PETA's Position on Sustainable Meat

Written by Ingrid E. Newkirk

09-28-2012

PETA has pushed hard over the years to reduce the sum total of suffering in the meat, dairy, and egg businesses, because to reduce suffering makes a whale of a difference if you are a pig or chicken on a factory farm, and we've stopped protests outside, say, Burger King or McDonald’s, when they've agreed to reforms that made animals suffer less. But we've never asked people to eat meat from Burger King or McDonald's. We also hold that if someone is going to eat a chicken, for instance, then yes, it would be better for them to pay extra for one who had a marginally less hideous life than one who suffered more so that the "farmer" could save money.

However, there's a world of difference between those positions and recommending that people eat meat from local, organic, "humane" farms. We don't think there are any such places, although we are prepared to stand corrected if anyone knows of a non-factory farm where the animals do not have their tails docked and their ears notched; are not castrated without anesthesia, debeaked, declawed, crowded, and kept solely indoors; are not sent to a feedlot; are allowed to have relationships with others; never have their young taken away from them; and are instantly dispatched without the trauma of capture or transportation and without seeing it coming.

We don't want "sustainable" animal agriculture. We want it abolished...

Source: PETA's Position on Sustainable Meat
Author: PETA

Link: A New Breed of Hunter Shoots, Eats and Tells
Link: Organic food industry to face more oversight
Link: Scotland: Uncompromising pictures of the life of a professional deer stalker as he retires after 45 years
Link: US cowherd to shrink further in 2013


Other EVANA-articles about this topic:
Peta claims 'higher welfare' meat is still not ethical (en)