The UK's KFC Chicken 'Crisis' and eating Meat

Apparently the UK has run out of Chicken. Okay, they have not run out of chicken as such. But KFC has a supply chain problem of such monumental proportions that they are unable to get chicken to all their 900 stores. At last count,

160 stores across the UK had been forced to closed. Some news sites are reporting that 640 branches were shut at the height of the crisis.  

This has been big news and hard to miss. As a vegan, and user of social media, I have good reason to believe that my world view is skewed towards vegetarian-friendly news. It is certainly true that I rarely hear much about what’s happening in the world of chicken-eating. At the same time, my news feed is filled with inspiring stories of people turning vegetarian, or opening successful vegan businesses.

So what lessons might I take away from the biggest chicken-eating-related story of the decade?

1.     People will not give up their chicken lightly.

Under normal condition, in a three-month period, an estimated 43% of Britons will buy takeaway from a fast food restaurant that sells chicken.  

As the chicken drought took hold this week, news reports out of the UK suggest that some chicken meat lovers had become so distraught that they turned to the police for help. Both London and Manchester police issued statements saying that a lack of chicken does not come under their perve, and that fast food junkies should stop calling. Of course, it may be withdrawal from the secret herbs and spices that is actually causing the distress. After all, many other fast food restaurants also sell chicken.

But it seems clear that the thought of going without your favourite chicken meat for a couple of days is highly destabilising for some. According to the Metro newspaper, a bucket of KFC chicken currently fetches around £100, on e-Bay.

2.      The world is not on the cusp of turning vegan.

While I dearly hope that one day future generations will mock me for making this claim, based on the evidence available now, I think it is unlikely.

It seems to me that the number of people who identify as vegan, vegetarian, or who simply have meat free days, is increasing. But that increase is small compared to global population increases and the number of people eschewing traditional diet in favour of meat-heavy western diets. Moreover, what the KFC crisis tells me is that for some people meat eating is such a deeply entrenched behaviour that an alternative is unthinkable.  

3.     Harm minimisation via legislation is vitally important.

Meat eating is a deeply harmful practice. Broiler chickens are among the most miserable of all factory farmed animals. Their lives are short, and then they are killed to become nuggets. Meat is also environmentally harmful. It is water intensive, linked to de-forestation, and responsible for an estimated 18% of human produced greenhouse gas.

Yet many people are deeply committed to meat-eating.

There is a debate that rages among animal advocates about the best way to stop (or minimise) meat consumption. On one view, the state has failed to act, and therefore the way forward is to address individuals not as citizens, but as consumers. Get people to ‘do the right thing’ at the checkout.

I commend those who spend their time trying to make the world a better place in this way. But I simply cannot imagine the type of person who phones the police because their local KFC is closed for week, turning vegan.

In my opinion, we must also insist that the government shows leadership. We need to ask law makers to use their power (which we give them) to make the lives of broiler hens less horrible. This approach is unlikely to save them from death. But we can also insist that their death be less gruesome. We can punish those who do not comply. We can also ask the state to include environmental externalities in the cost of meat production.

So while the UK wakes to another day of KFC rations, the lesson for me is that meat-eating stirs great passion in some. But that passion is destructive. While I don’t know that I can persuade enthusiastic meat-eaters to like tofu. I do think it is reasonable for law makers to insist that meat-eaters take responsibility for the harm they do. It worked for cigarettes. Let’s try it with meat.

Should the RSPCA be involved in farm animal welfare?

An important political decision will be made in South Australia (SA) in the newt few weeks: should the RSPCA have power in relation to farm animal welfare?


Family First MLC the Hon Robert Brokenshire thinks not. He would like to see the RSPCA's power in relation to horses and livestock transferred to the SA  Department of Primary Industries and Resources (PIRSA).


The RSPCA does not want to relinquish its power and argues that locating farm animal welfare within the Department of Primary Industries represents a conflict of interests. The RSPCA argues that: 

The Department’s primary responsibility is to protect, promote and expand the profitability of the livestock industry.

The RSPCA has no difficulty with these aims but there must be a clear separation of powers so that no organisation is asked to both promote and police the same industry.

The RSPCA is asking members of the community to lobby the SA parliament on its behalf. 

The most appropriate location for animal welfare powers has been an important issue among animal protection theorists, especially lawyers, and animal advocates. 

The RSPCA has no power in relation to animals used in research and education. However, if the South Australian branch of the RSPCA loses its power in relation to farm animals, I think it will be an Australian first. 

There have been calls by animal activists, especially some years ago, to take investigation and enforcement powers away from the RSPCA (which is a private charity) and  hand them to the state. However, advocates of that position do not typically ask that animal welfare powers be transferred to Departments of Primary Industries. Indeed, I would assume that most animal advocates would consider that a conflict of interest. 

I know very little about political realities in South Australia. I have no idea why Family First is pursuing this agenda. However, I will be watching very closely to see whether SA is about to establish a highly significant precedent.    

Big Cats as Pets (but not sheep)

Over the last week I have been thinking a lot about animals in zoos. Last week I wrote an opinion piece for The Conversation in which I questioned how modern Melbourne Zoo really is. The Zoo turns 150 this year, yet it persists in the Victorian era practice of exhibiting elephants in very small enclosures within urban centres. 


Meanwhile, yesterday, I wrote about the case of a man living in the outer-suburbs of Melbourne who has been fined for having a pet sheep and is now required to relinquish Baa, the family pet. 


I was therefore very interested this morning to read about new laws that are anticipated as a result of the Ohio case in which the owner of a private zoo released all his animals before killing himself. 


Law makers in the state of Ohio are now working on new laws to make it more difficult to own exotic animals. Of course the process is tricky and the demands of zoos and animal rights activists are vastly different. 


Of particular interest to me is the unclear line between wild animal, pet, and exhibit. As we have seen in the case of Baa the sheep, Dandenong City Council does not consider a sheep to be a pet. Meanwhile, in Ohio, and other parts of the US, big cats appear to be quite common pets. 


Sue Manning reports that by some estimates there are more big cats living in captivity in American backyards than in the wild. While that might be good from a conservation perspective, the individual animals may be paying a high price.


And that brings us back to zoos. As part of their lobbying efforts around the new laws, Lynn Culver, executive director of the Feline Conservation Federation has argued that stricter big cat controls might mean an end to big cats on display: "Independent zoos will be allowed to keep their existing animals but when the cats die, there will be zoos without big cats and that's tragic," Culver said. "Big cats are charismatic species, key to the success of any zoo or wildlife exhibit." The zoo lobby does not want tougher laws. 


Meanwhile, animal groups point out that it can be easier to buy a big cat than to adopt a kitten from a shelter. Buying a big cat as a pet is currently under or unregulated. Adopting a kitten is not. 


So what constitutes a pet and how should we decide which animals should be allowed to live where?    

Can a Sheep be a Pet?

An interesting case for animal law enthusiasts is currently playing out in Dan­de­nong, in the outer-suburbs of Melbourne, Australia. 


In February 2011 Dandenong resident Vu Ho was fined $220 for keeping a pet sheep on a suburban block and ordered to remove the sheep. Ho argues that the sheep is a loved member of the family, a pet (rather than livestock). He does not want to relinquish her and has taken the matter to the Victorian Supreme Court, with a further appeal likely to follow. 


Animal activists are calling on Dandenong City Council to allow Ho's sheep (creatively named Baa) to remain living on the property. 


While that would probably be an optimal outcome for both Ho and Baa, I am curious to see how the matter plays out in court. 


Animals were once an integral part of the city scape. Livestock, including sheep, routinely lived close to humans and would be droved into the city for sale and slaughter. 


With urban modernisation animals were removed from cities, suburbs, and now apparently outer-suburbs. This occurred as the price of land increased and as city authorities became more concerned about hygiene. 


Of course one type of animals was permitted to remain in the city - the companion animal.


Companion animals come in many shapes and sizes. So how do we know when we are looking at a companion animal? Well, according to Dandenong City Council a companion animal will never come in the shape of a sheep. 


The definition I would offer is that a companion animal is an animal kept for non-economic purposes, and they normally lives in small numbers either close to the family home, or in it. 


In my book 'Animals, Equality and Democracy' I argue that one of the problems with legislative inconsistency in animal welfare laws is that companion animals fare better than other types of animals. That conclusion appears to apply to Baa very strongly. Yet I also feel that Dandenong City Council does have some difficult questions to answer. Why can't Baa be a pet? Which other animals cannot be a pet? Why can't a single sheep live on a suburban block. 


It should be a very interesting case. Stay tuned! 

Watch Them as They Fall

The folks at Racing Victoria must be feeling rather down. On the first day of the jumps season a horse - Jotilla - fell. She is now dead.

What terrible luck! Or was it? It seems that many horses fall and die while jumping for our amusement.

Last year I caused quite a stir when I wrote that I was happy to see horses die while jumping.

The reason I am happy, of course, is that dead horses make the news, and community attitudes will be what end jumps racing.

In my book 'Animals, Equality and Democracy' I demonstrate the relationship between high visibility animal use and strong animal protection laws and low visibility animal use and weak animal protection laws. But horse racing and jumps racing are a puzzling exception to that otherwise sound principle. We can all see the horses fall and die, yet it remains perfectly legal.

While I do find jumps racing and the use of the whip to be anomalies, I also think that they are much more likely to be banned before less visible animal uses - such as factory farms.

So let's watch how many horses fall this season and at the same time observe how long until jumps racing is banned in Victoria, as it is in most other states of Australia.

Live Animal Exports - an Australian policy failure?

Last week on ABC radio's Bush Telegraph http://www.abc.net.au/rural/telegraph/content/2012/s3436609.htm I was interviewed about animal welfare issues. I pointed out that very few people know what's going on with animals - how they are treated, how they are harmed, whether their care meets community standards etc. The host responded by saying 'but animal welfare problems are being exposed'. That is true, but it isn't the government that is learning about them and responding. It's animal protection groups.

If Lyn White from Animals Australia wasn't prepared to spend her time inside Indonesian slaughterhouses how would we ever know what's going on?  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-28/new-footage-shows-cruelty-at-indonesian-abattoir/3858230.

This morning Fran Kelly did a fantastic job interviewing the Minister. She pushed him to describe the auditing system and to explain how animal welfare violations would be uncovered without the work of groups such as Animals Australia and RSPCA Australia. He had no response: http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/2012-02-29/3859074.

Is this how we monitor public policy in this country? Leave it to not-for-profit agencies to do the work of the state?

This is a very sad day for animal welfare policy in Australia. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil seems to be the guiding principle at work when it comes to live animal exports and Australian public policy.

Animal Rights v Animal Welfare

The positive side of free range? | SAFE talk
In this honest and thoughtful piece seasoned animal advocate Hans reflects on what's been achieved since he first started working for animals. Writing from a New Zealand perspective he recounts some of the successes and some of the disappointments. Of most interest to me as a theorist is the way he effortlessly reconciles the animal rights versus animal welfare issue over which so much academic ink has been spilt. Hans wants an end to exploitation but where the political climate is not receptive he seeks to achieve what he can. Well worth a read.

Animal Welfare Regulation also a Problem in the US

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-15/artist-dog-wins-collar-award/3830890

The issue of animal activists identifying animal welfare violations in cases where the authorities do not is not an exclusively Australian Problem. News in overnight shows that US group Mercy for Animals took hidden video of a US turkey farm. As a result, three workers have been arrested.

"Unfortunately, every time we send an investigator they emerge with shocking evidence of animal abuse," said MFA executive director Nathan Runkle.

The challenge of regulating invisible environments is common throughout the western world.

Welcome

Welcome to my new blog. My name is Siobhan O'Sullivan. I am a researcher and I study animal issues. This blog is part of a larger research project called Knowing Animals Past and Present. This blog will keep you up to date with the latest news from the animal world.