It’s Animal Week on NPR’s ‘Fresh Air’
By Dr. Tony Johnson
September 1, 2009
One of my favorite radio programs, NPR’s “Fresh Air,” is running Animal Week this week. While not quite as gripping as Shark Week on the Discovery Channel, this comes in a close second by a whisker.
They are spotlighting animal related articles and stories, and it’s well worth tuning in.You can find showtimes on www.NPR.org.
I have already heard Temple Grandin (autistic animal advocate and consultant on the construction of animal-oriented slaughterhouses) and journalist Michael Shaffer (author of “One Nation under Dog”). I was late taking my son, Connor, to pre-school because I was having one of those “driveway moments” where I just couldn’t turn off the radio. I have my priorities, and the provision of excellent education to my son is high on the list, but some things just top it all at times. I mean, if the car was on fire, I probably would have just listened to the segment and not the whole show, but hearing how you would actually design a humane slaughterhouse had me riveted.
Michael Shaffer discussed a lot of the pros and cons of dog parks, a subject I am still grappling with. He mentioned that the social interactions between people are an important and beneficial by-product of the dog park phenom.
But, I have a hard time aligning this with the terrible carnage I see come into the ER as a result of dog on dog aggression from dog parks. I know that my perspective is skewed by what I do, and I acknowledge that there are many, many good things that can come of a well-run and cooperative dog park, but I still see so much tragedy come from these places that it is hard for me see the positive side sometimes.
I would encourage anyone with an interest in pets and animal-related issues to give it a listen.
I’d be willing to pay a fee to go to a dog park that actually had authoritative supervision. Part of the problems that I’ve seen have come from the fact that no one has the right to make someone who is causing a problem leave—short of calling the police. Might be a logistical nightmare, I suppose.
Comment by Original Lori — September 1, 2009 @ 4:38 pm
No matter how many times Temple Grandin trots out her “humane slaughterhouse” baloney, I’m not buying it. I’m also not buying that she’s an “animal advocate”. Bah.
Anyhow, I will have a listen to hear the story about dog parks. The one I frequent is large and clean, and I’ve yet to see any serious fights. I suppose I’m lucky that everyone there is responsible (so far!).
Comment by Smaki — September 2, 2009 @ 5:12 am
What is it you don’t “buy” about what Temple Grandin says? Her goal is to reduce the amount of fear and upheaval that animals go through prior to slaughter which I find a commendable objective. Short of cutting out slaughter altogether, what would you prefer to see as an alternative?
Comment by The OTHER Pat — September 2, 2009 @ 6:39 am
I know that some of my ethical vegan friends find any improvement in the factory farm situation to be rather alarming, because they believe that instead of total eliminations of livestock as they hope for, “happy meat” will become the norm.
I understand and respect their view on killing any animals for food. But … I’m not a vegetarian, and my dogs and cats are flat-out carnivores.
They may deride “happy meat,” but I don’t have a problem with animals living a normal life with normal animal behaviors and pleasures, and then dying without pain or fear. That’s why none of us eat factory-farmed meat. I choose sustainably, humanely produced meat, for ethical reasons.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — September 2, 2009 @ 7:34 am
thank you for this article - a few years back I read Temple Grandin’s book “Animals in Translation, using the mysteries of autism to decode animal behavior” I heard about the book originally on NPR (via an interview with her) -it’s a fascinating read, now I want to re-read it - Temple Grandin compares animals to autistic savants with their own special brand of genius…..and her work with cattle (her favorite animal) is common sense genius. It was interesting to me that she is not a vegetarian.
Comment by mary francis — September 2, 2009 @ 3:51 pm
She is exceedingly pragmatic in her views.
Comment by The OTHER Pat — September 2, 2009 @ 4:06 pm
As a vegetarian, I do realize that others will eat meat. IF we can do anything to provide a normal, happy life for the animals and then a kind death without fear and horror, then I’m all for it. I’m not naive enough to believe that the whole world will stop eating meat because I choose not to. I am very concerned about the lives and deaths of these “food animals”!
Comment by catmom5 — September 2, 2009 @ 4:16 pm
Tonight I listened to the NPR program about animals.
I had tears in my eyes listening about how prisoners are training pups (under supervision) which are to be given to wounded soldiers. After training they are called service dogs.
Later, when the prisoners who did the training and the soldiers that were benefitting from the pups met, all of them were crying. The soldiers derived so much from the dogs, as well as did the prisoners.
Great story!
Comment by Colorado Transplant — September 2, 2009 @ 8:22 pm
The OTHER Pat: I don’t believe that killing healthy, sentient beings CAN be humane, no matter what the method. I realize that puts me in the extreme minority here and I harbor no delusions about changing anyone’s mind.
Gina’s friends and I are likeminded. I believe that the “happy meat” movement is a justification.
I’m also unclear on how being autistic gives Grandin special insight into the way animals think.
The orinigal site is gone, but there is an excerpt of an article by an autistic person that has an opposing viewpoint here: http://www.animalperson.net/an.....andin.html
Yeesh, sorry about the ugly link, I don’t know how to neaten them up on this site.
Comment by Smaki — September 3, 2009 @ 5:57 am
Smaki … so you think there’s no humane way to kill? Are you against euthanizing a terminally ill pet?
Comment by Gina Spadafori — September 3, 2009 @ 6:17 am
Smaki and everybody - thanks for the lively discourse. Seems like there is a definite train of thought here that any move towards making the slaughter process ‘better’ is in vain, and some think we should eliminate the whole process altogether.
Reminds me of the quote “There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which should not be done at all.”
I see the point. Actually, I see both points, which is a problem I often have with many issues and keeps me from taking a firm stance. I am like Switzerland in that respect sometimes.
I think if one accepts that people eating meat is not going to go away, then we should try and make the process easier for the animals. However, if one is going to try and eradicate the people-eating-animals thing wholesale, then anything short of a total ban on killing animals is seen as a capitulation.
Rage on, tiny readers - let’s see where this goes.
You might try tinyURL.com to help with those long links.
Comment by Dr. Tony Johnson — September 3, 2009 @ 6:17 am
Thanks Smaki. When you said you didn’t “buy” that Grandin is an “animal advocate” I was unclear on whether you disagreed with her methods (i.e. you have ideas for humane slaughter that you feel are better than hers) or whether you simply disagreed with the notion of slaughtering animals for meat altogether. Which one it is defines which discussion we might have. And since you have now clarified that you meant the latter, then there’s no point in entering into a discussion (with you, specifically) over *which* humane methods of slaughter are the best choice. (The previous sentence is not intended to be taken in a punitive way, but merely as a statement of fact.)
I admire Grandin’s work. And I’ve heard her speak to a packed house full of scientists, saying some things that I think a lot of them were a bit surprised to hear.
Personally, I find her refreshing.
Comment by The OTHER Pat — September 3, 2009 @ 6:27 am
The OTHER Pat, I agree, we both have firm opinions about this issue, no use tilting at windmills =)
Gina said: “Smaki … so you think there’s no humane way to kill? Are you against euthanizing a terminally ill pet?”
I don’t believe that there is a humane way to kill a healthy, sentient being. Euthanizing an animal that is terminally ill or in unrelievable pain, or that has severe “mental health” issues that would prevent it from leading a satisfying life is something else altogether. In those situations I believe that we have an obligation to the animals we are responsible for to end their lives painlessly.
Comment by Smaki — September 3, 2009 @ 6:51 am
I’m wondering if Smaki keeps dogs or cats?
And if so, does she feed them a strictly vegan diet?
And if so, how those animals fare, welfare-wise, under this husbandry?
If Smaki does not keep dogs or cats (or ferrets, pythons, tarantulas, cormorants, tame velociraptors), is she devoted to eliminating the ownership of carnivorous animals?
Because it would seem that owning a carnivorous animal and feeding it appropriately could never be ethical to Smaki.
Comment by H. Houlahan — September 3, 2009 @ 6:55 am
I guessing we’re not going to reach accord, but … see, for me, I believe that having animals live normal animal lives, with normal social behaviors, and having those lives end without pain or fear is not only possible but preferable to never existing at all.
I can eat a mostly plant-based diet — and in fact, I do. But it’s not healthy for my dogs and cats (especially cats) to do so, and so they are meat-eaters.
I am very comfortable with buying the meat of humanely and sustainably raised meat animals. In addition, I have my own laying hens, and someday may well raise chickens or other animals for meat. That way, I can absolutely control the care my food animals get, from birth to death.
I believe in the circle of life. We are all of us destined to become another being’s meal. My interest is in having good lives and good deaths.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — September 3, 2009 @ 7:00 am
Gina, even if I were to agree (and I don’t) that allowing farmed animals to engage in normal social behaviors and ending their lives without pain or fear is preferable to not existing, they are not living normal lives by any stretch. They are slaughtered prematurely, well before they would die naturally.
There’s also the question of the “by products” of the meat industry; the male chicks that are ground up alive or smothered because they aren’t useful, the veal calves that can’t be produced humanely, the cows that are kept perpetually pregnant to produce milk.
I’m happy that you’ve thought out your decisions and chose what was most comfortable for you ethically. I happen to chose differently, but that doesn’t mean I’m judging you.
H.Houlahan, if you wonder about whether I keep dogs or cats, why not just ask me? I do have pets, a dog and three cats. My dog eats a vegetarian diet supplemented by eggs I bring home from the animal sanctuary. I’m perfectly comfortable with my decision to feed him this way, I’ve done my research and he is one of several vegan/vegetarian dogs I know who are thriving. He’s a perfect weight, has a beautiful coat and nice teeth, and gets a clean bill of health at every vet visit.
My cats eat a meat-based dry food. I adopted them long before I was giving my own diet consideration, and I’ve yet to find a vegan diet that I’m convinced is healthy for them. I chalk it up to one of those unavoidable and uncomfortable concessions I have to make to live in the real world. I also take birth control that contains a milk by product and was probably tested on animals and drive a car every day. Being vegan isn’t about being pure, it’s about living in the most ethical way that I feasibly can.
Comment by Smaki — September 3, 2009 @ 10:39 am
Smaki, thank you for your comment. Yes, we all try to live in the waywe believe is most ethical, and we are both doing exactly that in different ways.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — September 3, 2009 @ 11:29 am
As a musician I was totally engrossed in the segment about composing music for different species. I’ve always known intrinsically that music makes special connections in our heads. The thought that science might some day be able to isolate exactly why music can affect us so deeply is exciting in some ways. In other ways it is like knowing how a magic trick work. It takes the wonder out of the experience. I completely understood the cellist’s statement when he said, ” I hope I die the day before they discover why Puccini makes me cry.”
Comment by Verde — September 3, 2009 @ 12:57 pm
It wasn’t on NPR but I saw a segment on Primetime: The Outsiders (ABC) regarding Charlie Vandergaw who lived with black bears and grizzlies in Alaska. He’s been closed down and is going to court to challenge Alaska’s bear-baiting policy - it was an amazing show - watching Vandergaw disarming hunters who came back later to walk with Charlie among the bears - made me tear up…
Comment by mary francis — September 4, 2009 @ 11:42 am