Climate Change: The Cow in the Room

We are in the midst of a public awakening, of a sort, about climate change, with hundreds of thousands of protestors taking to the streets this past Sunday, and TV hosts interviewing celebrity guests as the United Nations prepared to hold its annual summit on the topic. But few people have been talking about the elephant in the room – or, more appropriately, the cow.

People typically point to the global transportation industry as the largest culprit in climate change. But factory farming is an even larger contributor. Today, about 70 billion animals worldwide, including cows, chickens and pigs, are crammed into Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOS) each year.

How does animal agriculture contribute to climate change? According to a 2006 report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N. (FAO), animal flatulence and manure are responsible for 18 percent of all human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, including 37 percent of methane emissions and 65 percent of nitrous oxide emissions. The methane releases from billions of imprisoned animals on factory farms are 70 times more damaging per ton to the earth’s atmosphere than CO2. The poor diet and massive amounts of antibiotics given to these animals (to increase input-output “efficiency”) exacerbates their digestive difficulties and, hence, their waste and pollution.

But, on Sunday, hundreds of climate change marchers around the world were lining up at food trucks for meat – the same meat that’s producing the effect motivating them to be there in the first place.

Climate change experts and activists alike, such as Al Gore and Bill McKibben, are conspicuous in their neglect of the meat issue. And TV hosts and commentators barely ever make the connection. I have been to climate change dinner meetings where factory farmed animals are on the menu.

We care about climate change as long as it doesn’t get too inconvenient and end our barbecues and steak house jaunts.

If we live in a world where everyone is afraid to talk about the “cow in the room” what chance is there for a real awakening to the consequences of human actions? Perhaps one in 70 billion?

Next Steps for the Orca Welfare and Safety Act

On April 8th, at the California legislature, the Orca Welfare and Safety Act went before the Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee. Passage of the bill would require the phasing out of captive breeding of orcas and their continued use for entertainment purposes.

After hearing testimony from scientists and advocates for the orcas, including from Dr. Naomi Rose of the Animal Welfare Institute and Dr. Deborah Giles of University of California, Davis, and then from SeaWorld officials and lobbyists, the committee requested an interim study and undertook to revisit the bill in 2015.

The Kimmela Center worked with Dr. Rose to craft a Scientist Statement that was presented in support of the bill and signed by 35 prominent members of the marine mammal scientific community.

Kimmela will continue to work over the next year to strengthen scientific support for the bill, including bringing to bear scientific peer-reviewed papers and more marine mammal experts.

By the time the bill goes before the committee again next year, and having heard the arguments of the SeaWorld lobby, we are confident that we can make a very strong case, and one that will gather the support of large numbers of California voters.

How I Became an Elephant

When she was 14 years old, Juliette West set out from California on a quest that would take her through Thailand to learn everything she could about the elephants and their plight. A small camera crew joined her, and the result is a movie that’s touching hearts and fueling action in the United States and around the world.

Early on in her journey, Juliette meets Asia’s famous “Elephant Lady,” Lek Chailert, who has risked her life and freedom for more than 30 years to protect elephants from illegal trade and abuse. Together, these two determined women from opposite ends of the earth work to save elephants, stopping at nothing to expose the dark secrets within entertainment and logging industries that are steeped in greed and corruption. Together, these two determined women from opposite ends of the earth have had some impressive successes protecting elephants.

The two women have had some impressive successes. But elephants, as we know, are still being captured to meet the demands of increasing tourism and entertainment in countries such as Thailand, where they are severely mistreated and suffer malnutrition. Thousands more are pressed into hard labor in Myanmar to support the logging industry. As a result, wild populations are plummeting – from 100,000 at the start of the 20th century to a mere 5,500 today.

For Juliette, now 18 years old and still at high school, the elephants have become her life’s work. She gives talks around the country, providing youth with the tools they can use to develop their own leadership abilities as effective animal advocates. On her own website, JulietteSpeaks, young people can find answers to their biggest question: “How Can I Help?

Back home in Los Angeles, she has been part of the successful campaign to ban bullhooks from the city, and part of the ongoing campaign to provide better living conditions for Billy the Elephant in the LA Zoo.

How I Became an Elephant has become the cornerstone of an inspiring program to save the world’s elephants before time runs out on them. Here at the Kimmela Center, we’re delighted to be able to provide the movie to you at less than half the price of commercial sources. Just click on any of the links on the video above. You can rent the movie (subtitled in numerous languages) for $5.99 or for $10.99 for the Director’s Cut Deluxe edition with deleted scenes, etc. Or buy the physical DVD professionally packaged for $19.99 (also subtitled in numerous languages).

The Giraffe on Your Plate

Millions of people are rightly outraged over the Copenhagen Zoo’s recent killing of Marius, a young giraffe. It is wrong to end the life of any sentient being. But what was done to Marius is just the tip of the iceberg. Thousands of “surplus” animals in zoos are killed every year – either at the zoo or, worse, sent to “canned hunt” facilities where they are hunted down, shot, and killed as trophies.

But, on the heels of the Marius tragedy, I cannot help but bring to light another important point. Giraffes have a close bovine cousin whom we kill and eat by the millions every year – and without a second thought. Those animals are cows.

There are striking parallels between giraffes and cows. Here are just a few of their shared characteristics:

  • They are both even-toed ungulates (two-toed hooved animals).
  • They both have a natural lifespan of about 25 years.
  • Their brains are about the same size relative to their body (with the cow having a slightly larger than average relative brain size).
  • Their brains contain the same emotional processing system found in all mammal brains, including humans.
  • Mother giraffes and cows nurse and nurture their children for months.
  • Both giraffe and cow mothers call their children by bellowing to them.
  • Adult giraffes and cows babysit youngsters who are not their own.
  • Giraffe and cow youngsters “moo” to find their mothers and friends.

There are other similarities, too, between what happened to Marius at a zoo and what happens to all his cousins, the cows in factory farms.

Marius was killed in exactly the same manner (shot in the head with a stun gun) as 39 million cows are killed every year.

There are striking parallels between giraffes and cows.His mother lost her child when he was 18 months old. But it’s even worse for the 9.3 million dairy cows in factory farms who have their babies torn from them just hours after birth.

Marius’s mother is not afforded the decency of being allowed to make choices about her life. She is simply a commodity whose behavior and even reproduction is controlled by humans. And millions of cows in factory farms are also denied the same fundamental consideration: intensively confined, repeatedly impregnated, and bred for high milk production and meat as nothing more than unfeeling objects.

The frequent argument that factory farming is justified because cows, unlike giraffes, are “bred for” our plates is not supportable because domesticated cows still exhibit the same behaviors and characteristics of wild ungulates – as these parallels with giraffes show.

The fact that so many people are angry at the killing of Marius while they’re still quite comfortable eating his close relatives from a factory farm should make us think about the inconsistencies in how we treat animals.

Marius’s death is about much more than the killing of one young giraffe, however sad and shocking that is. It is a reminder of our unjustified prejudice toward another animal who is extremely similar in every way that matters – the “giraffe on your plate.”

The Scala Naturae: Alive and Well in Modern Times

Three thousand years ago, in Ancient Egypt, people generally believed that the sun god Ra rose from the darkness each day and rode across the sky. Observations – by sailors, for example, who could watch mountains slowly sinking below the horizon as they sailed from shore – gradually disproved that notion.

However, for another 2,000 years it was still mostly agreed that the Earth was at the center of the universe and that all heavenly bodies revolved around it. Indeed, it could be quite dangerous to suggest otherwise. But scientific data kept showing that this view was indisputably incorrect. And despite persecution from the Catholic Church, Galileo’s model of the universe eventually won out.

Over time, the dynamic self-correcting nature of science has led us to an increasingly better understanding of the world. We no longer accept Earth-centered astronomy, flat-earth models, or the idea that disease is based on imbalances in bodily “humors”.

But there is still one domain that we cling to despite all the evidence to the contrary – a view of nature known as the Scala Naturae or Great Chain of Being. The Scala Naturae is a philosophical view of nature attributed to Aristotle in Ancient Greece. According to this view, nature is arranged on a kind of ladder or hierarchy of increasing “advancement” and value, moving up from inorganic objects like stones, at the very bottom, to plants, through the “lower” animals such as sponges, to vertebrates such as fish, then to “higher” animals such as mammals, then to monkeys and apes, and finally humans.

While we’ve rejected every other inaccurate model of the world, like the flat Earth, we continue to embrace the Scala Naturae.As Christianity grew, the church added spiritual beings to the ladder, placing angels above humans, and then, at the very top, God, who was seen as perfect and all other natural forms as progressively less perfect as one moved back down the ladder.

As this view of nature spread, humans were increasingly seen as being separate from animals by virtue of being “part-animal” and “part spiritual.”

Darwin’s discoveries showed conclusively that there is no ladder, but that all life is instead connected through branching evolutionary relationships – known as phylogeny. Even though he demonstrated that there is no “up” and “down”, Darwin’s insights were relabeled as the “phylogenetic scale”, which continued to preserve a hierarchical system in which “higher” organisms were more “evolutionarily advanced” than “lower” ones.

To this day the phylogenetic scale leads many people to claim the impossible: that some modern species are ancestral to other modern species. For instance, modern fish are viewed as ancestral and “more primitive” to mammals, and modern great apes are viewed as ancestral to humans, who are considered the most “advanced”. And while we’ve rejected every other inaccurate model of the world, like the flat Earth, we continue to embrace the Scala Naturae.

The effects of this belief system continue to be disastrous for us, the other animals, and the planet. That’s because there are consequences to upholding incorrect and archaic views of the world – like when doctors recommended plunging sick people into ice cold water to get rid of the yellow bile. The seductive quality of the Scala Naturae is that it places us at the top of a hierarchy and tells us that we are not only better than all the other animals but that we are qualitatively different and that we enjoy some of the perks of being spiritual, like being closer to God and the angels.

As long as we view ourselves as “higher than” or “qualitatively different from” the other animals, we will continue to make assumptions about them that promote abuse and exploitation. The Scala Naturae gives us license to exploit other animals because they are seen as being further down the ladder. It also helps us to view ourselves as not being fully part of nature, and therefore to disconnect from empathizing with other animals. It seems to give us a “right” to treat them as commodities for our own use. Even seemingly well-intentioned ideas about stewardship and dominion are ultimately just manifestations of the same hierarchical view that leads to abuse and exploitation.

It’s time to add the Scala Naturae to the list of archaic and disputed ideas like the Flat Earth, and to adopt the science-based view of nature as an interconnected tree of life forms, branching in many directions, and where we humans live.

SeaWorld’s Act for Dolphins

SeaWorld wants to put as much distance as possible between itself and the infamous dolphin massacre at Taiji.

In a position statement, the company says it’s “opposed to these drive hunts in Japan and elsewhere,” and, in another statement, that it’s committed to “see it stop.”

I believe them. The Taiji drive hunts, with 41 dolphins dead this last time, along with 52 being shipped to marine circuses from Dubai to China, and another 140 injured, orphaned and traumatized as they’re driven back out to sea, are a public relations nightmare for the whole captivity industry.

To support the notion that they’re against these massacres, SeaWorld is identifying itself with an out-of-date campaign called Act for Dolphins, which was put together eight years ago by marine mammal scientist Diana Reiss, Dr. Paul Boyle (then CEO of The Ocean Project) and myself. And while SeaWorld played no role in Act for Dolphins, by linking to its website they are implying that they were involved.

That, in itself, is fine by me. But SeaWorld has now caught itself in a snag. On the one hand, it tries to co-opt the Scientists Statement Against the Japanese Dolphin Drive Hunts that Diana Reiss and I co-wrote. Yet at the same time it’s claiming that “there is not a shred of scientific support” for my statements in the film Blackfish, and attacking me and my scientific colleagues who are featured in the movie with ad hominem comments depicting us as “advocates masquerading as scientists.”

You can’t have it both ways, SeaWorld. If you want to “Act for Dolphins”, you need to get your own act together first.