McDonald's board urges "no" on HSUS and PETA proposals

Walmart, Wendy's, Burger King, and Subway have all jumped on the cage-free egg bandwagon. Each of these food retailers has made some sort of commitment to providing food products made with eggs from chickens not raised in cages. In fact, making the boldest move of them all, Subway is now implementing a plan to go completely cage-free. But the golden arches won't jump off that cliff because everyone else has — on Friday their board of directors recommended that company shareholders vote against a proposal that would require 5 percent of the chain's eggs to be cage-free.

“As we have examined this issue over the years, we have deter­mined that there is no agreement in the global scientific com­munity about how to balance the advantages and disadvantages of laying hen housing systems,” was the statement from the board.

The requirement was pushed on the chain by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) that owns 101 shares of the company's stock. Another proposal is being made by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) that owns 79 shares of the company's stock. They are advocating that McDonalds suppliers adopt Controlled Atmosphere Stunning (CAS), a slaughter method, within five years instead of Low-Voltage Electrical Stunning (LVES.) The board is urging a "no" vote on this proposal, too. Their statement on this issue was as follows:

"While the proponent presents CAS as a less cruel method than LVES, the reality is that there has not yet been consensus among animal welfare scientists that CAS is a better or more efficient form of rendering chickens insensible before slaughter."

If you'd like to read the entire details of McDonald's board response to the proposals, we've posted the document below. While these proposals would not directly impact the dairy industry, proposals that food retailers take a regulatory stand on how food is produced is certainly becoming more common. While it may be eggs today, milk may be tomorrow. It is nice to see that one major food retailer is standing up and saying no to animal welfare activists without a scientific backbone.

MCD_Proxy2010.pdf

Pressing HSUS’s feet to the fire

In the two weeks since we told you about creation of HumaneWatch.org and its mission to separate fraud from fact about the Humane Society of the United States, we’re delighted to report that turning up the heat of scrutiny is already producing some results.

First came a colossal tidal wave of public backlash against the Australian company that makes Yellow Tail wine after it announced a $100,000 donation to HSUS in February. This prompted the company to investigate what HSUS’s priorities really are – and then make a public apology and promise to never donate to the group again.

An essentially identical story was repeated a few days later by Pilot Travel Centers, a U.S. chain of gas stations that caters to long-haul truckers, which was also clueless about HSUS’s anti-agriculture mission. Then yesterday, Precious Cat, Inc., a cat litter company that had been listed on the HSUS “corporate supporters” page, announced it had withdrawn its support and henceforth would make donations to actual animal shelters instead.

While the truth about HSUS may finally be getting out in some quarters, communicating the message to the public will be an uphill struggle. Just how steep that challenge is was illustrated by results of a nationwide public opinion poll released on Tuesday this week. In it, 71 percent of those polled the previous week agreed with the statement that, “HSUS is an umbrella group that represents thousands of local humane societies all across America.” However, HumaneWatch.org says tax records filed by HSUS show this statement is, in fact, false.

The heat is on, ladies and gentlemen, and we think HSUS may be starting to sweat.

Make a bowl of popcorn and check out this website

Ladies and gentlemen it’s showtime at last.

One of the best surprises we’ve had in a long time arrived in our e-mail on Tuesday this week, from the Center for Consumer Freedom in Washington D.C. announcing it has formed HumaneWatch.org to be a watchdog to fan away the smoke and clear the mirrors of propaganda spewed by the Humane Society of the United States.

Pinch us because it feels like a dream.

In the announcement, CCF Director of Research David Martosko said, “Nearly one million Americans donate money to HSUS every year, and most are completely unaware that they’re bankrolling PETA-style propaganda, far-reaching anti-meat campaigns, a huge staff of lawyers, and bloated pension plans for HSUS executives.

“Donors deserve to know exactly how their money is being spent,” he continued. “HumaneWatch will create an open dialogue for farmers, scientists, fashion designers, entertainers, and countless Americans who love both their pets and their chicken sandwiches.”

Browse through the HumaneWatch website and you’ll see no shortage of critical questions and fact-supported statements that paint a picture of HSUS as a relentless fund-raising machine, rather than a benevolent savior of unwanted pets that its tear-jerker TV commercials want people to believe. Among HumaneWatch’s most recent entries is a connect-the-dot sequence that strongly suggests HSUS’s claimed membership of 11 million – which it wields like a bludgeon over the heads of politicians – is actually only 420,000.

Yes, we are positively giddy that HumaneWatch is putting HSUS and its one-sided tactics under the microscope. We’re also going to pull up a chair and watch, and we can’t wait to see what happens. Extra butter anyone?

ABC's Nightline makes a direct hit at dairy farmers

Just last night, if you stayed up past your local news and turned on the TV you would have seen a disturbing negative report about the dairy industry on ABC. Before the piece even ran, we were led to believe the piece would be about milk quality, but it was nothing more than an attack on how dairy farmers care for their animals. ABC has posted the story online and has already received 529 comments as of this morning.

Undercover videos were shown of tail docking, as well as dehorning (did you notice the PETA stamp in the corner of the video?). The videos weren't pretty and were undeniably damaging to the dairy industry. You and I may know this is not the status-quo on dairy farms, but, for the average consumer, this may be as close as they ever get to a farm. There needs to be a zero-tolerance for this disappointing animal care shown in the Nightline "investigation."

Tail docking is an unnecessary practice and is not recommended by the American Veterinary Medical Association. To see AVMA's stand on the practice, visit them here. AVMA also suggests disbudding along with a local anesthetic for dehorning — not the practice shown in the undercover video.

Chris Galen of the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) was interviewed during the report, as well as the dairy farm owner. While the dairy farm owner relayed his belief that tail docking is a standard practice on dairy farms, we believe it is the contrary. Tail docking is now banned in California; however, prior to its ban, a survey of over 200 California producers (average herd size of 2,500) revealed that 89 percent of dairies did not dock tails. Comments from Chris Galen of NMPF were kept to a minimum — likely because he only had positive things to share about dairy farms.

A representative of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) also was interviewed and had the last word when the representative ended the piece with "Got ethics?" as a direct jab at the "Got Milk?" campaign. To answer her question, we say yes. Farms across the country work very hard to produce a safe, and humanely produced product. Let's work together to enforce a zero-tolerance standard for poor animal care.

What did you think of the piece? We'd love to hear your take on it.

HSUS aligns itself with Bank of America

A cute orange cat is the face of a new credit card for the Humane Society of the United States. Offered by Bank of America, the card offers a free HSUS t-shirt with credit approval, you can still get the same great card rewards, and you can help support the missions of the HSUS. Bank of America will be providing 25 cents for every $100 in purchases. This donation has already generated hundreds of thousands of dollars with a growing cardholder population of over 50,000. What could be better, right?

However, as many of us know, the HSUS missions to combat animal cruelty and care for animals in need, are not always as they seem. The HSUS underlying mission is to stop animal agriculture, and its new alliance with Bank of America has the cattle industry in an uproar.

Thanks to efforts by the Cattle Network, the Bank of America has been alerted of industry disagreement and is bringing the matter to an elevated level. W. Ashley Allen, Sr. Vice President of Bank of America responded to the Cattle Network and fellow industry people’s complaint letters, saying Bank of America is very supportive of the cattle industry and will look into the matter.

Tail docking might be banned in California where most cows aren’t docked

Senator Dean Florez might be best known as the proud co-sponsor of Proposition 2 in California which bans the use of certain housing systems for veal and laying hens. He is also a well-known ally of the animal rights organization, HSUS. While Proposition 2 didn’t have a direct effect on the dairy industry, it was a foothold for what came next. This spring, he introduced a bill that would ban tail docking on dairy farms.

Tail docking isn’t common in California. A recent survey of 12 large animal veterinarians asked about tail docking practices of their dairy clients. A total of 294,339 cows were included in the study from the San Joaquin Valley and the Northern Sacramento Valley. The results of the study showed that 90.6 of the dairies do not dock tails and 88.7 percent of cows do not live in operations where it is practiced. In addition, several studies have shown no benefit to the practice.

Cassandra Tucker is an assistant professor at the University of California Davis. Tucker, before the vote, wrote in the California Dairy Newsletter, “If this bill passes, it would be part of a nationwide trend to set standards for how farm animals are cared for in the U.S.” The bill then did pass, by a vote of 27 to 12. What practices could be regulated next?