VICTORY: „MAKE CCTV MANDATORY for SLAUGHTERHOUSES“ says the Britsh Public!


In the slaughterhouse, Lovis Corinth, 1893.
In the slaughterhouse, Lovis Corinth, 1893. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

[image] For immediate release: Wednesday 28th November 2012

‘Make CCTV Mandatory for Slaughterhouses!‘ says the British public

A YouGov poll has found that, of those who expressed a view, 73 per cent said the Government should make CCTV mandatory for all slaughterhouses in the UK.

The poll, which was conducted across Great Britain from 15-19 November, asked 3,445 people:

‘Most supermarkets insist that their slaughterhouse suppliers install CCTV, but this does not cover all abattoirs. Some people think that CCTV should be compulsory in ALL slaughterhouses, to help prevent potentially widespread illegal animal cruelty, such as the kicking, beating and punching of animals. Other people don’t think it should be made compulsory, due to the cost to slaughterhouses of installing CCTV and because some law abiding slaughterhouse owners and workers may object to being filmed at work. Do you think the government should or should not make it compulsory for CCTV to be installed in ALL slaughterhouses in the UK?‘ 

60 per cent of the total (and 73 per cent of those who expressed a view) answered: The government should make it compulsory.

22 per cent answered: The government should not make it compulsory.

18 per cent answered: Don’t Know.

 The statistics for those who expressed a view in Scotland indicate that 71 per cent support mandatory CCTV. In Wales, the figure is an overwhelming 78 per cent. 

Animal Aid has been campaigning for mandatory CCTV since the national group filmed inside nine randomly chosen slaughterhouses and found breaches of animal welfare laws in eight of them. The cruelties included animals being kicked, beaten, punched and burnt with cigarettes. Animal Aid’s footage led to two men being jailed.

Says Animal Aid’s Head of Campaigns, Kate Fowler:

‘Our investigations have found that breaches of the law inside slaughterhouses are all too common when workers do not think they are being watched. CCTV will deter some of the worst cruelties, help with training and retraining of staff and provide evidence for prosecutions.

‘Despite this practical and achievable option, the government’s recent consultation on welfare at slaughter suggested that slaughterhouse owners „are best placed to decide which monitoring tools are most appropriate for their individual circumstances“. We believe this is a dereliction of the government’s duty and it must now pay heed to the public which rightly feels that regulations must be tightened, not weakened, in order to better protect animals.‘ 

– Ends –

 Notes to Editors

 
  • The full poll results can be seen here:

http://www.animalaid.org.uk/images/pdf/YouGovslaughterresults.pdf

http://www.animalaid.org.uk/images/pdf/YouGovslaughtermethod.pdf 

All figures, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov Plc. Total sample size was 3445 adults. Fieldwork was undertaken between 15th-19th November 2012. The survey was carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all GB adults (aged 18+).

I am very excited about this message! We all worked together in this direction. I remember unto my book under the webblogname

         www.scheingehabt.wordpress.com/

would need help to translate my book into english language!

Nur im Wald sicher: Wildschweine auf der A3 überfahren!


Photo of German Autobahn A 3, with interchange...
Photo of German Autobahn A 3, with interchange Bonn/Siegburg, Sankt Augustin, Germany. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

http://www1.wdr.de/themen/infokompakt/nachrichten/nrwkompakt/nrwkompakt11830.html

Zehn Wildschweine auf A3 überfahren: (08.11 Uhr)

Zehn Wildschweine haben am Mittwochmorgen (21.11.2012) auf der A3 bei Sankt Augustin  einen Unfall mit drei Autos und zwei Lkw verursacht. Beim Versuch, die Autobahn zu überqueren, wurde die Rotte erfasst, so die Polizei. Menschen wurden nicht verletzt. Die A3 war für die Aufräumarbeiten in beide Richtungen für eineinhalb Stunden gesperrt.

Nach Schätzungen des Deutschen Jagdschutz Verbandes kommt es in Deutschland jährlich zu rund 230.000 Wildunfällen. In den Wintermonaten sind diese Unfälle besonders häufig, denn es wird später hell und früher dunkel und die Tiere sind vor allem in der Dämmerung aktiv – und die fällt im Winter häufig mit den Hauptverkehrszeiten zusammen. Zudem ist das Verkehrsaufkommen in den letzten Jahren stark angestiegen und immer mehr Wälder werden von Straßen durchkreuzt.

 


Wildschweine
Bild 1 Nur im Wald sicher

HAGEN RETHER über den ZYNISMUS des FLEISCHKOMSUMS video


Hagen Rether, German cabaret artist in perform...
Hagen Rether, German cabaret artist in performance at Waldorf-School in Wangen (Allgäu). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

http://youtu.be/sHNY1Xt-Y-o

Hochgeladen von am 17.05.2008

Hagen Rether über den Zynismus des Fleischkonsums. (ARD Scheibenwischer vom 15.05.2008)


Add your thoughts here… (optional)

Dear Kitty. Some blog

This video is called Cute mangalitza piglets.

By Tony Patey in Britain:

Charities slam MoD’s surgery on shot pigs

Monday 19 November 2012

Animal welfare groups attacked the Ministry of Defence today after it defended shooting live pigs to train army surgeons.

The pigs are shot by marksmen at a Nato training facility in Jaegerspris, Denmark, to replicate battlefield wounds and are then operated on by military medical staff.

Formerly known as Operation Danish Bacon, the practice has been described by animal rights groups as „impossible to justify medically, ethically and educationally.“

An MoD spokeswoman said: „This training provides invaluable experience, exposing our surgical teams to the specific challenges posed by the injuries of modern armed conflict.“

The MoD said although the practice would not be illegal in Britain, approval would have to be obtained on a case-by-case basis from the Home Office.

The government of the day…

Ursprünglichen Post anzeigen 314 weitere Wörter

Britain Defends Shooting Pigs for Army Medic Training


English: Painting of the Trial of Bill Burns, ...
English: Painting of the Trial of Bill Burns, the first prosecution under the 1822 Martin’s Act for cruelty to animals, after he was found beating his donkey. It is the first known prosecution for animal cruelty in the world. The prosecution was brought by Richard Martin, MP for Galway, also known as Humanity Dick, and the case became memorable because he brought the donkey into court. The painting was made at the time of the trial. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Home > Britain defends shooting pigs for army medic training

Britain defends shooting pigs for army medic training

By blade
Created 18/11/2012 – 20:33

Britain’s Ministry of Defence on Sunday defended its practice of shooting pigs and giving the wounded animals to military surgeons to practice treating common battlefield injuries.

Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals spokesperson Klare Kennett said the training exercises, which take place twice a year in Denmark, were „abhorrent and shocking“.

„Pigs are intelligent animals and most people would be appalled by this, especially as there is an alternative available which does not involve harming any animals,“ she said.

The ministry said the training gave surgeons „invaluable experience“ and „helped save lives on operations“.

The animals are heavily anaesthetised before being shot at close range „to damage organs but not kill the animals“, and are then operated on before being killed humanely, the ministry said.

„This training provides invaluable experience, exposing our surgical teams to the specific challenges posed by the injuries of modern armed conflict,“ a spokesperson said.

„This training has helped save lives on operations and by participating in the Danish exercises we minimise the overall number of animals used.“

Animal rights campaigners argue that life-like human simulator devices are more effective for medical training than live animals.

But the courses, which were suspended in 1998, were reinstated after a government-commissioned study found that „no equally effective alternative“ existed.

 


„How Big Pork Screws Small Towns“ MoJo:


Pork packing in Cincinnati. Print showing four...

Mother Jones

CHARTS: How Big Pork Screws Small Towns

http://www.motherjones.com/print/205921

As a new Food and Water Watch report shows, hog farms‚ problems aren’t just environmental.

By | Mon Nov. 12, 2012 3:08 AM PST


I’ve argued often that the food system functions like an economic sieve, draining away wealth. Imagine, say, a suburb served by a handful of fast-food chains plus a supermarket or Walmart or two. Profits from residents‘ food dollars go to distant shareholders; what’s left behind are essentially low-skill, low-wage clerical jobs and mountains of generally low-quality, health-ruining food.

But the food system’s secret scandal is that it’s economically extractive in farming communities areas, too—and especially in the places where industrial agriculture is most established and intensive. I first learned about this surprising fact from the Minnesota-based community-economics expert Ken Meter, specifially this 2001 study [1] on a farm-heavy region of Minnesota. And now Food and Water Watch, working with the University  of Tennessee’s Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, has come out with an excellent new report [2] documenting the food industry’s effect on several ag-intense regions, with the main spotlight on the hog-centric counties of Iowa, the nation’s leading hog-producing state.

The structure of Iowa’s hog farming went through a dramatic change starting in the early 1980s. As this FWW chart show, first, the number of hog farms in the state declined.

All charts by Food and Water Watch. All charts by Food and Water Watch. At the same time, the toal number of hogs raised in th state nearly doubled.

Accordingly, the remaining hog farms scaled up dramatically, growing by a factor of nearly 11 between 1982 and 2007:

What caused this epochal change? According FWW’s analysis, it was driven by the increasing consolidation of hog packing. Packers are the companies that buy hogs from farmers, slaughter them, and cut them into chops, bacon, and the like. In the 1980s, the meat-packing industry began what economists call a consolidation wave—big companies buying smaller companies and consolidating operations into bigger and bigger processing facilities. As the pork packers got bigger and bigger, they were able to use their market weight to force down the per-pound price they paid farmers for their hogs.

To assess the level of an industry’s concentration, economists use a measure they call „CR4″—the percentage of a market controlled by the four biggest companies. „In most sectors of the US economy, the four largest firms control between 40 and 45 percent of the market,“ FWW writes. At CR4 levels above 40 or so, the reports continues, markets start to lose competitiveness—the big firms have power to dictate terms to their suppliers, in this case, farmers. Look at how CR4 has grown nationally since 1982:

In Iowa, the situation is even more stark. CR4 levels have edged down slightly in recent years, but remain near 90 percent. That means that many hog farmers must either sell to one of the Big Four—Smithfield, Tyson, JBS, and Cargill—or exit the business altogether. As noted above, 80 percent of the farms selling hogs in Iowa in 1982 took the latter route. Most of the rest of them scaled up—and saw the prices paid them by the Big Four plunge. As the next chart shows, the real (inflation-adjusted) price farmers get for each hog fell by more than half between 1982 and 2007.

Now here’s the kicker. When you look at the state as a whole, Iowa’s hog farmers were bringing in more money, in inflation-adjusted terms, in 1982, when they raised 23.8 million hogs, than they did in 2007, when they raised 47.3 million hogs.

This is a great deal for the Big Four packers—they’re getting nearly twice the pork, for less total money. For the farmers, it’s a different story.

People who live within smelling distance of large hog farms have higher incidences of high blood pressure.

Now, Iowa’s hog farming used to be widely distributed across the state—most farms raised some hogs along with corn, soy, and other crops. As farms either exited hog production altogether or scaled up dramatically, hog farming got more and more concentrated into a handful of counties.You might think that people who live in these hog-centric counties got some economic benefit from the vast scaling up of hog production. At least you’d hope so—as I learned on a 2007 trip through one of those counties, Hardin (report here [3]), it’s no fun to live in industrial-hog country. Such areas are marked by clusters of bleak hog houses, each containing as many as 2,400 animals—as well as fetid, foul-smelling manure cesspools (known as „lagoons“) and horrific periodic spraying of nearby fields with liquid shit rife with antibiotic-resistant bacteria. A recent study [4] from University of North Carolina researcher Steve Wing showed that people who live within smelling distance of industrial-scale hog farms have higher incidences of high blood pressure.

Well, Food and Water Watch found that hog-heavy Iowa counties don’t do better economically than other counties—the opposite, in fact. The next chart compares real median annual household incomes in hog-heavy counties (based on the total number of hogs sold each year) with the statewide average.

Note that in ’82, hog-heavy counties had slightly higher-than-average median incomes. After 25 years of scaling up, that reversed itself. Overall, the state’s average median income rose by 14.5 percent over the time period, while median incomes in the state’s hog-intense counties grew by just 10 percent.

Food and Water Watch also finds evidence of growing inequality in the hog counties—while real median incomes grew by 10 percent between ’82 and ’07, average incomes jumped by about a third. „The rise in real per capita income alongside a less robust increase in median household income suggests that  earnings are being captured by a smaller portion of more well-off people in counties with high hog sales,“ FWW writes.

Why the dismal economic performance in the counties that house Iowa’s booming pork industry? It costs money to run a big farm, and the larger the farm, the less of those farm expenditures go to local business, FWW found. Large farms buy about a third less per hog worth of goods from local businesses than small farms, the report shows. And that’s a third less money circulating through local economies, building wealth and creating jobs. The study found that for the average Iowa county, the average number of non-farm local businesses grew by about 30 percent between 1982 and 2007. For the hog-heavy counties, though, the average number of such establishments fell by more than 10 percent.

Not surprisingly, while the average Iowa county saw robust growth in total jobs over that period, for hog-heavy counties, total jobs dropped.

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the economic story for meatpacking and processing workers—the people who slaughter, cut, and package Iowa’s vast annual hog crop. As Ted Genoways‘ blockbuster 2011 Mother Jones piece [5] shows n graphic detail, conditions have grown quite grom on the slaughterhouse floor. The following chart looks at real annual earnings for packers (workers who slaughter live animals) and processing workers (people who turn carcasses into sellable products). This is a story of full-on immiseration—what were once middle-class jobs now pay poverty-level wages.

Here’s how FWW sums the situation up:

Counties with more hog sales and larger farms tend to have lower total incomes, slower income growth, fewer Main Street businesses and less retail activity. General employment levels have suffered, wages in meatpacking have declined and farm job opportunities  are more difficult to find. In spite of what Big Pork boosters have said, there is little evidence that the trends in Iowa hog production have been good for Iowa’s rural economies.

Now, in their defense, the meatpacking giants often counter that the changes described here are necessary for the provision of cheap food. To deliver you a bountiful supply of pork chops, farmers and workers must be squeezed. But here, too, FWW brings a cold slap of reality. The report finds that when hog prices rise, the pork packers tend to pass on the increase to consumers „completely and immediately“; but when they fall, as they have for much of the past 25 years, the companies tend to pocket much of the difference as profit, passing only some on to consumers.

So, in addition to all the environmental damage associated with factory-scale hog farming [6], it’s an economic disaster, too—unless you happen to be a shareholder in one of the Big Four pork packers.


PIG ODORS RAISE HUMAN BLOOD PRESSURE


http://news.discovery.com/earth/pig-odors-raise-human-blood-pressure-121110.html#mkcpgn=rssnws1

Analysis by Emily Sohn
Sat Nov 10, 2012 04:42 AM ET

http://youtu.be/gYTkM1OHFQg  Calves in horrible situations

Living near an industrial-scale hog farm could be hazardous to your health.

Just 10 minutes of exposure to smells from swine operations in North Carolina was enough to raise the blood pressure of people who lived nearby, found a new study.

North Carolina’s swine farms lie disproportionately close to low-income, non-white communities, causing the farms to be fingered by some advocates as a classic example of environmental racism, said lead author Steve Wing, an epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

PHOTOS: Facts and Fables About Eco-Labels

To study the health effects of eastern North Carolina’s hog farms, Wing and colleagues partnered with community-based organizations, which helped them connect with residents who were skeptical of the researchers’ intentions.

“Most participants were African-American,” Wing said at a recent meeting of the Council for the Advancement of Science in Raleigh. “People were peeking out to see why a white person was in the neighborhood. There was a lot of distrust of scientists. We never would have been able to conduct this study without our community partners.”

For about two weeks, 101 adults who lived in 16 neighborhoods within 1.5 miles of industrial swine farms sat outside their homes twice a day for 10 minutes each time. Afterwards, they recorded the strength of the ambient smell on a scale from zero to eight and they took blood-pressure measurements. At the same time, the researchers recorded levels of various pollutants in the air.

For every extra point reported on the odor scale, participants’ blood pressure went up by small but incremental amounts, the researchers reported in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives. Compared to times when there was no smell detected, level-eight odors were associated with a two-mmHg rise in diastolic blood pressure (the bottom number). And higher levels of hydrogen sulfide gas were associated with a three-mmHg rise in systolic blood pressure (the top number).

NEWS: Factory Farming Videos Prompt ‘Ag-Gag’ Bills

Previous studies have linked bad odors from swine farms with higher levels of stress in nearby residents as well as with irritation to eyes, noses and throats. The new findings, Wing said, are “a sign that the environment is related not only to our perception, but to our physiology.”

And even though measured blood-pressure increases were small, every little bit adds up.

“This region is known as a stroke belt,” Wing said. “We don’t need additional environmental exposures leading to additional blood pressure increases.”

read and watch more ….

Rampant Cruelty at Slaughterhouse…very graphic video!


 

https://schweingehabt.wordpress.com/2012/08/22/rampant-cruelty-at-california-slaughterhouse-discovered-by-compassion-over-killing-very-graphic-video

Violence will not disappear if we do not show it, if we are silent about it …