Among the many topics from last week's class, the discussion of "canned hunting" struck a cord with more students than any other subject. In the words of one of the students, it's like hunting for cheaters. But there were actually a few good reasons for what has become a big industry and many parts of the world.
Firstly, people want to hunt big animals. Whether or not your own moral conscience can accept this, those people will continue to do it for love of the game. Breeding animals for hunting keeps these species in existence and helps give a hunting outlet that isn't based on poaching.
Secondly, some people can't physically get out and hunt they way they used to, but they still love the thrill of the kill and the challenge of that split-second, well-placed shot. I can't really sympathize with this emotion in people, because I've never actually hunted, but I can understand other peoples' needs and their wants to be able to function despite a wound, injury, old-age or other handicap. That's fair, isn't it?
Thirdly, capitalism. In the US, just about anything goes when you consider entrepreneurship and the drive to get somewhere in the grand scheme of life. Well, these canned hunts are just one more step in the path of ambition. If you're ok hunting the animals, the owners are ok being paid for it and there you go. Once again, the animals were specifically raised for this in the beginning, so what's the problem?
Well, the big complaint from everyone is always that it's no longer a fair game. But after you watch this video and the guys who almost die by lion, is it really that unfair of a game? You wouldn't find me in the pen with 3 other guys all ineffectively wielding rifles and a lion on the loose amidst them. I'm cool with anyone who wants to do this, but I'll pass.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Sunday, February 27, 2011
ConCall Professionalism (duplicate post)
Well, Friday afternoon we made it through our first conference call training meeting for the collegiate facilitators. With our registration numbers becoming more final and the core group that will end up in DC slowly sorting itself out, it was time for us to get on the phone, get to know each other a little bit and then for me and my 2 colleagues to lay out expectations, programming plans and schedules for the next month and a half.
This leads me to some simple comments about conference call etiquette, based on observations that I made during the call and which can beneficial to anyone just learning how to function in this now old-school form of distance meeting.
1) When the system you're using for a meeting doesn't work or you have connection issues, be prepared to find an alternative way to run or join the meeting. We had some pretty severe communication issues at the beginning with voice connections not working and luckily everyone was well enough prepared that the meeting ran without much of a hitch. That includes props to some of the facilitators who were dealing with the inclement weather, bad connections and power outages.
2) Many call in systems result in feedback between the audio output and your mic input. Without IT knowledge to fix this being common this is just one of the reasons why people need to mute their mic input when not talking, and prevent double audio output with computer and phone systems to limit this.
3) Another reason to mute your mic is because it picks up and magnifies even the largest background sounds. It's bad when we have to ask the person eating chips to mute their mic and we've never even met these people before.
4) Muting your mic isn't an excuse for not paying attention to the meeting. Many people think they can just get away with being on a call and multi-tasking or even Facebooking. But people always know, and it's easy to tell later who the people were that paid attention during the call.
5) Interrupting is probably my biggest reason for hating conference calls. It seems that even if you don't mean to, you're always butting in on someone else and that by the time they're done talking they've already said what you wanted to say anyhow or changed the topic enough that your discussion is now irrelevant. This system aimed to prevent this by putting a click control over who could talk and when but since nobody was properly educated on this prior to the call, we were never able to use the technology properly.
Regardless, conference calls can be really good for getting people together, especially for trainings and I think ours was a definite success. As the time rolls on I'm getting more excited for the conference in DC.
This leads me to some simple comments about conference call etiquette, based on observations that I made during the call and which can beneficial to anyone just learning how to function in this now old-school form of distance meeting.
1) When the system you're using for a meeting doesn't work or you have connection issues, be prepared to find an alternative way to run or join the meeting. We had some pretty severe communication issues at the beginning with voice connections not working and luckily everyone was well enough prepared that the meeting ran without much of a hitch. That includes props to some of the facilitators who were dealing with the inclement weather, bad connections and power outages.
2) Many call in systems result in feedback between the audio output and your mic input. Without IT knowledge to fix this being common this is just one of the reasons why people need to mute their mic input when not talking, and prevent double audio output with computer and phone systems to limit this.
3) Another reason to mute your mic is because it picks up and magnifies even the largest background sounds. It's bad when we have to ask the person eating chips to mute their mic and we've never even met these people before.
4) Muting your mic isn't an excuse for not paying attention to the meeting. Many people think they can just get away with being on a call and multi-tasking or even Facebooking. But people always know, and it's easy to tell later who the people were that paid attention during the call.
5) Interrupting is probably my biggest reason for hating conference calls. It seems that even if you don't mean to, you're always butting in on someone else and that by the time they're done talking they've already said what you wanted to say anyhow or changed the topic enough that your discussion is now irrelevant. This system aimed to prevent this by putting a click control over who could talk and when but since nobody was properly educated on this prior to the call, we were never able to use the technology properly.
Regardless, conference calls can be really good for getting people together, especially for trainings and I think ours was a definite success. As the time rolls on I'm getting more excited for the conference in DC.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
American Ingenuity
Today I'd like to highlight a couple of Youtube videos that focus on simple methane digesters. I think with all the discussion about methane digesting and its potential for adding energy to grid while disposing of waste, this is worth your time for personal enlightenment. Of course, these are highly simplified digesters when compared to even the on-farm ones that have popped up in a few places, but it's the general idea that's pretty cool. Both of the videos are essentially the same but for a more rustic touch, I'd definitely go with this one. He made a longer version too, but the outtakes are more just mistakes happening than anything else.
What's really fantastic about this to me is that it's always just a matter of time before someone figures out how to utilize something else that we consider waste and they turn it into something productive and useful in their lives. I have to wonder if the energy put into this is exceeded by the eventual output before the structure lifecycle is reached, but that's a question for the future and experts to decide.
What's really fantastic about this to me is that it's always just a matter of time before someone figures out how to utilize something else that we consider waste and they turn it into something productive and useful in their lives. I have to wonder if the energy put into this is exceeded by the eventual output before the structure lifecycle is reached, but that's a question for the future and experts to decide.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Glimpse into the Future (duplicate post)
Yesterday marked the final selection of applicants for the National 4-H Conference Collegiate Facilitators. It's so far been a very educational process for myself and a great opportunity to be involved and responsible for selecting a team of people who Lauren and I will have to train and manage for the next 2 months before letting them loose to see how they perform in a demanding environment.
Well, based on the on-paper applications and excellent recommendations that I saw from nearly 30 applicants, I'm not only excited to work with those we've selected, but I have to say that the future is bright for 4-H and the other organizations and institutes who will have the pleasure of working with any of the bright, enthusiastic and skilled individuals who applied for the position. Our future is in good hands.
There are many times that I doubt the value of 4-H in today's society and wonder whether there is a way to change the program to encompass more youth or if there is a way to increase the perceived value of extension. This has been especially heavier on my mind as 4-H programs in Ohio have begun to go extinct in this difficult economy. But as long as a program is developing youth like those I saw in applications this week, as long as it still inspires the dreamers to achieve higher education and application of new technology then there is hope. And thus, in my opinion, there is still a future for 4-H.
Well, based on the on-paper applications and excellent recommendations that I saw from nearly 30 applicants, I'm not only excited to work with those we've selected, but I have to say that the future is bright for 4-H and the other organizations and institutes who will have the pleasure of working with any of the bright, enthusiastic and skilled individuals who applied for the position. Our future is in good hands.
There are many times that I doubt the value of 4-H in today's society and wonder whether there is a way to change the program to encompass more youth or if there is a way to increase the perceived value of extension. This has been especially heavier on my mind as 4-H programs in Ohio have begun to go extinct in this difficult economy. But as long as a program is developing youth like those I saw in applications this week, as long as it still inspires the dreamers to achieve higher education and application of new technology then there is hope. And thus, in my opinion, there is still a future for 4-H.
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Targeting Children (duplicate post)
I think violence is so much worse when the intended targets are children. It's been decades now and Ireland/N. Ireland still can't get over the war which never really ended. But who honestly thought it was cool to rig a kid's bike with a bomb? Horrible.
And if you think about the fact that the booby-trapped bike would have only gone off in the case that a kid were to use it, don't you have to wonder if it would've damaged or killed anything but the kid? Worse than a case of using a bomb on a kid to kill your enemies, this was direct targeting of the kid and only the kid.
Of course, isn't targeting children the same thing that any extremist crazy group does? Compare this to Peta who handed out coloring books to children telling them that their parents were murderers and including graphic images for the kids to color of their parents killing animals and eating them. No surprise that there was a huge outcry against the coloring books, but not as huge an outcry as there should've been because Peta still legally exists.
Do agriculturalists target children? Yes, of course, but not in the same way. We encourage them to explore the farm life, to eat healthy which is best done with an animal protein diet and to embrace the quality of life they have been given the opportunity to live in this country.
Compare this to the crazies with ALF and their efforts to target children of employees at Huntington. They unabashedly claimed in their press releases that they target kids instead of the parents because this is what works. The company is too strong, and the adults better equipped to handle the stress of aggression and stalking than the children.
The next time you see a Peta ad with a naked girl telling you to stop eating meat... are you going to listen?
And if you think about the fact that the booby-trapped bike would have only gone off in the case that a kid were to use it, don't you have to wonder if it would've damaged or killed anything but the kid? Worse than a case of using a bomb on a kid to kill your enemies, this was direct targeting of the kid and only the kid.
Of course, isn't targeting children the same thing that any extremist crazy group does? Compare this to Peta who handed out coloring books to children telling them that their parents were murderers and including graphic images for the kids to color of their parents killing animals and eating them. No surprise that there was a huge outcry against the coloring books, but not as huge an outcry as there should've been because Peta still legally exists.
Do agriculturalists target children? Yes, of course, but not in the same way. We encourage them to explore the farm life, to eat healthy which is best done with an animal protein diet and to embrace the quality of life they have been given the opportunity to live in this country.
Compare this to the crazies with ALF and their efforts to target children of employees at Huntington. They unabashedly claimed in their press releases that they target kids instead of the parents because this is what works. The company is too strong, and the adults better equipped to handle the stress of aggression and stalking than the children.
The next time you see a Peta ad with a naked girl telling you to stop eating meat... are you going to listen?
In spite of the weather
I know you hear all the time from so many vocal agriculturalists that farmers work 365 days a year, that they work in the ice and the heat, because time doesn't wait and growing food isn't something people have time to mess up. I can remember many a day where the thunderstorms rolled in and we were still cleaning cages or feeding the animals. It never mattered what the weather was like; we were always there.
Well, now that I'm back in the Columbus area again, I've been able to go out there a little more often. Amanda and I's ewe lambed twins, both healthy, and so I've been out there trying to help as the ewes transition into being mothers and then as the lambs need processed (not quite Mike Rowe style). That's what brought me out to the farm last week on a day which was better than some, but not most.
You can see from the picture the ice that covered the barnyard. Not only is this problematic for getting up the big, slick hill from the road (I made it only 12 feet and had to walk the rest) but this is also hard on the animals' joints if they were to be kept outside during the storm and hard on the people working to care for the animals. Without the extra kids around anymore, my little brother and my mom have so much more work to do on the average day by themselves.
But slipping around on the ice, chipping away at the frozen tanks and running the heat lamps to warm the lambs has its reward in the end; I wouldn't trade this for anything and while this year I'm not out there much, I put in my time, and I will again when this whole school thing is finally over. Leaning on the fence, looking down at all the frolicking lambs in the pens who will soon be turned out to pasture, I wouldn't rather be anywhere else.
Monday, February 7, 2011
Biodiesel on farms
As the biodiesel research continues to make progress and optimism pushes us forward, this is really where I can practically see the new oilseed crops going. An oilseed crusher is just one more depreciable investment that a farmer can add to the schedule and if he can effectively grow these crops for his own biodiesel then the economic savings will be huge. We're never going to fuel the average American driver with this, but this is pretty cool stuff.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Good commentary
Dr. St-Pierre has returned to OSU. A man of legendary stories which pass between classes, I've heard he tracked his low and high temperatures in his office and ran SAS on it to prove that it was not being regulated properly. A man of great intelligence and obvious interest in the education of students and the learning experience, I've very excited to have class with him in the spring.
I encourage you to read his commentary on the "natural" label too many Westerners are trying to pursue in their meals. Also of interest would be some of the moronic comments underneath by the typical anonymi. Enjoy and happy Saturday!
I encourage you to read his commentary on the "natural" label too many Westerners are trying to pursue in their meals. Also of interest would be some of the moronic comments underneath by the typical anonymi. Enjoy and happy Saturday!
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Oprah goes Vegan
News that that will lead to weight loss before anemia probably didn't bother her too much in the short run, but what is important is the big way in which Oprah really hit hard and honest the fact that unhealthy diets are a part of American culture today.
Frankly, when I watched the Oprah Vegan videos, I expected to be more angry. They got in on a Cargill processing plant and didn't sit there trying to portray it for anything other than what it really is. Does everyone have the stomach for killing animals for food consumption, no, they don't, but that doesn't mean that killing animals for food is wrong and Oprah's filming of the Cargill plant didn't try to push the issue one way or the other. If you haven't seen a processing plant in video before, this was a great example of how the process works.
Then there is the video link of Oprah's interview with Michael Pollan. Of course, I have a slightly more liberal view of Michael Pollan than many of my agricultural counterparts, but I again found little fault with his critical take on the processed foods which make our trips to the grocery and fast food so cheap every day. I agree that cheap food is a curse, but without it, many people would simply go hungry from lack of ability to feed themselves. So then we end up in the current situation where elitists call for "higher quality" food which costs them more money claiming that everyone should have this because it's a factor in one's quality of life. Well, news flash, but not everyone can afford organic or health foods (note, not one and the same).
Where Michael Pollan then really still gets it wrong is by saying that he only buys meat from small farms. That's great, but that also gets back to a huge problem of whether or not we try to feed the rest of the world. The world is going hungry, and small farms aren't going to do it. He needs to wise up to that or stop making money from his controversial books so that real life can hit him in the face and remind him of just why we still need cheap food. Would farmers love to be paid more for food products? Sure they would, but they also want to make sure that people get fed. I think making more money for their labor is the attitude you see reflected in the few farmers quoted as saying they'll be ready with a higher quality product when consumers demand it in the Food INC trailer, but of course they misused these quotes as well.
Of course, there was some other crap on Oprah's show about how all meat comes from terrible places, yadayadayada, cough vegan cough propaganda cough cough. But again, Oprah was trying to show both sides of the coin, even if one side did get most of the face time. Americans are provided a safe, wholesome product every day, 24/7/365 and there are a lot of people who just don't seem to appreciate how good they have it.
Frankly, when I watched the Oprah Vegan videos, I expected to be more angry. They got in on a Cargill processing plant and didn't sit there trying to portray it for anything other than what it really is. Does everyone have the stomach for killing animals for food consumption, no, they don't, but that doesn't mean that killing animals for food is wrong and Oprah's filming of the Cargill plant didn't try to push the issue one way or the other. If you haven't seen a processing plant in video before, this was a great example of how the process works.
Then there is the video link of Oprah's interview with Michael Pollan. Of course, I have a slightly more liberal view of Michael Pollan than many of my agricultural counterparts, but I again found little fault with his critical take on the processed foods which make our trips to the grocery and fast food so cheap every day. I agree that cheap food is a curse, but without it, many people would simply go hungry from lack of ability to feed themselves. So then we end up in the current situation where elitists call for "higher quality" food which costs them more money claiming that everyone should have this because it's a factor in one's quality of life. Well, news flash, but not everyone can afford organic or health foods (note, not one and the same).
Where Michael Pollan then really still gets it wrong is by saying that he only buys meat from small farms. That's great, but that also gets back to a huge problem of whether or not we try to feed the rest of the world. The world is going hungry, and small farms aren't going to do it. He needs to wise up to that or stop making money from his controversial books so that real life can hit him in the face and remind him of just why we still need cheap food. Would farmers love to be paid more for food products? Sure they would, but they also want to make sure that people get fed. I think making more money for their labor is the attitude you see reflected in the few farmers quoted as saying they'll be ready with a higher quality product when consumers demand it in the Food INC trailer, but of course they misused these quotes as well.
Of course, there was some other crap on Oprah's show about how all meat comes from terrible places, yadayadayada, cough vegan cough propaganda cough cough. But again, Oprah was trying to show both sides of the coin, even if one side did get most of the face time. Americans are provided a safe, wholesome product every day, 24/7/365 and there are a lot of people who just don't seem to appreciate how good they have it.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Light at the end of Winter's Tunnel
It's finally February and I don't know about the rest of you but January seemed to both take forever and to filled with busy days from New Year's to yesterday. And just as the weather seemed to break and lighten up, and Betsy finally got to see the ground at our house for the first time since she's come home, we got the ice coating last night.
I think if there's one thing I hate about living in C. Ohio compared with my time spent at MSU, it's definitely the ice. Up there we got much more snow and I can deal with all the snow in the world just so long as I don't have to slide my way around the backyard or hammer at the car windshield trying to get the cracking/scraping process started.
Well, despite the wintry conditions, lambing is in full swing now out at the family farm. With 13 lambs down, we're about halfway through the process and these little bundles of joy are the inspirational reminder that winter really does have expiration date. Lots of people like to wait until spring to drop lambs, but with ours lambing indoors, we can afford to lamb early and it's days like today that I'm grateful for that. If the weather gets ugly tonight and meetings get cancelled, you'll find me out on the farm with my mom moving fencing as we prepare to welcome more lives into this world. Pictures to follow, but for now I've included one from a couple years ago.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
ADSA news
From my e-newsletter with ADSA, I refer you to a good article on the challenges that some "more humane" bird facilities face during this time of year. I think it's really important for people to fully understand the consequences of their ideology, and how much it sometimes just doesn't make sense.
Speaking of not making sense, the driving force behind cheap food is talking about making healthier food cheaper. It just seems like a high percentage of the people who shop Wal-mart do it because they can get more food for less money, thus eating more. Making your food healthier won't change the fact that people come there, buy too much and subsequently eat too much. Changing consumer action will make a bigger difference than the quality of your food. If you asked me, Wal-mart could do with focusing on fresher produce first.
Speaking of not making sense, the driving force behind cheap food is talking about making healthier food cheaper. It just seems like a high percentage of the people who shop Wal-mart do it because they can get more food for less money, thus eating more. Making your food healthier won't change the fact that people come there, buy too much and subsequently eat too much. Changing consumer action will make a bigger difference than the quality of your food. If you asked me, Wal-mart could do with focusing on fresher produce first.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Ag Thesaurus
For those of my readers who rarely know what the heck I'm talking about, try out this updated agricultural thesaurus. And for those of you who are just fascinated by the ways in which words have changed over the years, it's a fun little reference tool.
It's a pretty quiet week for me. Being so busy with school has kept my head in the books, and with abstracts pending in 3 weeks and exams just finished, I'm just keeping my head above water. We also started lambing out at our place last night, dropping twins and a single. Animals always seem to build energy off of each other, because it wasn't long after the lambs dropped that the steers jumped the fence and starting running around.
Speaking of the steers, these are probably the nicest steers I have seen in a while on our place. Combining that with how well they handle for my younger brother, this should be a great show year. They are growing and look very healthy; seeing the profile yesterday against the perfect snow was beautiful. It's days like that that I miss living out on the farm.
It's a pretty quiet week for me. Being so busy with school has kept my head in the books, and with abstracts pending in 3 weeks and exams just finished, I'm just keeping my head above water. We also started lambing out at our place last night, dropping twins and a single. Animals always seem to build energy off of each other, because it wasn't long after the lambs dropped that the steers jumped the fence and starting running around.
Speaking of the steers, these are probably the nicest steers I have seen in a while on our place. Combining that with how well they handle for my younger brother, this should be a great show year. They are growing and look very healthy; seeing the profile yesterday against the perfect snow was beautiful. It's days like that that I miss living out on the farm.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Mike Rowe on castration
Nothing more needs said other than I think this is a great talk by Mike Rowe. Listen to it, and think about how it applies to the misconceptions that we have about what is really better for the animals. And who better to know what's good for animals than the ones who take care of them 365 days a year.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
On it goes...
Barilla pasta became the first big pasta-maker to join the cage-free egg movement. Whether or not they were pressured into it or bought out by HSUS, we'll probably never know. But what I do know is that they represent just one in a huge wave of propaganda conquests by HSUS as they buy, force or lie their way into the forefront of animal rights idiocracy. I think it's great that Barilla cares so much about the welfare of chickens, but maybe before they force more of the market production to convert to cage-free production, they might've wanted to ask whether or not cage-free is really a better system for the bird. For further reading on the matter, check out this OSU compilation on the welfare of birds in both systems. You might just be surprised.
While we're at the old grind of trying to spread facts to the few who care to elevate about media-hyped fiction, try out this sow housing fact sheet released by the USDA and ARS. I found it to be a more honest and unbiased evaluation of the current situation and research. In class today, we discussed the highly controversial issues surrounding the care and euthanasia of pigs. I understand the concern with animal welfare. As long as there are people beating animals, we have not done enough. But what frustrates me is the momentum from video releases which are used to push for irrational methods of caring for animals, such as untested swine housing, lack of castration, castration with anesthetics which are more detrimental to the piglet than the surgery, and utopic descriptions of how a pig should be allowed to act to exhibit "normal" behavior. For those of you who haven't seen pigs, don't watch their normal behavior - it will make a bad impression (ever seen Old Yeller?).
Finally, I have just two topics that border gross for me. First is the suspected live burial of pigs during the spread of foot and mouth disease in Korea. Foot and mouth disease is a horrible disease which spreads much faster than the vaccine would be able to work. While Compassion advocates the vaccine, you need to understand that the animals in question were obviously already afflicted with the disease. They should obviously have been euthanized prior to burial but they were not going to be saved one way or another.
And then there's the Dutch guy who thinks we should eat bugs. What do animal rights activists think about this? What a tasty alternative to bacon, eh?
While we're at the old grind of trying to spread facts to the few who care to elevate about media-hyped fiction, try out this sow housing fact sheet released by the USDA and ARS. I found it to be a more honest and unbiased evaluation of the current situation and research. In class today, we discussed the highly controversial issues surrounding the care and euthanasia of pigs. I understand the concern with animal welfare. As long as there are people beating animals, we have not done enough. But what frustrates me is the momentum from video releases which are used to push for irrational methods of caring for animals, such as untested swine housing, lack of castration, castration with anesthetics which are more detrimental to the piglet than the surgery, and utopic descriptions of how a pig should be allowed to act to exhibit "normal" behavior. For those of you who haven't seen pigs, don't watch their normal behavior - it will make a bad impression (ever seen Old Yeller?).
Finally, I have just two topics that border gross for me. First is the suspected live burial of pigs during the spread of foot and mouth disease in Korea. Foot and mouth disease is a horrible disease which spreads much faster than the vaccine would be able to work. While Compassion advocates the vaccine, you need to understand that the animals in question were obviously already afflicted with the disease. They should obviously have been euthanized prior to burial but they were not going to be saved one way or another.
And then there's the Dutch guy who thinks we should eat bugs. What do animal rights activists think about this? What a tasty alternative to bacon, eh?
Monday, January 17, 2011
FS's take on the new veterinary oath
Farm Sanctuary's blog had a thought provoking post about the new veterinary oath and previous "research" that they had conducted on the opinions of veterinarians. Their blog is worth the read if you're interested in this type of thing and since they never post my comments, I have included below:
"Gene,
"Curious, but when was 2% response rate on over 69,000 veterinarians considered an acceptable number to claim that "80% of veterinarians considered gestation crates objectionable"? Considering the fact that this was also a mail survey, that means that people who replied were likely highly opinionated participants and you didn't capture the true essence of the population.
"Secondly, I think you'll find if you conducted a qualified mail survey that veterinarians weren't objecting to adding "welfare" to their oaths for any reason other than fear that animal rights activists and supporters would mislead and misconstrue that oath to the public. Veterinarians have always had the implied obligation to protect an animal's welfare as it pertains to their health; as a health professional it is within their duty and they act on this responsibility. Adding "welfare" to their oath was in my own opinion overkill and unnecessary."
"Gene,
"Curious, but when was 2% response rate on over 69,000 veterinarians considered an acceptable number to claim that "80% of veterinarians considered gestation crates objectionable"? Considering the fact that this was also a mail survey, that means that people who replied were likely highly opinionated participants and you didn't capture the true essence of the population.
"Secondly, I think you'll find if you conducted a qualified mail survey that veterinarians weren't objecting to adding "welfare" to their oaths for any reason other than fear that animal rights activists and supporters would mislead and misconstrue that oath to the public. Veterinarians have always had the implied obligation to protect an animal's welfare as it pertains to their health; as a health professional it is within their duty and they act on this responsibility. Adding "welfare" to their oath was in my own opinion overkill and unnecessary."
Our new dog, Betsy (duplicate post)
It's official, we've finally adopted a dog. She's about 2 years old, a hound mix, with 2 bundles of energy and a bit of a bad habit to whine which she picked up copying all the other dogs at the shelter. Hopefully we'll be able to train that out of her because she's picked up a lot of other things we've taught her even in the last 14 hours, like sitting, not jumping on people and staying off the furniture (although she tries to sneak past you on that last one).
She's a pretty curious little dog (about 30 lbs.) and ferocious with her toys. Out of all the toys we bought for her, she's demolished everything except for the indestructible pig which she doesn't like as much because, go figure, it's indestructible. Anyhow, we've finally made good on our goal to adopt a dog, and the people we worked with, "Pets Without Parents" were easygoing and prompt with paperwork, most importantly not selling the dog out from underneath us. Most importantly, we can't wait to take her out to the folks' places and let her run some and get some introductions to other animals.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Doggies! (duplicate post)
We're headed over to another pet adoption place tonight and the ball is rolling on new paperwork. Amanda found some new dog options, two of which we're headed to look at tonight. First though, you have to see the picture of this adorable little beagle/chihuahua mix. Of course, that's a bit smaller than we wanted, so it's not really an option for us, but if you want, it's still waiting for a home.
So the two dogs we are going to look at tonight are pretty similar in a few ways. Both have interesting names, "Keegan" and "Betsy Boop", but who says naming your dog has to be boring? Both are about the same size, cost, colors, and health status. Now we just have to see them and interact with them to see whether or not they actually fit for us.
Of course, this is a no-kill shelter, which is nice, but still means that we're not really saving a puppy from being put down. However, we are looking at adopting a dog without a home, and that's a really good feeling for me. Time will tell how much work will go into having a pet and whether or not we were totally ready for it. But I think all the preparation in the world still can't leave you fully prepared for the unknown. We are ready enough, financially stable and this is a nice/fun step for us in our relationship as well.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Hopefully not Food for Thought
A couple of videos to mull over as the issue of animal care and how it is provided continues to be discussed and relevant in today's world.
In class today, one of the students brought up this man's crazy stunt of "living" with the lions for a month to raise money for his animal sanctuary. Besides the fact that his shelter actually doesn't provide sanctuary for the animals where they can function normally, his plan really just doesn't make any sense. Luckily, he still does have a place where he can hide to protect himself - if he makes it there.
In case you needed a reminder of why you shouldn't climb into a pen with animals, let alone carnivores, check out this video below.
Or of course, there's the puffer fish that somehow is believed to have killed a man. If I was the wife, I'd be wondering why he ate the poison, or of course, maybe she already knows.
It was interesting in class though that as we talked about deceptive arguments and the methods used by activists to sway the middle ground, many of the things we denounce animal rights groups for doing, we've done or are doing ourselves. And the excuse that they were first doesn't make it any better that we also try to manipulate people's opinions. I think that same observation is reflected in a lot of the change in agricultural media at this point as we return to focusing on what we do, and why we do it instead of finger pointing and saying who's wrong and why. It's not that we're being simple and stupid; we just need to be honest because that's what people want and need more than anything.
In class today, one of the students brought up this man's crazy stunt of "living" with the lions for a month to raise money for his animal sanctuary. Besides the fact that his shelter actually doesn't provide sanctuary for the animals where they can function normally, his plan really just doesn't make any sense. Luckily, he still does have a place where he can hide to protect himself - if he makes it there.
In case you needed a reminder of why you shouldn't climb into a pen with animals, let alone carnivores, check out this video below.
Or of course, there's the puffer fish that somehow is believed to have killed a man. If I was the wife, I'd be wondering why he ate the poison, or of course, maybe she already knows.
It was interesting in class though that as we talked about deceptive arguments and the methods used by activists to sway the middle ground, many of the things we denounce animal rights groups for doing, we've done or are doing ourselves. And the excuse that they were first doesn't make it any better that we also try to manipulate people's opinions. I think that same observation is reflected in a lot of the change in agricultural media at this point as we return to focusing on what we do, and why we do it instead of finger pointing and saying who's wrong and why. It's not that we're being simple and stupid; we just need to be honest because that's what people want and need more than anything.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
De-barking
This was a concept I had barely even heard about before we discussed it yesterday in the animal issues class that I TA. As a little side note, I would like to congratulate all of the students in that class for taking it upon themselves to enroll in a non-required class (but fulfills a GEC) that discusses such complicated topics. These are students who truly show for the most part an interest in learning things in college instead of just checking off requirements before they leave. Yesterday, I talked to an aviation major in the class, just one example of the diversity we have in the class and hopefully that will lead to a lot of healthy discussion.
Debarking dogs can be done for many reasons. First on my mind was a beagle or the deaf dog in our house last year, but apparently there are more complex interests in debarking of dogs than just the annoying metronome of dogs who haven't learned to shut up. Most interesting to me was the fact that Ohio is the only state to have a law that prohibits the debarking of vicious dogs. It would seem that there were actually people who debarked attack/guard dogs in order to still protect themselves but give the dog the benefit of surprise. Law enforcement officers found this especially troublesome for obvious reasons.
What bothers me about the debarking of dogs is the surgery and the fact that it permanently inhibits the dog's ability to vocalize. I understand this is the goal of the procedure and I'm sure there are dogs which this procedure must be performed on, dogs that have no self-control and raise complaints from neighbors, etc. There does come a point where the dog will either have to be given up or debarked for its own good. And when you reach that point and there has been no way to prevent the dog from incessant barking, then I think that debarking becomes a justifiable procedure. There was no way to previously predict the dog would behave this way and to get rid of the dog would provide less quality of life than the alternative of just removing the ability to misbehave in a way in which will result in the dog's movement to a shelter or unfamiliar home. This is just one more of those tough choices that has to be made by the people who have taken the responsibility of caring for the animal. The animal depends on these people to do the best that they can for it, and sometimes they might determine that debarking is necessary. That's just one more fact of life, and it's better than the dog having to settle into a new home or shelter.
Debarking dogs can be done for many reasons. First on my mind was a beagle or the deaf dog in our house last year, but apparently there are more complex interests in debarking of dogs than just the annoying metronome of dogs who haven't learned to shut up. Most interesting to me was the fact that Ohio is the only state to have a law that prohibits the debarking of vicious dogs. It would seem that there were actually people who debarked attack/guard dogs in order to still protect themselves but give the dog the benefit of surprise. Law enforcement officers found this especially troublesome for obvious reasons.
What bothers me about the debarking of dogs is the surgery and the fact that it permanently inhibits the dog's ability to vocalize. I understand this is the goal of the procedure and I'm sure there are dogs which this procedure must be performed on, dogs that have no self-control and raise complaints from neighbors, etc. There does come a point where the dog will either have to be given up or debarked for its own good. And when you reach that point and there has been no way to prevent the dog from incessant barking, then I think that debarking becomes a justifiable procedure. There was no way to previously predict the dog would behave this way and to get rid of the dog would provide less quality of life than the alternative of just removing the ability to misbehave in a way in which will result in the dog's movement to a shelter or unfamiliar home. This is just one more of those tough choices that has to be made by the people who have taken the responsibility of caring for the animal. The animal depends on these people to do the best that they can for it, and sometimes they might determine that debarking is necessary. That's just one more fact of life, and it's better than the dog having to settle into a new home or shelter.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Pet Surgeries
Today in the class that I TA, we spent a lot of time discussing elective surgeries on animals and the various things that happen to both small and large animals. The idea was to get the class thinking and discussing what makes a surgery ok, or acceptable, and what doesn't.
Of course, beyond the agricultural processes (some of which I agree with and some, like tail-docking of dairy cattle which serves no scientific purpose I do not support), this also led to ethical considerations in pets. We talked about the de-clawing process and how this actually removes a bit of the bone from each digit on a cat and destroys their ability to act on their instincts.
Of course, if you were to ask animal rights activists what they thought about cat de-clawing, they'd probably not give you an answer. They don't want involved in a sticky issue like that. Of course, they might say that they think it is a wrong-doing towards the animal but they are much more concerned with letting domesticated livestock loose to be free in the wild (even though they will die from inability to care for themselves) than helping pet owners better understand the alternatives to de-clawing.
I'm not saying I disagree with the de-clawing process, of course. I actually think it is a great option if you can't find another way to prevent your cat from tearing up the furniture, and especially if that cat will not end up outside or abandoned later, struggling to cope with the fact that its claws can't help feed it or protect it anymore. Instead, what I am saying is that there are painful procedures which go on all around us in the world today. Some of these are more obvious, like the dehorning of calves or castration of pigs. But these can be necessary procedures, just like the de-clawing of a troublesome cat. These procedures all serve to protect other animals that might be in proximity of the cows, or pigs, or housecat.
We're all in this together, and at some point, reason must prevail. We can't just keep thinking that what we do makes sense to everyone else. If we don't speak up, eventually it will be too late to state our opinion. I know you hear this all the time, but it really is important not only to figure out what you think on critical animal care issues, but then to help educate those around you. If you need an example of how ridiculous some people can get, just look at this:
Of course, beyond the agricultural processes (some of which I agree with and some, like tail-docking of dairy cattle which serves no scientific purpose I do not support), this also led to ethical considerations in pets. We talked about the de-clawing process and how this actually removes a bit of the bone from each digit on a cat and destroys their ability to act on their instincts.
Of course, if you were to ask animal rights activists what they thought about cat de-clawing, they'd probably not give you an answer. They don't want involved in a sticky issue like that. Of course, they might say that they think it is a wrong-doing towards the animal but they are much more concerned with letting domesticated livestock loose to be free in the wild (even though they will die from inability to care for themselves) than helping pet owners better understand the alternatives to de-clawing.
I'm not saying I disagree with the de-clawing process, of course. I actually think it is a great option if you can't find another way to prevent your cat from tearing up the furniture, and especially if that cat will not end up outside or abandoned later, struggling to cope with the fact that its claws can't help feed it or protect it anymore. Instead, what I am saying is that there are painful procedures which go on all around us in the world today. Some of these are more obvious, like the dehorning of calves or castration of pigs. But these can be necessary procedures, just like the de-clawing of a troublesome cat. These procedures all serve to protect other animals that might be in proximity of the cows, or pigs, or housecat.
We're all in this together, and at some point, reason must prevail. We can't just keep thinking that what we do makes sense to everyone else. If we don't speak up, eventually it will be too late to state our opinion. I know you hear this all the time, but it really is important not only to figure out what you think on critical animal care issues, but then to help educate those around you. If you need an example of how ridiculous some people can get, just look at this:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)