May 27, 2006
Dr. Henry E. Childers, President
American Veterinary Medical Association
1931 N. Meacham Road, Suite 100
Schaumburg, IL 60173
Re: Position Statement on Animal Welfare as Important Priority
Dear Dr. Childers:
Via the organization known as Farm Sanctuary, a resolution has been
submitted for consideration at the annual American Veterinary Medical
Association (AVMA) convention, to be held in July of this year.
The resolution states four propositions: (1) Veterinarians
have an ethical obligation to promote animal welfare. (2)
In some instances, the economic priorities of animal industries may
be in conflict with the welfare of animals. (3) The AVMA
is considered a leader on matters relating to animal welfare. (4)
We will place a higher priority on animal welfare when required to
choose between animal welfare and economic considerations.
It is difficult at first for the layman to understand why there
should be any need for such a resolution to begin with, or difficulty
in adopting it should the need be found to exist. Upon examination
of the AVMA's stated positions with regard to animal care as commonly
provided by U.S. agribusinesses, however, the problematic nature of
the resolution quickly becomes clear. The AVMA's general
working definition of what constitutes appropriate "welfare"
standards for farmed animals consists of little more than endorsing
standards set by the agricultural industry. These standards are,
of course, adopted not to protect the animals' interests but to ensure
productivity and enlarge profit. Examples of the
AVMA's willingness to bow to industry standards of animal care
are not hard to find. It has refused, for instance, to
take a position opposing the production of fois gras via forced
feeding, the reasoning being that if one farming practice is opposed
on the basis of perceived cruelty, other practices perceived to be as
or more cruel must also be opposed. The result of such reasoning
is that virtually all commonly held industry standards with regard to
animal welfare end up receiving the AVMA's implicit endorsement.
Beak trimming of chickens on battery farms, castration and dehorning
of cattle, genetic modification of animals, the docking of lambs' and pigs'
tails, gestation crates for pigs, and induced molting procedures for
egg-laying hens are but some of practices which remain unopposed by
your organization.
Many of these practices are necessitated because industry standards
with regard to factory farming do nothing to ensure the well-being of
the animals involved, and do little with regard their welfare beyond
that which is required to ensure that they remain an economically
viable product. While I understand and respect that the AVMA is
dedicated to promoting the continued usage of animals by humans for
the sake of human gratification, it is disheartening to find your
organization so clearly putting the ethical consideration due these
animals a distant second to the needs of those industries which exploit
them. It is my hope that this situation will be rectified during
the coming convention. While enjoying the balmy climate and
generous peoples of Honolulu, Hawaii, home of this year's convention,
please continue to bear in mind the millions of animals whose entire
lives are spent packed into pens, stalls, and cages so small they have
barely room enough to move, who are never given the opportunity to enjoy
the feel of sunshine on their backs and earth beneath their feet, and give
the matter of their well-being the consideration it deserves. If
this request sounds too dependent on anthropomorphism for your taste,
call it by another name: call it a request made in the name of empathy.
In the name of compassion. Put yourself in place of those animals over
whose lives you have power; allow yourself to imagine an experience
that you already know to be true. Then put into practice what
you know to be right.
Yours sincerely & etc. . . .
|