United Poultry Concerns
P.O. Box 150Machipongo, VA 23405-0150(757) 678-7875FAX: (757) 678-5070
Visit Our Web Site:
www.upc-online.org
Spring-Summer 2012 Volume 22, Number 1
Poultry Press
Promoting the compassionate and respectful treatment of domestic fowl
Celebrating 22 years of dedicated activism for domestic fowl
UPC# 11656
World-amous artist Sue Coe, author o
Dead Meat
and
Cruel
, created
Te Screaming Hen
orthis edition o
Poultry Press
. Te hen screaming in her “enriched” cage echoes Norwegian artistEdvard Munch’s amous depiction o his experience, related in his diary in 1892, o hearing “an innite scream passing through nature.”
Te Scream
has been described as an expressionistevocation o an individual suering rom a sense o total distortion o one’s environment andone’s sel. Te proximity o a slaughterhouse and a madhouse to the site depicted in Munch’sscreaming gure may have inuenced his portrait o innite agony. Please turn the page . . .
United Poultry Concerns • (757) 678-7875
P.O. Box 150 • Machipongo, VA 23405-0150
2
Volume 22, Number 1
U
nited
P
oUltry
C
onCernswww
.
UPC
-
online
.
org
Agreement Raises Flags for Egg-Laying Hens:A Chicken Activist’s Perspective on the “New Deal”
By Karen Davis, PhD, President of United Poultry Concerns
“What is that gun fring or?” said Boxer.“o celebrate our victory!” cried Squealer.“What victory?” said Boxer.From
Animal Farm
by George Orwell
he January/February 2012 edition o
Animal People
included a ull-page ad headlined“It’s ime to Ban Barren Battery CagesNationwide,” urging readers to ask Congress to supportthe Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments o 2012.he ad told us that “All the groups that have beenleading the ight to ban battery cages – such as thoselisted below – actively support this legislation, becauseit’s the best opportunity to help the largest number o arm animals.”he irst part o this statement is alse, and thesecond part begs the question, since whether theproposed legislation is the best we can do or egg-laying hens is at the heart o the current debate over the shitin the animal protection movement rom trumpet callsto “ban cages or egg-laying hens” to “ban
barren
cagesor egg-laying hens.”o begin with, not all groups that have beenleading the ight to ban battery cages actively supportthe proposed legislation. here is a mixture o sharpopposition and apprehensive ambivalence among us.Secondly, some groups so credited haven’t led the ightto ban battery cages at all. Some have done little ornothing o note. As George Orwell amously observed in his writingsabout the politics o language, rewriting history isa commonplace strategy used by politicians andpowerbrokers to get people to go along with shiting agendas. People can orget the acts o even the mostrecent past.For the record, then, I must recall that UnitedPoultry Concerns put chickens on the map o U.S.animal advocacy back when we were being told by someactivist leaders, in the late eighties and early nineties,that “nobody would ever care about chickens.” We took the challenge and proved otherwise.
WHY IS HIS HEN SCREAMING?
In “Agreement Raises Red Flags,” we look atthe eort to ban battery cages or egg-laying hens in Europe and the United States. In January, a bill was introduced to the U.S.Congress called the Egg Products Inspection Act o 2012 (HB 3798). It advocates a ederal law that would allow battery cagesto continue in the orm o “enriched” cages.I enacted in 2030, the ederal law willpreempt state eorts to ban
all
cages, criticssay. For more inormation about HB 3798,see
www.RottenEggBill.org
, a websitecreated by the Humane Farming Association.
The Scream
by Edvard Munch
United Poultry Concerns • (757) 678-7875
P.O. Box 150 • Machipongo, VA 23405-0150
3
Volume 22, Number 1
U
nited
P
oUltry
C
onCernswww
.
UPC
-
online
.
org
In the irst edition o my book
Prisoned Chickens,Poisoned Eggs: An Inside Look at the Modern
Poultry Industry
(1996) I concluded: “he battle to liberatehens rom battery cages has begun and it includes all o us. Wherever we are, we are morally obligated to endthe oppression. Battery cages should be banned in theUnited States and throughout the world. Until they have been discontinued, our species stands condemnedo a criminal relationship with the living world.Consumers should boycott battery eggs and discover thevariety o egg-ree alternatives.”
“Enriched” cages in Europe.
In the early 1990s, the distinction between barrenbattery cages and so-called enriched cages was emerging in Europe, as a result o initiatives by Chickens’ Lib andCompassion in World Farming toward trying to banbattery cages. A 1992 report by the European EconomicCommission’s Scientiic Veterinary Committeeconcluded that the existing battery cage system “doesnot provide an adequate environment or meet thebehavioural needs o laying hens.”However, the Commission did not propose a banon battery cages, just modiications. It proposed thatbeginning in 1995, each new cage should provide atleast 800 square centimeters (120 square inches) o wireloor space per hen, at least 60 centimeters (24 squareinches) o cage height over 65 percent o the cage area;claw-shortening devices consisting o strips o abrasiveoot-scratching tape added to the manure delectorsbehind the eed troughs, as mandated in Sweden;perches; and ully openable cage ronts. All cages wouldhave to comply with these standards by January 1,2002.In “A Cage is Still a Cage,” Compassion in WorldFarming lamented in the Spring 1993 issue o theCIWF magazine then called
Agscene
that i thesestandards became compulsory, egg-laying hens wouldcontinue to be condemned to lie in a cage, with a littlemore wire to stand on, sit on, and be surrounded by.his ear was prophetic. On June 17, 1999, theEuropean Union announced Laying Hen Directive1999/74/EC. he Directive banned the barren battery hen cage in Europe by 2012 by adopting the Swissormulation o minimum conditions that could notbe met by conventional cages. Compassion in WorldFarming hailed the Directive “a new era o humanity orhens.”Until 2012, existing cage systems were required tobe slightly improved by reducing the number o hensper cage, so that each hen had 86 square inches o living space, up rom 70 square inches. In 2008, theEuropean Commission reairmed its directive banning conventional cage systems in the EU, eective January 1, 2012.
“Major New Threat – The ‘Enriched’ Cage!”
his was the title o an alert published in the Winter 2002 issue o Compassion in World Farming’srenamed magazine,
Farm Animal Voice
. Pleased thatthe 1999 Hens Directive meant that the cruel systemo conventional cages was on its way out, the editors worried that the EU directive “does not also ban theso-called ‘enriched’ cages.”hey were “appalled at the prospect o ‘enriched’cages being used,” at the behest o the arm lobby,pointing out that while the “enriched” cage wouldgive each hen a tad more space the size o a postcard,along with a tiny perch, “nest” box, and bit o litter orpecking and scratching, these eatures “are so minimalistthat hens are unable to perorm many o their basicbehaviours in any way that is meaningul or them.” Activists were urged to continue to seek a ban on allcages, including “enriched” cages.In the Summer 2006 issue o CIWF’s
Farm Animal Voice
, Clare Druce, ounder o Chickens’ Lib (laterrenamed Farm Animal Welare Network), noted that
As compared with the conventional cage, the "enriched" cageoffers no meaningful benefits to hens, said CIWF.
CIWF photo, 2002
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Poultry Press [Spring-Summer 2012]
The Spring-Summer 2012 edition of Poultry Press, newsletter of United Poultry Concerns.
Find out more about United Poultry Concerns at
http://www.upc-online.org
Find out more about United Poultry Concerns at
http://www.upc-online.org
1.2K
Reads
0
Readcasts
216
Embed Views
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
