaring, cold, tion due to fatigue, and it is difficult argument, while researchers drew on and dispassionate scientist. to hold the interest of the public and emotional appeals in their defense However, this attitude, commonly the media over the long term. Intense of the status quo (Einwohner 1997; called anti-instrumentalist, does not interest, and the commitment to see- Grove 1997). in itself define the movement. In fact, ing an issue resolved, usually recede Both Einwohner’s and Grove’s stud- humane advocates have often coun- as the complexity of certain issues, ies confirm the potential of studies terpoised their skepticism of science and their imperviousness to quick of local and regional contexts to with enthusiasm about the possibili- and easy resolution, become more produce insight into the dynamics of ties of technology to ameliorate the obvious. The philosophy of animal contention over animal use. In short- circumstances of animals. For exam- rights, an ideology largely defined in er case studies of community-level ple, advocates have relied on the terms of moral absolutes, did not challenges to biomedical research, development of knowledge through make evolution of the animal move- Jasper and Poulsen suggest that the science to advance arguments con- ment from a novel protest force to animal movement can quickly lose its cerning the replacement of animals a mature contestant in the political advantage when targeted institutions in research, testing, and education; marketplace any easier. Animal advo- decide to fight back with equal tenac- to critique the reliance on hunting as cates have begun to develop other ity. Jasper and Sanders conclude that, a policy; to descriptive rhetorics that are more where both sides avoid strongly polar- reduce animal overpopulation; and to pragmatic and inclusive. ized disagreement over basic princi- promote alternative food-animal hus- As a result, in the 1990s the animal ples, compromises can be achieved bandry systems. protection movement shifted into (Jasper and Poulsen 1993; Sanders other, less dramatic, and less obvious- and Jasper 1994). A full appraisal of ly newsworthy channels of activity. For animal protection and its accomplish- 1990–2000: example, some of the battles between ments during the past half-century animal users and animal defenders will require many more such investi- Consolidation moved into the political, legislative, gations. Not just the recent history, By 1990 national media coverage of and regulatory arenas. These con- but the future of animal protection animal rights protests had apparently frontations called for new kinds of work, may be clarified by careful peaked, leading to speculation that knowledge and action, often more attention to the substance and legacy the movement was losing the public’s subtle and nuanced than street-level of such case studies. attention and waning in influence protests and less likely to attract It seems clear that the 1960s lega- (Herzog 1995). Certainly, the novelty the notice of the mass media. For cy of critical skepticism and cultural of the movement’s provocative chal- instance, humane advocates have suc- radicalism created a favorable context lenges to the use and mistreatment of ceeded in the establishment of basic for the growth and spread of new social animals wore off, undoubtedly leading frameworks for regulating the use of movements such as animal protec- media decision makers to the conclu- animals in certain contexts and in tion. Disaffection with American for- sion that the cause, no longer “new,” some of their campaigns to strength- eign policy and with racial and sexual was less deserving of special coverage. en earlier “foothold” legislation such at home led many The high level of local grassroots as the AWA, obtaining incremental Americans to question the authority activism that had characterized the advances in a steady pattern. As the and honesty of government and insti- 1980s subsided, and several national issues and the arenas of debate and tutional actors, a tendency that activist organizations, tied to the action evolved, they drew new and infused most of the post-1960s move- movement’s growth in the previous different players into animal protec- ments. While animal protectionists decade, dissolved or waned in influ- tion work. have rarely adopted wholesale cri- ence. Some participants in the work, Among recent accomplishments, tiques of the American political eco- accustomed to seeing large numbers attorneys representing various hu- nomic order, the movement has often of people at events and extensive mane organizations scored victories relied on rhetoric and assumptions media coverage, worried about the in cases relating to wildlife manage- that identify animals as victims of health of the animal protection move- ment, species preservation initiatives, rampant commercialism, greed, vani- ment. Others asserted that the ani- wildlife import-permit challenges, ty, and the coercive power of big insti- mal rights movement was in ideologi- standing to sue, and open-government/ tutions. Like other post-industrial, cal retreat (Francione 1996). public-participation laws. Legal advo-

28 The State of the Animals: 2001 cacy showed increasing promise as a ment of Agriculture (USDA) elimi- to constitute an increasingly impor- strategy for helping animals. In 1999 nated the face branding of tant market segment. The “green discussion of the merits of extending because of animal welfare concerns. consumerism” of the 1990s both rights to animals within the American In 1999 the USDA took the virtually encouraged and relied upon market- legal system spilled into the national unprecedented step of forcing a place expressions of affinity with ani- media, as Harvard University’s consent agreement upon a contro- mals. Such patterns of consumption school announced that it would offer versial private laboratory, resulting have caught on outside the animal a course in for the first in the promised relinquishment of protection movement itself, as other time (Glaberson 1999). chimpanzees to other facilities after Americans, exposed to relevant infor- In a trend that began in the early a number of serious animal welfare mation and sensitized to humane 1990s, The HSUS and the Fund for violations had been reported (Spira values, changed their lifestyles. The Animals pioneered the use of state- 1995; Brownlee 1999). success of supermarkets and other wide public referenda to curb certain In general, the movement has retailers attuned to these values kinds of animal use and abuse. These enjoyed greater success in reshaping reflects the longer-term influence initiatives, while costly, enjoyed a cultural attitudes than in securing of campaigns waged in the 1970s high rate of success. It is worth not- laws. Every movement produces cul- and 1980s. ing that the determination of public ture, and the animal protection cause Similar choices outside the realm opinion through scientific polling and has done especially well in the broad of food and household product pur- attention to demographic changes diffusion of its values. While it might chases have also become more popu- in the targeted states were vital to be the case that straight news cover- lar. Those who object to the presence the development and prosecution of age of animal issues has declined, of animals in circuses can now patron- these campaigns. They also relied on these issues are more likely to be ize troupes that eschew their use. the more democratic political chan- mentioned in popular cultural forms who wish to choose nonani- nel of the popular referendum, forc- such as television entertainment or mal alternatives, whether in the high ing special interests to face the magazine features than was the case school cafeteria or the veterinary judgments of the voting public. This twenty years ago. Concern for animals school classroom, now find it easier approach sidestepped the usual has been increasingly represented to do so. Even haute couture has domination of public policy networks within a variety of cultural forms, condescended to meet the demand by opposition groups through the including literature, television, music, for elegant but cruelty-free fur. lobbying of elected representatives, and art. During the past twenty years, Judging the success of a social large campaign contributions, or it has become strongly associated with movement is a notoriously difficult other means. successive generations of cul- exercise. A simple verdict of success In some cases, too, the introduc- ture. Through this sequence of accul- or failure in any specific category of tion of a bill in the federal legislature turation, the movement has helped to effort is usually inadequate for the signaled a particular issue’s “arrival” normalize a number of practices and assessment of animal protection as an or helped to frame a debate that was beliefs that support the animal pro- ongoing social and political endeavor. ultimately resolved through adminis- tection agenda. There are different forms of success: trative or other channels. In 1989, for The embrace of humane lifestyle political success, mobilization success, instance, the Veal Calf Protection Act choices has been one significant result campaign success, economic success, gained a hearing in Congress, the of this process. Animal advocates and success in the realm of public first farm animal welfare bill to do so have taken the pursuit of principles opinion. Beyond this, dichotomous in a decade, more or less. The bill embodied in the 1960s slogan “the assessments of “success” and “fail- came in the wake of considerable neg- personal is political” to considerable ure” are often inappropriate in the ative publicity about the way in which lengths. The embrace of humane prod- assessment of a complex and ongoing calves were raised for market. ucts, ones that involve no (or less) process of struggle and debate (Ein- Observers credit another bill, the harm to animals and the environ- wohner 1997). A broad evaluation of Research Modernization Act, intro- ment, has been a core principle for animal protection’s relative accom- duced annually since 1979, for high- animal protectionists during the past plishments must include an under- lighting the issue of duplication in fifteen years. Over time, exposure to standing of the ever-changing terrain experiments and the need to search humane ideology typically prompts wrought by shifts in public taste and for alternatives. Ultimately, both of its adherents to become highly con- opinion. Other factors that must also these goals were pursued through scious of the ethical implications of be considered include nonlegislative means. their wardrobe, diet, entertainment, • the relative embeddedness of the In recent years there has been household, and other lifestyle choic- practices under scrutiny, some evidence of greater federal es. Humane advocates, as purchasers • countermeasures undertaken by commitment to enforcement action. of vegetarian, “cruelty-free,” and envi- the targeted interests, In the mid-1990s the U.S. Depart- ronmentally safe products, have come • negative publicity wrought by

A Social History of Postwar Animal Protection 29 misguided activism, ally not been borne out. Although the actually passed. Many have not even • changes in the political economy, movement made significant progress gained a hearing, let alone a vote. • technical advances that change toward the goal of deglamorizing fur Despite the frequent complaints of opportunities and threats, and in the 1980s, the fur industry has sur- the regulated parties, the legislative • many other advances and vived and continues to attract con- and regulatory restraints on animal reversals that occur over sumers. Its ability to cut prices in the use remain modest. The quality of the long term. short term, shift production to cheap- enforcement is at times questionable, Goals must necessarily change as er overseas facilities, and deploy and funding for administration of ani- conditions and opportunities change advertising resources to promote its mal protection programs is also limit- and issues are disputed, negotiated, product as an affirmative choice have ed. For instance, at the time of this and transformed by subsequent debate allowed the industry to survive during writing, federal Wildlife Services, and action. even the worst of times. Veal con- (known until 1997 as the Animal With these considerations in mind, sumption may be down, but it is not Damage Control program), which one should not overstate the effective- out. Americans eat a little less red underwrites the extermination of ness and sophistication of animal meat than they used to, but poultry predators, enjoyed a budget of $40 protectionists’ tactics or the general consumption has risen dramatically, million, while the AWA, designed to caliber of their leadership. The move- resulting in more animal suffering protect laboratory animals, got just ment’s history provides compelling overall. Internationally, intensive ani- one-fourth of that amount. examples of expenditure of funds and mal agriculture and meat consump- Efforts to translate substantial pop- effort on strategically pointless ges- tion have been increasing fast. Not ular concern for animals into legisla- tures and/or campaigns with little even in the field of , tive and regulatory progress have attention to long-term strategy or fol- which drew so much attention in the been stymied by the fact that political low-up campaigns. In the early 1980s, 1980s and where evidence indicates success in animal protection depends for example, Mobilization for Animals that animal use has declined substan- not on the breadth of public support (MfA) organized a year-long campaign tially, can continuing progress be but on the movement’s influence against the nation’s seven taken for granted. In 1999 animal within the networks responsible for centers and conducted major protests organizations had to fight off a prod- policy-making about animals. As it outside four of the seven facilities. Yet uct-safety initiative launched by envi- happens, movement access to these MfA and its collaborators never devel- ronmental groups and sponsored by networks is relatively poor. In general, oped a follow-up strategy; ironically, the federal government that would the proponents and beneficiaries of the major outcome of the protest was have led to an expansion of animal animal use dominate such networks, an increase in funding for the primate testing. After two decades of work on while animal advocates and organiza- centers in the wake of the demonstra- alternatives, it was still necessary for tions struggle to improve their access tions. The 1990 March for Animals humane advocates to persuade other (Garner 1998). drew 25,000 people to Washington for stakeholders that different and better It also remains the case that, despite a protest, but there was no larger testing, not more animal testing, was humanitarians’ efforts to place con- strategy developed beyond holding the appropriate course for the pro- cern for animals in its own right into the event itself. A last-minute legisla- gram to chart. public discourse, a number of the tive agenda, which produced little or most successful initiatives have relied no follow-up, was a failure. In the end, on secondary and tertiary arguments groups opposed to the animal activist Current Context tied to human interest or to civil lib- agenda exploited the event to get The animal protection movement erties. The campaign against youthful their story out and the media cover- may have growing popular appeal, but acts of cruelty has emphasized the age was mostly negative. Six years this has not necessarily been translat- potential for escalating sociopathic later, many of the same groups staged ed into commensurate political suc- behavior and interpersonal violence a follow-up event that drew only sev- cess. In the political arena, the power on the part of the perpetrators. The eral thousand supporters. While some of interests tied to animal exploita- campaign against dissection has argued that the turnout was low tion has prevented the passage and underscored the right to conscien- because the event was badly orga- implementation of many initiatives. tious objection on the part of stu- nized, the 1996 gathering effectively Frequent tensions between federal dents coerced to participate in the ended attempts to convert animal and state authority have limited the practice. Campaigns against the fac- activism into some sort of mass chances of success for some propos- tory farming and animal research movement. als, especially those relating to wildlife industries have emphasized the poten- It is also important to note that issues. Only a small percentage of the tial harm to humans of the products optimistic predictions about the many bills to halt or curb animal suf- that may result from those institu- demise of certain forms of animal use fering introduced during the past half tions and their activities. The need to during the past two decades have usu- century in the U.S. Congress have place emphasis and priority on con- 30 The State of the Animals: 2001 siderations unrelated to the integrity their political power by forging than 90 percent of all animal abuse and well-being of animals themselves alliances with one another and devel- and suffering occurs. appears to be an essential feature of oping broader societal networks (Zald Some models of movement devel- many successful campaigns. and McCarthy 1987). Among other opment suggest that, at a critical One of the most serious obstacles implications, the broad public base of stage, some adherents who believe faced by animal protection has been support for both that little or no progress is being its difficulty in forging viable and and animal protection suggests that made or that change is not occurring enduring alliances with other move- the reconciliation of differences fast enough, may turn to extralegal ments. This deficiency has been most between the animal and environmen- and/or to violent tactics. In recent evident in the pursuit of legislative tal movements should be a high pri- years there has been an apparent objectives, but it has manifested itself ority for both. One potential conflict increase in the number of illegal in other arenas as well. Public health pits environmentalism’s focus on ani- actions directed against those who organizations, for example, have gen- mals as populations that need con- make their living through the use of erally resisted overtures from animal serving (or preserving) from extinc- animals. Most amount to organizations when it comes to the tion against animal protection’s damage, cast by its perpetrators as a reform of product testing require- interest in animals as individuals that form of economic warfare against ments. Relations with the veterinary need protection from suffering. those who exploit animals. On some community, which could provide con- Another potential conflict arises from occasions, however, the targeted indi- siderable technical expertise as well the tendency for environmental viduals and institutions have been the as substantial moral support for the groups to seek solutions in appropri- of threats to life and limb. movement’s goals, are often strained. ate human intervention (they are still Such threats undermine the moral Animal protectionists have also ready to trust human ingenuity). Ani- basis of the modern animal move- neglected to cultivate ties with uni- mal advocates usually offer some vari- ment, which holds that all sentient versities, which could be a source of ation of a call for humans to leave beings (presumably including humans) potentially useful scholarship, exper- Nature alone to her own devices (they should not be subject to abuse or tise, and societal credibility. Finally, distrust what humans do in the name threat. In a democratic and pluralis- it has proved difficult for humane of preservation). tic society, the boundaries of accept- groups to establish reliable coopera- In the coming decade, the farm ani- able protest, , and civil tion with environmental and wildlife mal issue would seem to pose the disobedience may be difficult to conservation organizations. Admit- most interesting and challenging test determine. Nevertheless, the animal tedly, coalition building is a two-way of the animal movement’s capacity protection movement cannot counte- street, and it is not clear that animal for alliance building. Until the last nance violence towards either ani- protectionists can readily overcome few years, humane organizations have mals or humans. As a matter of his- the dismissive attitude of other inter- been virtually alone in attempts to torical fact, threats of bodily harm est groups, whose concern for animal challenge factory-farming practices and acts of destruction intended protection issues is not deep enough in the political arena. Unfortunately, merely or mainly to intimidate or to underpin a strong alliance solely the movement has been unable harm others are nearly always coun- on the basis of animal welfare interests. to penetrate the relevant political terproductive in the long term and decision-making networks, which are will always undermine efforts to build dominated by industry-based groups a humane society (as both Gandhi and The Next with substantial power and influence Martin Luther King Jr. understood). (Garner 1998). However, the main- Ten Years stream environmental movement, The engagement of animal protection traditionally indifferent to the suffer- Conclusion with environmentalism looms espe- ing of animals on factory farms, has During the first phase of revitaliza- cially important, as environmentalism begun to address intensive animal tion (1950–1975) that followed World has emerged as the pivotal foundation agriculture from the perspective of War II, animal protectionists sought of new social movements worldwide. concern over environmental despolia- to reinstate the broad question of the Other movements’ prospects for gen- tion resulting from increased quanti- proper treatment for animals on the eral success rest to a significant ties of animal waste. The practices national agenda. New and compelling degree on their ability to include the of industrialized agriculture are also philosophies of human responsibility language of environmentalism in drawing increased attention from toward animals entered into public their own rhetoric. Among all new legislative and regulatory bodies. It discourse. In the middle period, social movements, environmentalism remains to be seen whether these between 1975 and 1990, the move- elicits the most support and the convergent interests can lead to long- ment gained popular support, and greatest degree of consensus (Martig term cooperation aimed at the reform triggered changes in attitudes and 1995). Movements grow and increase of the agricultural sector, where more behavior (buying patterns, for exam- A Social History of Postwar Animal Protection 31 ple) that continue to register broadly Jasper, J.S., and J. Poulsen. 1993. within American society. Literature Cited Fighting back: Vulnerabilities, blun- The evidence of concern for ani- Adams, C.J. 1990. The sexual politics ders, and countermobilization by mals within popular American culture of meat. : Continuum Press. the targets in three animal rights strongly suggests that the humane Brownlee, S. 1999. Foundation gives campaigns. Sociological Forum 8: impulse has made significant inroads up 300 research chimps. New York 639–57. into popular consciousness at the Times. 14 September. Kellert, S.R. 1985. Attitudes toward beginning of the new millennium. Cartmill, M. 1993. A view to a death animals: Age related development During the last quarter of the twenti- in the morning: Hunting and nature among children. Journal of Envi- through history. Cambridge: Harvard eth century, millions of Americans ronmental Education 16: 29–39. University Press. came to view the mistreatment of ani- Kellert, S.R., and J. Berry. 1981. Donovan, J., and C.J. Adams. 1996. mals, in various contexts, as a social Knowledge, affection and basic atti- Beyond animal rights: A feminist tudes towards animals in American evil that merits attention. Grassroots caring ethic for the treatment of ani- action and targeted campaign work society. Washington, D.C.: Govern- mals. New York: Continuum. ment Printing Office. generated unprecedented pressure Einwohner, R.L. 1997. The efficacy of Martig, A. 1995. Public support for for reform within most areas of ani- protest: Meaning and social move- the goals of new social movements: mal use. Animal protectionists tried ment outcomes. Doctoral disserta- A cross-national study. Doctoral to capitalize on public interest and tion, University of Washington. dissertation, Washington State Uni- concern by pushing for legislative Francione, G.L. 1996. Rain without versity. gains. This effort to realize legislative thunder: The ideology of the animal McAdam, D. 1982. Political process objectives continued during the con- rights movement. Philadelphia: and the development of black insur- solidation phase of 1990–2000. Ani- Temple University Press. gency. Chicago: University of Chica- mal organizations and their support- Garner, R. 1998. Political animals: go Press. ers have established themselves as an Animal protection politics in Britain Melucci, A. 1985. The symbolic chal- interest faction in political debates and the United States. Manchester: lenge of contemporary movements. that affect the well-being and future Manchester University Press. Social Research 52: 789–816. of nonhuman animals and have pene- Glaberson, W. 1999. Legal pioneers Mitman, G. 1999. Reel nature: Ameri- trated some of the institutions where seek to raise lowly status of animals. ca’s romance with wildlife on film. relevant policy decisions are made. New York Times, 18 August, A–1. Cambridge: Harvard University At the same time, cruelty to ani- Griffin, D. 1976. The question of ani- Press. mals remains peculiarly subject to mal awareness. New York: Rocke- Morris, A.D. and C. M. Mueller. 1992. social definition. Some of the humane feller University Press. Frontiers in social movement theory. movement’s greatest challenges Grove, J.M. 1997. Hearts and minds: New Haven: Yale University Press. involve the regulation or suppression The controversy over lab animals. Myers, E. 1998. Children and animals: of socially sanctioned cruelties, many Philadelphia: Temple University Social development and our con- of which remain largely outside the Press. nection to other species. Boulder, scope of anticruelty laws and admin- Herzog, H.A. 1993. “The movement is Colo.: Westview Press. istrative standards. Animal advocates my life”: The psychology of animal Payne, D. 1995. Bambi. In From rights activism. Journal of Social cannot likely succeed in bringing mouse to mermaid: The politics of Issues 49: 103–119. sweeping reform on their own. The film, gender, and culture, eds. E. ——————. 1995. Has public inter- future development of the animal pro- Bell, L. Haas, and L. Sells. Bloom- est in animal rights peaked? Ameri- ington: Indiana University Press. tection movement will depend on the can Psychologist (November): ability of its leaders to identify and Plous, S. 1991. An attitude survey of 945–947. animal rights activists. Psychologi- take advantage of social trends and to Jamison, W., and W. Lunch. 1992. cal Science 2 (1991): 194–196. build appropriate alliances with other Rights of animals, of Richards, R.T., and R.S. Krannich. movements whose goals converge science, and political activism: Pro- 1991. The ideology of the animal with the objective of a humane soci- file of animal rights activists. Sci- rights movement and activists’ atti- ety, one that is compassionate, ence, Technology, and Human Val- tudes toward wildlife. In Transac- sustainable, and just toward all of ues 17 (1992): 438–458. tions of the Fifty-Sixth North Amer- its inhabitants. Jasper, J. 1997. The art of moral ican Wildlife and Natural Resources protest: Culture, biography, and cre- Conference. Washington, D.C.: ativity in social movements. Chica- Wildlife Management Institute. go: University of Chicago Press. Rowan, A.N. 1984. Of mice, models, and men: A critical evaluation of animal research. Albany: State Uni- versity of New York Press.

32 The State of the Animals: 2001 Sanders, S., and J. Jasper. 1994. Civil politics in the animal rights con- flict: God terms versus casuistry in Cambridge, . Sci- ence, Technology, and Human Val- ues 19(2): 169–88. Serpell, J. 1986. In the company of animals: A study of human-animal relationships. Oxford: Basil Black- well. Shapiro, K. 1994. The caring sleuth: Portrait of an animal rights activist. Society and Animals 2: 145–166. Singer, P. 1998. into action: Henry Spira and the . New York: Rowman and Littlefield. Snow, D.A., and R.D. Benford. 1992. Master frames and cycles of protest. In Frontiers in social movement theory, eds. A.D. Morris and C.M. Mueller. New Haven: Yale University Press. Spira, H. 1995. Coordinator’s report of the Coalition for Non-Violent Food. New York: Animal Rights International. Tarrow, S. 1998. Power in movement. New York: Cambridge University Press. Taylor, V. 1989. Social movement con- tinuity: The women’s movement in abeyance. American Sociological Review 54: 761–75. Zald, M., and J.M. McCarthy, eds. 1987. Social movements in an orga- nizational society. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.

A Social History of Postwar Animal Protection 33 Appendix Milestones in Postwar Animal Protection ORGANIZATIONS FOUNDED LEGISLATION PASSED/AMENDED OTHER

1951

1954 Humane Society of the U.S.

1955 Society for Animal Protective Legislation

1957 Friends of Animals

1958 Humane Slaughter Act (HSA)

1959 Catholic Society for Animal Welfare Wild Horses Act The Principles of Humane (now ISAR) Experimental Technique published

1962 Bald and Golden Eagle Act

1966 Endangered Species Act (ESA) Laboratory Animal Welfare Act (LAWA)

1967 Fund for Animals United Action for Animals

1968 Animal Protection Institute Canadian Council on Animal Care

1969 International Fund for Animal Welfare

1970 Animal Welfare Act (AWA) amendments

1971 Greenpeace Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act published

1972 Decompression chamber banned for euthanasia in Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)

1973 International Primate Protection ESA amendments Convention on International League (IPPL) Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) Air Force beagles campaign

1974 North American Mankind? published (NAVS)

1975 Animal Liberation published

1976 Animal Rights International AWA amendments American Museum of Natural (ARI) History protests Committee to Abolish Sport Horse Protection Act The Question of Animal Hunting (CASH) Awareness published Fur Seal Act

1977 Sea Shepherd Conservation “Undersea Railroad” releases Society porpoises in Hawaii Scientists Center for Animal Welfare formed American Fund for Alternatives to Animal Research

1978 Animal Legal Defense Fund HSA amendments Indian government bans rhesus (ALDF) monkey exports Modernization Committee

34 The State of the Animals: 2001 continued from previous page Appendix Milestones in Postwar Animal Protection

ORGANIZATIONS FOUNDED LEGISLATION PASSED/AMENDED OTHER

1979 Committee to End Animal Suffering Metcalf-Hatch Act (authorizing pound Coalition to Abolish the Draize in Experiments (CEASE) seizure) repealed in New York State Test launched Packwood-Magnuson Amendment to the The Animals’ Agenda launched International Fishery Conservation Act Research Modernization Act introduced in Congress (ALF) raid, first in the United States, at New York Univ. Medical Center : A Way of Life published

1980 People for the Ethical Treatment Action for Life conference of Animals (PETA) launched Psychologists for the Ethical Treatment Animal Factories published of Animals (PsyETA) Action Corps for Animals (SACA)

1981 Farm Animal Reform Movement Silver Spring Monkeys confiscated (FARM) from IBR Trans-Species Unlimited (TSU) Mobilization for Animals (MfA) Association of Veterinarians for Animal Rights (AVAR) Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing (CAAT) Primarily Primates sanctuary

1982 Food Animal Concerns Trust MMPA reauthorized Veal ban campaign launched (FACT) Vegetarian Resource Group (VRG) National Alliance for Animal Legislation (NAA) Feminists for Animal Rights (FAR)

1983 (IDA) The Case for Animal Rights published A Vegetarian Sourcebook published

1984 Humane Farming Association Pound seizure in Massachusetts ALF raid at Head Injury Clinical (HFA) repealed Research Center, Univ. of Pennsylvania Performing Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) Modern Meat, focusing on antibiotics in meat production, published

A Social History of Postwar Animal Protection 35 continued from previous page Appendix Milestones in Postwar Animal Protection

ORGANIZATIONS FOUNDED LEGISLATION PASSED/AMENDED OTHER

1985 Physicians Committee for Responsible AWA amended to include focus ProPets Coalition launched Medicine (PCRM) on alternatives and control of and distress Hegins pigeon shoot campaign launched (LCA) Campaign for a Fur Free America Culture and Animals Foundation and Fur Free Friday launched (CAF) Great American MeatOut launched Tufts Center for Animals Federal funding for Head Injury and Public Policy Clinical Research Center suspended

1986 Cambridge Committee for Responsible Research Animal Welfare Information (CCRR) initiative Center (AWIC)

1987 The Animals’ Voice launched published Jenifer Graham case filed

1988 Doris Day Animal League (DDAL)

1989 Avon Corporation ends its animal testing Veal Calf Protection Bill hearings, U.S. Congress

1990 AWA amended March for the Animals California referendum bans mountain-lion hunting

San Mateo County spay/neuter ordinance passed

1991 Ark Trust Cambridge, Mass., bans LD50 Stockyard “downer” and Draize tests campaign launched

1992 Wild Bird Conservation Act Student Right Not to Dissect approved in Pennsylvania International Conservation Act Driftnet Fishery Conservation Act Colorado referendum bans spring, bait, and hound

1993 NIH Revitalization [Reauthorization] Marie Moore Chair in Humane Act mandates development of research Studies and Veterinary Ethics methods using no animals endowed at Univ. of Pennsylvania First World Congress on Alternatives and Animals in the Life Sciences

1994 Arizona banned trapping on public lands (public initiative) Oregon referendum bans bear , bear and cougar hounding

36 The State of the Animals: 2001 continued from previous page Appendix Milestones in Postwar Animal Protection

ORGANIZATIONS FOUNDED LEGISLATION PASSED/AMENDED OTHER

1995 USDA ends face branding under pressure Spay Day USA launched

1996 Colorado referendum bans body-gripping traps Massachusetts referendum bans bear baiting, hound hunting, body-gripping traps, and reforms Fisheries and Wildlife Commission Washington referendum bans bear baiting and hound hunting bears, cougars, and bobcats

1998 Arizona referendum bans cockfighting Missouri referendum bans cockfighting California referendum bans body-gripping traps

1999 Harvard Univ. announces launch of animal rights law course

2000 Hegins pigeon shoot terminated

A Social History of Postwar Animal Protection 37