Mercy For Animals (MFA) went undercover at Iowa Select Farms (the nation’s 4th largest producer) from April-June 2011 and found this…
Iowa Select issued a statement the day after the video’s release. Citing their “long-standing commitment to animal welfare,” they claim to have begun an investigation “into the portions of the video that show unacceptable animal handling.” They have also hired an “animal behavior and well-being researcher” from Iowa State “to provide additional consultation to deal with specific actions depicted in the video that do not reflect Iowa Select’s commitment to animal welfare.” That said, their senior staff veterinarian, Howard Hill, is “deeply troubled” by the inaction of the investigator, saying that even though Iowa Select bears “ultimate responsibility…video-taping abuse instead of reporting it is indefensible.”
The first part of the statement is standard damage control: First, assure that this is rare and unacceptable. Second, promise swift disciplinary action (including a conspicuous firing or two). And third, pledge ongoing husbandry improvements. This section should just be copied and circulated in CAFO circles, for it is that familiar. Hill’s censure, though, practically leaves one speechless. Imagine the arrogance in rebuking the MFA activist for not meeting his “ethical obligation” to stop (and report) the abuse when said abuse happened on the fine doctor’s watch. Howard Hill and Iowa Select are in no position to lecture on ethics. These undercover investigators display uncommon courage and restraint in striving for a greater good. They are the true animal advocates, not Veterinarian Hill.
This is well-traveled territory…
There exists an implied compact between agribusiness and government. The former, hellbent on keeping processing particulars from the public, has proposed Ag-Gag bills (to criminalize these investigations) in a handful of states (NY and Iowa included). The latter, through a gaping void in animal protection policy (livestock is not covered under the AWA; no regular welfare inspections, federal or state, of American farms) and woeful enforcement of anticruelty laws (arrests – usually resulting from these videos – rare, convictions rarer, misdemeanor-level fines and probations common), is protecting large financial interests (the meat industry expended $6.2 million on federal lobbying in 2008). And by consistently deferring to common industry practice, the judicial system ensures a virtual firewall against successful prosecution.
Phil Niles was the only person associated with NY’s Willet Dairy to be arrested, charged, and punished (small fine, no animal contact for one year) for this. And Billy Joe Gregg Jr. was held solely responsible for the recorded cruelty at Conklin Dairy in Ohio. He received a mere eight months and no animal contact for three years. Regarding Willet, the Cayuga County DA said: (The Post-Standard, 3/25/11) “In short, this team of industry experts found the condition of the animals to be well above industry standards for health and well-being. The experts indicated findings of a high level of care and animal husbandry being practiced by Willet Dairy.” If Willet is providing a “high level of care,” doesn’t this suggest systemic abuse, closely guarded and staunchly defended, on all factory farms? And is it any wonder why cynicism pervades the animal rights community?