Government labels on meat products that say "humane" or "raised in a stress-free environment" are meaningless, according to some animal-rights groups, because the feds don't verify the companies' practices on the ground.

The group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, has just submitted a petition calling on the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service to stop approving labels that PETA calls "grossly misleading."

Jared Goodman is the general counsel for animal law at the PETA Foundation.

"The government is enabling companies to exploit consumers' willingness to pay more for products that are made from animals who are supposedly raised humanely," said Goodman, "but in reality, suffer in many of the exact same ways as those who are raised pursuant to regular industry standards."

The USDA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

PETA says its investigations show some companies with the "humane" label - even some that advertise themselves as "cage free" - still mutilate the beaks of poultry, crush male chicks while they are still conscious, and keep animals in crowded sheds with little light or room to roam.

The nonprofit Humane Farm Animal Care has created a "Certified Humane Program" that evaluates producers on standards of care in raising and slaughtering animals. But Goodman pointed out that third-party programs are merely voluntary.

He said he thinks the feds should not approve "humane" labels, since companies have a strong financial incentive to misrepresent the ways they treat animals.

"They don't consider animal welfare a priority," said Goodman, "and are not going to invest the resources that are needed to provide these animals with adequate care before they're ultimately sent to the same slaughterhouses that kill animals from factory farms."

There are no federal anti-animal cruelty laws, but states will investigate when complaints are filed.

PETA claims that adopting a vegan diet is the only way to be sure your meals are cruelty-free.

Some Hoosiers want Indiana lawmakers to rethink proposed legislation that would usurp existing local laws that prohibit retailers from selling puppies. Legislators listened to emotional testimony during a 3.5 hour hearing on the proposed law, which was revived from last year's session.

Dr. Scott Robinson, a physician and attorney who also founded a low-cost spay and neuter center in Indianapolis, told the Senate Agriculture Committee there's no mystery about House Bill 1412. Pet stores support the legislation because they're trying to keep themselves from being forced out of business.

"I've been involved in animal welfare for a long time, and I've seen over the years many wolves in sheep's clothing and that's what this is about," Robinson argued. "There's plenty of regulations that can be made to monitor puppy mills, but this is designed to usurp local control of communities and protect pet stores."

Robinson said the issue is not a Republican or Democrat problem -- regardless of party affiliation, people care about their animals. If passed, the bill will overturn bans on retail puppy sales in 21 Indiana communities. Proponents say the law would allow pet stores the option to sell puppies as long as the animals are from ethically sourced suppliers.

Lori Wilson, CEO of Uncle Bill's Pet Centers, who operates six stores throughout Indiana, supports the proposed legislation.

"We are very transparent. We're open door," she intoned. "Being USDA, you have to be open door, so we are very picky. I actually go to many of the kennels to make sure that they are exactly what we want them to be and need them to be, to be able to source humanely and ethically raised puppies."

Opponents say the bill lacks funding to support the agencies tasked with enforcing laws. This is not a budget year for Indiana lawmakers, so any funding to support the proposed mandate would not come before 2025.


get more stories like this via email

Researchers at Colorado State University are making headway in identifying how osteoarthritis progresses in horses, and their findings could one day also help people who develop the degenerative disease after injuring a knee, elbow or shoulder.

Lynn Pezzanite, doctor of veterinary medicine and assistant professor at Colorado State University, said the disease affects nearly eight in ten horses over age 15.

"It's the most common disorder affecting joints in horses, as well as in people, and one of the most common disorders that we treat overall in horses. It's one of the most common reasons horses present to a veterinarian," she said.

Pezzanite and her team are hoping to find markers of how osteoarthritis develops in horses by studying individual immune cells in joint fluid. Those markers may provide insights on how veterinarians can use gene therapies or other treatments at specific stages to slow the disease's progression.

Typically, people and animals only show signs of osteoarthritis at advanced stages, when they experience joint pain. Pezzanite believes information in immune cells might expose the disease much earlier, even before evidence appears on X-rays.

"Our goal with this work is to look at those very early stages in horses that have post-traumatic arthritis, so that we can determine that tipping point of when we should be intervening or not. And hopefully this will inform treatment in humans as well," she continued.

Pezzanite said people could benefit from this research if the immune markers can be translated across species. Physicians would have better information about when to intervene before full-blown osteoarthritis develops.

"If you're playing soccer and twist your knee, tear your ACL, we would potentially be able to take a sample of that joint fluid and know whether you're going to develop arthritis or not," she explained. "Which would allow us to be more aggressive in treatment of that joint."

Spring brings about migration season for birds, but home and workplace windows can often prevent them from getting to their final destination.

Wayne State University has been awarded a grant by The Detroit Zoological Society to conduct research on bird mortality from window strikes.

Ava Landraf, conservation and research coordinator with Detroit Bird Alliance, said more than half of the bird window strikes happen at low-rise and residential buildings, and not on skyscrapers as most would imagine.

"Most people don't know that bird-window collisions are the second highest cause of direct human-caused mortality of birds. And this is surpassed only by outdoor and feral cats," Landraf said.

The Smithsonian Institution finds many bird window strikes happen because of less darkness at night and an increase in artificial light caused by streetlights and lighted office buildings.

The research shows 33% of the world's population cannot see the Milky Way galaxy due to light pollution, and for birds that navigate using the stars, this hazy sky is having deadly results.

Landraf said Wayne State University faculty and students have had concerns about bird strikes over the years, but the opportunity to do something about it never materialized until they got this grant. She added it's scary to find a small number of dead birds around the campus, knowing there are many window strikes.

"A lot of the birds will hit a window, have that head trauma and then, fly off and then die later," Landraf said. "Even if they hit the window and they die right there, they're either picked up and eaten by a scavenger or the building caretakers just sweep the birds right up."

Based on the Detroit Bird Alliance's findings from tracking bird strikes, CollidEscape, an adhesive film that reduces reflections outside, was applied on the first- and second-floor windows of the university's Law School building as part of the research. She suggested people contact the Bird Alliance for other potential solutions, and also suggested checking the website birdmapper.org to see which areas experience more bird-window strikes around the world.


get more stories like this via email