David Moss

Recent Activity

• 

  David signed the petition | almost 3 years ago

  URGENT: Sign Petition to Stop Live Pig Lab Scheduled for April 27
• 

  David signed the petition | almost 3 years ago

  You Can End the “Pet” Primate Trade
• 

  David signed the petition | almost 3 years ago

  Tell your representative to co-sponsor a national Healthy Oceans Act
• 

  David commented on the article | almost 3 years ago

  How to Start a Trap-Neuter-Return Project for Feral Cats

  Very helpful post, Mary.  I too have begun TNR-ing ferals this spring.  One point I would add about Alley Cat Allies is that in addition to all their indispensable literature they have a database of people to contact in every geographical area.  The person in my area ended up having eight extra traps, not to mention a ton of useful experience ... Something I wasn't aware of when I brought in the first cat was that the clinic will always anesthetize the cat while he/she is inside the cage, which means they have no way of determining if the cat is pregnant or not.  So when I picked up this cat (i had no idea she was pregnant, or even that she was a she), I learned that the clinic had aborted her six-week old kittens.  I was incensed that they'd done this without consulting me, but it was explained that once anesthesia is given, the kittens are compromised.  This might be true, but I still suspect that the overwhelming problem of cat overpopulation hardens people at these places and they become far too willing to euthanize.  (The clinic was part of a no-kill shelter, so I was even more surprised that they aborted six week old kitten.)  

• 

  David commented on the article | about 3 years ago

  FOX News and Animal Advocates on Meat-Eating Environmentalists

  As the connection btw animal agriculture and climate change becomes more widely known, no doubt conservative commentators will gleefully press these questions on self-styled environmentalists.  And the environmentalists will have to come up with good answers.  When vegans/AR people pose the questions, the self-styled environmentalists can shrug off the questions as coming from the fringe.  They’ll feel a little more compelled to justify themselves to conservative questioners since they’re calling out the conservatives for unwillingness to reduce unnecessary selfish consumption, and it’s hard to make that accusation when you’re unwilling to reduce you own unnecessary selfish consumption.  Not sure how the environmentalists are going to avoid looking like rank hypocrites on this one (especially since that’s what they are).  It’s a lot easier for them to flip off Hummers than to give up their meat and the conservatives know it.
  
  

• 

  David commented on the article | about 3 years ago

  Is PETA More Sexist Than Mainstream Advertisers?

  PETA ads are sexist and demeaning and yet that’s the society they find themselves in.  They seem to have made the determination that if you want to reach the young (hopefully persuadable), male demographic, you need to speak their language.  Do they really want to become known as the Go Daddy.com of the animal rights world?  Apparently so, if it gets their message out. (Go Daddy.com has far and away the highest success rate among Super Bowl advertisers even though their ads are filled with nothing but demeaning sexist imagery totally unrelated to their product.) Luxury carmakers appeal to vanity, which most people agree is a nasty trait.  But their target audience is nothing if not vain.  Same thing with PETA.  Their target, as they see it, is susceptible to sexist imagery.  If they delivered their message using reason or compassion, people would ignore it. I think Peta would say their animal advocacy trumps any squeamishness they might feel about running sexist ads/stunts, that in order to get anyone to pay attention to your message, you first have to “break through the clutter” and grab their attention.  Does it work?  There’s no denying their influence, even among people who often ridicule them.  I recently listened to the Jim Rome (sports show) and callers were saying once peta came out in strong opposition to Michael Vick’s returning to football, no team would risk the “sideshow” of bringing him back.  In an ideal world, people would be responsive to messages based on compassion and reason.  But in the real world, at least the real world as PETA sees it, they aren’t.

• 

  David commented on the article | about 3 years ago

  Meat That Can Save The Climate

  1) Does grain-fed meat create more emissions than grass-fed meat?  The evidence is mixed.  Some studies find the opposite is true, that cattle raised on pasture actually produce more methane than feedlot animals, on a per-cow basis.  2) Is that grass-fed cattle really grass-fed and for how long?  In many cases, “grass-fed” and “free range” have become nothing more than marketing catchphrases that appeal to people who purport to worry about animal welfare and are willing to pay a little extra to have their guilt assuaged.  In Western rangelands, grass-fed cattle typically spend only six months or so grazing and the remainder of their lives in feedlots, where, as everyone agrees, the energy-intensive process of producing and transporting feed ravages the environment.  3) If cattle stopped grazing, the grasslands wouldn’t suffer a surprise invasion of elephants or antelope.  Some areas could grow grasses that could be harvested as biomass fuels.  Much of it could be restored to wildlife habitat. 4) If our objective is to reduce our carbon footprints, hoofprints, whatever we want to call it, then eliminating our consumption of meat will do more than shifting our consumption to grass-fed meat.  Naturally, most people won’t be willing to stop eating meat, but it’s surprising that it never makes it into any of those top 50 ways to save the planet lists.

• 

  David commented on the article | about 3 years ago

  Happy Cage-Free Eggs: Just What I Was Afraid Of

  The harm of Prop2 from the AR point of view is it effectively dissuaded two separate groups of people who might otherwise have considered veganism… 1)  People who are fully aware of the suffering of farm animals but are unable/unwilling to stop consuming animals products.  By supporting prop 2, they feel they are contributing to the slow but sure reduction of suffering.  Psychologically, this tangible thing they’ve done (support prop 2) allows them to force aside the possibility of more drastic change (going vegan).  Their mantra becomes, We have to take baby steps.  We can’t expect to solve the problem overnight, etc. etc. 2) People like the one you quote who had no idea how laying hens are treated and are genuinely shocked by the revelation.  As you say, Stephanie, these people are unduly influenced by organizations they consider to be advocates for animals.  So the Humane Society endorsement of prop 2 ends up legitimizing the status quo.  This person was first exposed to the issue by the Oprah show, with a panel that included an egg farmer and a representative from the egg producers lobby.  The animal rights position was handled by Wayne Pacelle of the Humane Society, who described the suffering in stark enough terms but who offered a slight increase in cage space as the solution to that suffering.  One point of view was conspicuously absent from the show:  if you find the suffering of these animals appalling, you can eliminate your part in it altogether by the simple act of going vegan.  But of course this viewpoint could never be presented as a viable alternative.  Oprah’s show is paid for by sponsors, so the conversation, such as it is, will always be confined to a narrow range of opinions acceptable to these sponsors.  Veganism’s complete repudiation of agribusiness would be unacceptable to networks (who receive advertising dollars from agribusiness) and to other network sponsors who also rely on their customers’ toleration of factory farms.  Even though the show exposed their abuse of animals, it was no doubt eagerly supported by agribusiness because viewers were left with the perception that all positions had been aired and none of those positions potentially reduced the demand for meat or dairy products.