TVSquad

I thought an interesting thing was when the woman on the farm was suprised that George would save her over his dog, or something like that. I have a friend who was almost killed in a car accident because she swerved to miss a dog in the road. I'm sorry but if it's between me and the dog, I'm hitting the dog, and I love dogs.

Reply

Haven't seen the episode, but I'm a carnivore. I don't understand why in the grand scheme of life, the food chain, its ok for certain animals to kill and eat other animals, but according to some, its not ok for humans to kill and eat other animals.

I think that so long as it is cruelty free, we should be allowed to eat and drink what we want... what our bodies need.

there are some animals that eat only fruits and vegetables - because their bodies dont need the same types of enzymes and proteins that humans do.

I respect your choice is you are a vegetarian. but please don't try to change my opinion.

that's why groups like PETA get a bad rap... they might do good work to change practices to make them cruelty free, but they also try to ram down our throats that we shouldn't eat meat.

Reply

I don't know, this show brought ALOT of different issues to the table which kind of muddied the waters.

I guess they all fall under "Animal Rights", but veganism, the humane treatment of farm animals, pet adoption and fur all bring up many very different issues.

The initial "veganism" concept seemed like it was dropped (probably a good idea), but in the end it sounded like George would like more "humane" meat and dairy products, which brings up alot of interesting issues that weren't addressed.

Such as:
Since humane processes take time and money, is it alright for only the rich to be able to eat alot of meat?
Should we take away cheaper meat and dairy options for those with lower incomes so that animals are treated better?

Reply

It's a matter of might not necessarily making right. That is to say, just because we can do something doesn't mean that it is alright to do it. For example, a bully may be able to beat a smaller person up but just because he or she can doesn't necessarily mean that they should. Just because we can kill and eat animals, for example, doesn't mean that we should. We don't need to use animals, and they, like us, want to live as long and enjoyable a life as possible. See:
http://www.tryveg.com
http://tinyurl.com/djodu
and: http://www.vrg.org
And, for the record, chickens are not "stupid." Get to know them and you will find that they are very perceptive, inquisitive, and fascinating beings.

Reply

I've kept a sanctuary for rescued chickens for 20 years, and I can vouch for the intelligence of these birds.Their intelligence isn't just "my opinion," solidly grounded in direct experience though it is. Dr. Lesley Rogers, an avian specialist, wrote in her book, "The Development of Brain and Behaviour in the Chicken" (1995) that increased knowledge of the cognitive abilities of the chicken has brought "the realization that the chicken is not an inferior species to be treated merely as a food source."

Rogers also wrote, "it is now clear that birds have cognitive capacities equivalent to those of mammals, even primates."

If there's one thing we're learning from modern science, it's that our co-inhabitants on earth are not stupid, and this includes chickens. They're intelligent, emotional, sociable, cheerful, and attentive birds. So bless their hearts and don't eat them.

Karen Davis, PhD, President
United Poultry Concerns
www.upc-online.org

Reply

If animals "want to live as long and enjoyable a life as possible" then they should run faster. One reason why I dislike 30 Days is because it clearly starts from a forgone conclusion; the hunter was wrong and the vegans were right, just using the wrong tactics. That's BS. Animals don't die in nursing homes surrounded by three generations of their family, the typical Disney fed anthropomorphism notwithstanding; they get old or sick, get slow, and are torn apart by some higher predator, or are squashed by a car, or crawl off to slowly die in a cave somewhere. Predation is the natural way by which animal populations are managed and the health of the herd strengthened. Hunters and livestock operators, when they do their job properly, inflect a clean, merciful kill on surplus animals. Without the control they provide to animal populations in many areas herds, already deprived of most of their other predators, would suffer from starvation and disease. And the simple fact is, as we destroy habitat, the options for controls outside of human predation/consumption diminish. Reintroducing large predators to naturally control domestic and wild animal levels is rife with issues, as the people in California who are having coyotes carry off their poodles and attack their kids can tell you. Short of a massive retraction of human development, reintroduction of predators, and a massive slaughter off of domestic livestock to bring their population down to manageable levels, it's just not feasible. There are breeds of domestic chicken that couldn't survive in the wild if they wanted to because they're been bred to attain massive size within a commercially viable period of time; if they are allowed to grow longer their feet can't support their own weight.

Further the vegan proposition ignores the fact that outside of urban areas in the developed world, livestock and/or hunting is often the cheapest, easiest nutrition available to poor populations. A dirt poor Appalachian can put a couple hundred pounds of food on the table (and make money selling the hide) for a day in the woods and a a couple of 30-30 cartridges; what's the tofu equivalent cost?

Reply

The only thing I agree with Junyo about is that we are destroying habitat for wildlife. Their populations are also being artificially inflated by intentionally feeding these animals so that there will be more of them to hunt. As for farmed animals, they are not "surplus." Instead, they are, of course, very intentionally bred - to the tune of more than ten billion every year. This in turn requires massive amounts of land and crops, which in turn help deplete undeveloped land for wildlife. It's a vicious circle in which everyone suffers - and which we largely pay for it through tax subsidies (see the national farm bill). See also the links I posted previously.



The only real solution is to opt for a vegan diet. Fortunately it is healthier, more environmentally responsible, and more delicious and easier than ever. In addition to tofu, there is plenty else to eat and it is generally less expensive and more nutritious than meat, milk or eggs. So spare the animals and respect your own health and that of the planet: Go vegan.

Reply

I disagree with those who declare absolutely that it is not healthy to eat meat, eggs, and milk. Humans live in different habitats, just like animals, and have different requirements. Although most humans have moved out of living situations that require heavy meat diets, our genetics haven't necessarily changed at the same rate. There are different body types and needs - ancient medical traditions recognize and work with this - and some people thrive on a vegan diet, while others descend into an unhealthy abyss. I think we should all look more at where our food is coming from and how it is raised. Being of Native American descent, I can say that animals are respected but are also food. Trees are also respected but are cut down for shelter. A prayer of thanks is offered to both when they give their life so that we may live. If we farm locally, raise animals with respect and give them a quick end, and buy locally, the impact on the environment is reduced, the animals have had a higher quality of life, people see where their food is coming from (and probably appreciate it more), and we'd be a whole lot healthier because it is fresh and not pumped full of chemicals to preserve it over long distances.

Reply

I From many of the comments here, it is obvious WHY animals have been betrayed and assigned to the lowest, vilest level of man/womankind's cruelty so that they can have their oversized, antibiotic-steroid, misery laced piece of animal flesh at any cost to the helpless, innocent animal. Industrialized and institutionalized animal cruelty is blindly accepted by the masses - who seem to be in abundance here by their statements. What a shame the consumer crazed public turns their backs on the evident, needless suffering of creatures who cry out for mercy, unheard by the profit-driven animal enterprises. So sad so many has bought into this legalized animal cruelty and support it with their purchases. T.G. for animal rights/welfare organizations and the millions, and growing number of compassionate animal advocates who will continue to speak for the voiceless, most vulnerable among us. Nothing is crammed down animal hater's throats - Its the animals who have XXXX stuffed down their throats, beaten, electrocuted, chemically manipulated forced growth and pain beyond words. Rock on PETA and all the AR groups!

Reply

MaryF convienently glosses over a number of facts:
We are omnivores, with canines for tearing and chewing meat. There is little question that our development as a species factors in eating meat, that the human race has done pretty well for itself eating meat, and that any choice to exclude it from the diet is a political one, rather than a scientific or health issue. Yes animal farming does require massive amounts of land but so does universal veganism; the lost biomass has to be replaced somehow, so you're merely trading grazing land for cultivated land. And hunters are some of the primary advocates of wildlands preservation and maintaining habitat.

Vegans forgoe the more easily absorbed iron and protein in meat in favor of less easily digested sources in plants. One would assume that the "more natural" choice would be the most easily accessible one. Vegans often have B12 or calcium deficiencies if their diet isn't artificially fortified because the best and natural sources for those in the human diet are meat and dairy products. Can a vegan diet, with careful plannning, be healthy? Sure. But so can any diet with careful planning.

Also it's not explained exactly how we go from the current artificially inflated populations of domestic animals to smaller, naturally sustainable populations without a massive slaughter/starve off of current herds. If everybody went vegan tomorrow, you'd be commiting to a pretty aggressive culling program to make it viable. And causing the deaths massive numbers of animals for no purpose seems to violate the ethic of non-cruelty more than organized and humane management.

Lastly, the impact on the non-affluent is completely ignored. Animals as food are mobile and calorie dense, you can grow chickens in your backyard; without access to large enough pieces of of land and/or farming equipment the poor are completely at the mercy of land owners in a completely vegan world.

Again, not eating meat or animal products is a political choice, that you're free to make. But to call it the "only solution" and to try and shove it down other people's throats is nonsensical.

Reply

I have absolutely no problem with humans hunting animals (even for sport/population controls), hunting animals for food, raising and breeding animals for food, or even fur.

I do NOT place animals on an equal plane with humans, But I do believe we are their caretakers. That doesn't mean that I care about the way a chicken "feels" but I also don't think that they should live only to suffer needlessly. When possible, we should eliminate needless suffering. And I don't start with the premise that it is needless suffering to kill them in the first place.

What I abhor is people who treat animals above humans. Most animal rights activist that I know will freely tell you that they prefer animals to people. People who jeopardize their own life (and the lives of other humans) as they refuse to evacuate because they can't take a pet are ridiculous IMO. People that allow their pets to abuse other PEOPLE's rights (insist they run leash free, etc.) infuriate me.

And PETA is an obnoxious terrorist organization that doesn't live up to their own preaching (see dogs in dumpster). Anything with PETA's name attached to it is immediately disregarded.

I've seen the footage (not this show) and I'm not swayed a bit.

Reply

I have had pet chickens for 8 years now. I love all of them, they all have names and different personalities. I have been avegetarian most of my life by choice (just never cared much for meat) but after I adopted my first two hens I decided never to eat chicken again! They are intelligent feeling creatures. They are so curious and funny at times. Now I am a lacto vegan (still occasionally use dairy products) I saw a website on factory farms and was sick emotionally for weeks! We call ourselves humans but after seeing the torture and cruelty that goes on in these slaughter houses , it makes me wonder. This mass production of animals is not natural. We as the supposed more intelligent ones have to come up with a better way. I will never eat meat again .

Reply

Nicely done, Mr. Goebel.

I was disappointed that George didn't get much air time to make his case for hunting, but I was pleased that this at least wasn't 60 minutes of hunter-bashing. And the show revealed the common ground most reasonable people share: Animal suffering - be it in the name of profit, cruelty or neglect - is abhorrent.

I hunt, and I eat what I kill, and I try to avoid factory-farmed meats precisely because of how factory farms treat animals, because the meat factory farms produce is not good for my health and because the waste these farms produce is devastating to the environment.

I respect the right of all people to choose whether to eat meat, but I resent anyone who tells me I shouldn't eat meat, or that I'm somehow cold-blooded because I take the time, effort and personal responsibility for acquiring my own meat.

Reality is we're omnivores, and I'm comfortable with that. I don't feel the need to remove myself from the natural order of things. I think recent history increasingly shows that the more we remove ourselves from nature, the sicker we (and our planet) become.

Reply

My main problems with this episode were:
- crazy chicken lady comparing the raising of chickens to the jewish holocaust. I found that offensive and I am episcopalian.
- implying that the dead calves by the side of the road which were heading to the rendering factory would end up in the human food supply. This isn't true unless you enjoy eating lard, tallow or bone meal.
- And did they really show that guy steal a calf from a nearby farm?

Don't get me wrong, I am anti fur, I found the dog shelter euthanization scene disturbing, and the way they make veal creeps me out. But steak tastes good. Pork chops taste good.

I would also agree that chickens are intelligent. Spending time on my grandma's farm, I always found that they ran fastest on mornings we were planning fried chicken for lunch.

Reply

Like many of you who have commented, I feel that the problem is the treatment of the animals, not whether or not we eat them. As someone else pointed out, in nature, creatures eat each other as a matter of survival.

While it's true that we don't have to eat meat to survive, it's also true that it's very difficult to be a healthy vegan. I know that many will argue the case, but I've been vegan and raised a vegan child who is now a dyed in the wool carnivore.

What I got from the episode is that the hunter, George Snedeker is far more open minded and reasonable than the animal rights activists we were meant to admire and support.

We never saw the details of how Sugar came into the possession of the activists, it looked like cattle rustling to me, and isn't that illegal? Are the animal rights people operating under a double standard?

I'd love to hear more from George, if he's out there! I really liked what he had to say on the show.

Reply

I am all about the WELFARE of animals and have family members that hunt to eat and survive. I am personally a vegetarian and my husband is almost exclusively a carnivore. I tend to stay away from "animal rights activist" because they tend to use shock tactics and some times even violence to make their point.
I was out to lunch today with my husband and I saw George. I didn't realize who he was but knew that I recognized him. He was very gracious and intelligent and it was a pleasure to meet him. I told him I was impressed with how he handle it all - I doubt that I would have done as well with someone pushing their rhetoric down my throat. But I did have to tell him I disagreed about his thoughts on dogs - I would step over a burning man to get to my dog - that is my baby!! = )

We tivo 30 Days and it does make us think - I just wish there was a little less drama but I guess that is what makes for good tv for most people.

Reply