The Australian RSPCA puts its name and logo on eggs and some meats encouraging the public to buy them because the animals used or killed to produce the foods were raised to minimal standards of animal welfare.
When questioned as to why a society which claims to try to prevent cruelty to animals profits from their exploitation and slaughter and does not encourage people to give up meat and other animal foods they refer to this Knowledgebase entry:
“Why is the RSPCA not a vegetarian organisation?”
Just as the RSPCA respects the choices of people who don’t consume meat or other animal products, we also respect those individuals who do choose to do so. The RSPCA is not a vegetarian or vegan organisation. We acknowledge that one way of reducing the suffering of animals in livestock production systems is by not purchasing products that are sourced from farm animals. Indeed, when some people become aware of the realities of large-scale animal farming, they choose to become vegetarian or vegan. We respect this choice. However, in the mean time, there are many more people who choose to ignore the suffering of farm animals or who choose to source products from animals farmed in a more humane manner. So, while ever the farming of animals for food and fibre continues, the RSPCA seeks to ensure that the conditions under which those animals live meet their physical and behavioural needs. The RSPCA believes we can help improve how farm animals are treated by getting involved in the process and constantly pushing for higher production standards along the supply chain. We do this at government, industry and producer level.
The RSPCA encourages people who do consume meat, eggs, milk and other animal products to make a higher welfare choice, and to help them do this the RSPCA aims to ensure that higher welfare alternatives are readily available on the supermarket shelf. (http://kb.rspca.org.au/Why-is-the-RSPCA-not-a-vegetarian-organisation_435.html)
Another item in their knowledgebase addressing jumps racing – “What is the RSPCA position on horse jumping races?” (http://kb.rspca.org.au/What-is-the-RSPCA-position-on-horse-jumping-races_234.html) quite clearly and unequivocally states that RSPCA Australia is opposed to jumps races.
But what happens if we re-write their stance on jumps racing using precisely the same logic, arguments and words they put forward in their explanation of why they are not a vegetarian organisation?
It comes out like this:
Why is the RSPCA not opposed to jumps racing?
Just as the RSPCA respects the choices of people who don’t support jumps races or other animal contests, we also respect those individuals who do choose to do so. The RSPCA is not opposed to jumps racing. We acknowledge that one way of reducing the suffering of animals in the racing industry is by not supporting jumps races. Indeed, when some people become aware of the realities of jumps racing, they choose to reject it. We respect this choice. However, in the mean time, there are many more people who choose to ignore the suffering of horses or who choose to support horses raced in a more humane manner. So, while ever the racing of horses over jumps continues, the RSPCA seeks to ensure that the conditions under which those animals live meet their physical and behavioural needs. The RSPCA believes we can help improve how horses are treated by getting involved in the process and constantly pushing for higher racing standards. We do this at government, industry and trainer level.
The RSPCA encourages people who do support jumps racing to make a higher welfare choice, and to help them do this the RSPCA aims to ensure that higher welfare alternatives are readily available at all RSPCA Race Courses.
I think that shows the weakness and inconsistency of their arguments on vegetarianism. They simply choose to be firm on jumps races but weak on vegetarianism without any underlying, solid reasoning.
Then, of course, they’d risk 90% of their members’ fees and donations and all the profits from their ‘happy eggs’ and ‘happy meat’.
I wonder if they’ll change.
2 comments:
Interesting juxtaposition. I think that the RSPCA opposes jumps racing because there is no way to prevent the routine catastrophic crashes over hurdles whereas they do believe that animals can be bred and live in conditions that cause no suffering. Exceptionally rare, comparable to the idea of a safe hurdle.
That sounds like an apologists position so to get to the heart of it; the number of people involved in and supporting the jumps racing industry are small - so are the numbers of horses. The community sentiment is against jumps racing, but not the farming of animals for food. The RSPCA rarely ever leads until community sentiment is already across the majority line; then it speaks out about "injustices". What they are doing with live export is admirable, but hardly courageous - they are riding on the decades of work done by grass roots organisations - it's the same with the battery egg issue, mulesing, puppy farms.
As soon as the majority are against animal production for food, you can bet they will "seem" to be campaigning on it.
Nice article.
"I think that the RSPCA opposes jumps racing because there is no way to prevent the routine catastrophic crashes over hurdles whereas they do believe that animals can be bred and live in conditions that cause no suffering. Exceptionally rare, comparable to the idea of a safe hurdle."
Well said. I'm sure there's more suffering in one RSPCA approved egg farm than in one jumps-racing season. It's important not to forget things like the suffering on breeder farms, feather pecking that can lead to cannibalism, other mortalities, and the depopulation, transportation and slaughter of both the spent laying hens and the breeder birds. It's untenable to believe that the whole process is cruelty-free.
"The RSPCA rarely ever leads until community sentiment is already across the majority line"
That seems to be absolutely true. They are an extremely conservative organisation.
To be honest, I don't understand why jumps-racing is a big issue. I agree that it's wrong, but why do groups like Animals Australia the RSPCA campaign against them? The number of animals affected is virtually zero...
Post a Comment