Bowwowmeow
03-04-2008, 07:26 PM
Here is an interesting article that might get us started on a discussion of rights vs. welfare:
Animal Producers From Mars, Animal Lovers From Venus?
Submitted by Editor on Fri, 02/22/2008 - 11:53am.
Charlene M. Shupp
Espenshade
Special Sections Editor
BALTIMORE — A woman from Australia married a dolphin recently. Sound impossible? It is just one of countless stories of the new roles animals play in people’s lives.
“Animal welfare has absolutely nothing to do with animals,” says Wes Jamison, a professor of agricultural and natural resource politics.
Jamison has been studying the animal rights and welfare movement for nearly two decades. He spoke here at the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) Young Farmer and Rancher Leadership Conference last weekend, proposing the notion that “animal producers are from Mars and animal lovers are from Venus” (a takeoff on the popular book called “Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus”).
The challenge lies in that agriculture is a small minority in this country. Only about 3 million out of the country’s 304 million people are in animal agriculture. Problems arise when the world of the consumer and animal agriculture collide.
“You have a society and culture that does not understand what you do,” he said.
The urbanization of the American population has led to seemingly irresolvable differences between society’s fundamental beliefs and agriculture’s.
Compounding the issue is the loss of mid-size farms to either accomplish economies of scale or downsize into niche markets.
There is “consumer confusion” regarding animals. Most consumers want animals to be both “the center of their lives and the center of their dinner plate,” according to Jamison. “You have conflicting images and realities.”
The problem, he said, is between the difference in the role of animals in consumers’ lives and the role of animals on the farm.
For the consumer, animal production is a morality issue, according to Jamison. Agriculture, he said, has tried to answer these morality questions with science and economics, but must find a better way to address the morality issue.
“We keep talking in terms of science and economics when this has nothing to do with science and economics, in fact it has nothing to do with animals,” he said. “Animals in modern culture are more than just commodities.”
Agriculture has become a very “economically rationalized” industry because market dynamics have forced it in that direction. Additionally, there is internal competition in agriculture. If one industry does not meet consumer demand, there is another one willing to step in.
While farmers have been focusing on competition and farm profitability, the world has been changing, according to Jamison. Animal rights discussions hinge on the human values that society has placed on animals.
Jamison outlined four factors needed in a society for an animal rights movement to rise, including urbanization, anthropomorphism (attributing human qualities to animals), belief in evolution, and a sense of equality. Unless all four factors are present, an animal rights movement does not exist.
Urbanization has made animals go from tools, instruments and commodities to something else. Animals now live in the house as members of the family.
Anthropomorphism is demonstrated through popular movies, children’s books and toys. Prior to the 19th century, when evolution theory placed animals on a more level footing with humans, all belief systems — religious and secular — believed humans were above all other creatures, according to Jamison. Animal rights movements have only taken root in Westernized cultures because of the need to give “equal rights for everything like us,” he said.
“Animal rights does not cause society to change, but changes in society itself give way to animal rights,” Jamison said.
One example of a societal change is how people view their pets. For most, they are members of the family. Jamison showed several news clips depicting the tens of thousands of dollars people were willing to spend in vet costs for their pets. The race horse Barbaro fascinated the public for months on end.
“It is now possible to make more money to do a total hip replacement on a 14-year-old dog then you can in a month as a large animal vet,” Jamison said.
Studies and polls show that the public believes that pet animal rights should be extended to farm animals.
Farmers must be willing to own the entire industry from farm to plate and not present a sanitized view of what happens, according to Jamison. If farmers do not, he believes the economic impacts of animal rights will force animal production to other countries.
Despite all of the challenges, Jamison points to one positive point. No modern society, including India, has eliminated animal production.
Consumers want meat products, but feel guilty for it. Agriculture needs to give consumers permission to eat meat products.
“Consumers want their animal products, but they don’t want to be reminded on how they get their animal products,” he said.
"Jamison outlined four factors needed in a society for an animal rights movement to rise, including urbanization, anthropomorphism (attributing human qualities to animals), belief in evolution, and a sense of equality. Unless all four factors are present, an animal rights movement does not exist."
I always question whether it should be considered "attributing human qualities to animals" or simply that we cease to deny the possibility that these are not human qualities, but animal qualities we all share.
"Consumers want meat products, but feel guilty for it. Agriculture needs to give consumers permission to eat meat products."
This is the crux then. We've got to get people to stop wanting meat products, and prevent the agricultural industry from giving this "permission".
Animal Producers From Mars, Animal Lovers From Venus?
Submitted by Editor on Fri, 02/22/2008 - 11:53am.
Charlene M. Shupp
Espenshade
Special Sections Editor
BALTIMORE — A woman from Australia married a dolphin recently. Sound impossible? It is just one of countless stories of the new roles animals play in people’s lives.
“Animal welfare has absolutely nothing to do with animals,” says Wes Jamison, a professor of agricultural and natural resource politics.
Jamison has been studying the animal rights and welfare movement for nearly two decades. He spoke here at the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) Young Farmer and Rancher Leadership Conference last weekend, proposing the notion that “animal producers are from Mars and animal lovers are from Venus” (a takeoff on the popular book called “Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus”).
The challenge lies in that agriculture is a small minority in this country. Only about 3 million out of the country’s 304 million people are in animal agriculture. Problems arise when the world of the consumer and animal agriculture collide.
“You have a society and culture that does not understand what you do,” he said.
The urbanization of the American population has led to seemingly irresolvable differences between society’s fundamental beliefs and agriculture’s.
Compounding the issue is the loss of mid-size farms to either accomplish economies of scale or downsize into niche markets.
There is “consumer confusion” regarding animals. Most consumers want animals to be both “the center of their lives and the center of their dinner plate,” according to Jamison. “You have conflicting images and realities.”
The problem, he said, is between the difference in the role of animals in consumers’ lives and the role of animals on the farm.
For the consumer, animal production is a morality issue, according to Jamison. Agriculture, he said, has tried to answer these morality questions with science and economics, but must find a better way to address the morality issue.
“We keep talking in terms of science and economics when this has nothing to do with science and economics, in fact it has nothing to do with animals,” he said. “Animals in modern culture are more than just commodities.”
Agriculture has become a very “economically rationalized” industry because market dynamics have forced it in that direction. Additionally, there is internal competition in agriculture. If one industry does not meet consumer demand, there is another one willing to step in.
While farmers have been focusing on competition and farm profitability, the world has been changing, according to Jamison. Animal rights discussions hinge on the human values that society has placed on animals.
Jamison outlined four factors needed in a society for an animal rights movement to rise, including urbanization, anthropomorphism (attributing human qualities to animals), belief in evolution, and a sense of equality. Unless all four factors are present, an animal rights movement does not exist.
Urbanization has made animals go from tools, instruments and commodities to something else. Animals now live in the house as members of the family.
Anthropomorphism is demonstrated through popular movies, children’s books and toys. Prior to the 19th century, when evolution theory placed animals on a more level footing with humans, all belief systems — religious and secular — believed humans were above all other creatures, according to Jamison. Animal rights movements have only taken root in Westernized cultures because of the need to give “equal rights for everything like us,” he said.
“Animal rights does not cause society to change, but changes in society itself give way to animal rights,” Jamison said.
One example of a societal change is how people view their pets. For most, they are members of the family. Jamison showed several news clips depicting the tens of thousands of dollars people were willing to spend in vet costs for their pets. The race horse Barbaro fascinated the public for months on end.
“It is now possible to make more money to do a total hip replacement on a 14-year-old dog then you can in a month as a large animal vet,” Jamison said.
Studies and polls show that the public believes that pet animal rights should be extended to farm animals.
Farmers must be willing to own the entire industry from farm to plate and not present a sanitized view of what happens, according to Jamison. If farmers do not, he believes the economic impacts of animal rights will force animal production to other countries.
Despite all of the challenges, Jamison points to one positive point. No modern society, including India, has eliminated animal production.
Consumers want meat products, but feel guilty for it. Agriculture needs to give consumers permission to eat meat products.
“Consumers want their animal products, but they don’t want to be reminded on how they get their animal products,” he said.
"Jamison outlined four factors needed in a society for an animal rights movement to rise, including urbanization, anthropomorphism (attributing human qualities to animals), belief in evolution, and a sense of equality. Unless all four factors are present, an animal rights movement does not exist."
I always question whether it should be considered "attributing human qualities to animals" or simply that we cease to deny the possibility that these are not human qualities, but animal qualities we all share.
"Consumers want meat products, but feel guilty for it. Agriculture needs to give consumers permission to eat meat products."
This is the crux then. We've got to get people to stop wanting meat products, and prevent the agricultural industry from giving this "permission".