The problem is that the world is consuming more cereals than it produces — partly because of more mouths to feed, partly because of the ever-increasing demands of livestock as countries like China clamber up the protein chain from rice to hamburgers. It takes 7 pounds of cereal to produce one pound of beef. About 750 million tons, over a third of the world’s cereal crop, goes to feed livestock. Humans eat only 1.006 million tons, less than half the total crop.
“If the 300 million head of livestock that came to the South St. Paul Stockyards since its opening in 1887 were placed head-to-tail, they would form a line 248,560 miles long that would extend around the earth at the equator more than 10 times.”
From a brochure commemorating the closure of South St. Paul stockyards in Minneapolis St. Paul. See Silence Replaces Bids and Moos at Stockyards in Suburbs
By now you will have gathered that the Grumpy Vegan relies upon a number of news sources and one of them is The Guardian, which sadly is unsympathetic to animal issues.
Once again, it’s indulged itself in animal-bashing with a non-story about charitable giving to the Donkey Sanctuary versus women’s shelters. Shock! Horror! More people chose to give to the Donkey Sanctuary than they do to three women’s groups, Refuge, the Women’s Aid Federation and Eaves Housing for Women, combined which received less annual income than the Donkey Sanctuary. At the end of the article, however, there’s a pie chart which shows that 95 percent of giving in Britain goes to human-related groups and only 5 percent to animal-related organizations. Go figure. It must also be pointed out that many human related organizations, including women’s aid groups, also receive funds from national and local government who give nothing to animal causes. Further, many trusts and foundations prohibit animal groups from applying. In other words, if anyone has a shortage of funds its animal groups and not human groups!
But what’s worse is what the Institute of Fundraising has to say about the matter. Now, Megan Pacey, IF’s Director of Policy and Campaigns, may have been misquoted — it is The Guardian after all — but look at what she says
“There’s something about our human nature that doesn’t want animals to suffer as opposed to fellow human beings. Animals are in a different stratosphere – they can’t talk so someone has to represent their interest to society, and yet they really add to society,” Megan Pacey says.“But part of the question for donors is, okay, I like donkeys, so let’s give to the donkeys, but what other parts of the world should we look at donating to? The question then is, could you look at broadening your giving?”
Megan needs to learn that it’s the job of the Institute of Fundraising to foster fundraising for all and not advise folks who they should give their money to.
Japan’s whaling fleet has failed to catch its quota, after being disrupted by clashes with anti-hunting activists.
The fisheries agency said the fleet caught 60% of the minke whales they had planned – 551 from a target of 850.
Japan fleet misses whaling target
So what’s wrong with the PETA prize? You need to sell your product in order to win. According to the contest guidelines (PDF), the million-dollar meat must be available in stores to qualify for the cash. Fake-chicken entrepreneurs have to demonstrate a “commercial sales minimum” at a “comparable market price”; in plain English, they need to move 2,000 pounds of the stuff at supermarkets and chain restaurants spread out across 10 states during a period of three months. And the Franken-meat can’t cost more than regular chicken.
That means PETA won’t be content with any intermediate (and not immediately profitable) breakthrough, like the development of lab-grown chicken that tastes as good as the natural stuff. Instead, the organization will hold the purse until a “commercially viable” product hits the market. In other words, you can’t win the $1 million unless you’re already in position to make a profit. At that point, a science prize doesn’t provide much incentive for innovation. It’s more like a small bonus.
To make matters worse, PETA’s commercial requirements saddle researchers with demands that have nothing to do with science. Any company that wants to sell artificial chicken for public consumption will probably face a lengthy government-review process. Consider that it took five years for the Food and Drug Administration to approve the sale of cloned meat. Let’s say you invented a perfect chicken substitute tomorrow—something so delicious and inexpensive that it could go into production right away. Even then, you still might not make the PETA deadline for supermarket sales.
The PETA prize may turn out to be a minor boon for lab-meat research, insofar as it generates publicity for the project. (When everyone starts talking about artificial chicken, private investors will take notice.) But it’s hard to imagine that the $1 million will itself provide much incentive. As a science prize, it just feels a little fake.
Learn more about Kim Stallwood's forthcoming book Animal Dharma, which explores what it means to care deeply about animals and discovers how we can live peacefully with ourselves and others by proposing four key values: truth, compassion, nonviolence and interbeing.
Recent Comments