Another Cow’s Life
In regard to “A Cow’s Life,” a letter in your May 19 issue: it is unwise to speculate about “what happens to all cows and calves in dairy production.” Here’s how it is on the small family farm where I work:
Not all cows are always pregnant. Sometimes a cow is bred, but doesn’t become pregnant. Unless she’s really a nuisance cow, she will get quite a few more chances to be bred, either by a bull or by a really nice girl who comes around and inseminates. When a calf is born, it is allowed to run free around the barn for a week or so, until it starts getting into trouble. It won’t be allowed to go outside with its mother because the other cows might hurt it (accidentally). The mother will often put up a big fuss at missing her baby all day, and will go right to it and feed it as soon as she comes into the barn.
Male and female calves are treated equally, except most of the bull calves will be castrated (a matter of an elastic around the testicles, which I haven’t noticed to bother the calf). No calves live in crates. When they’re old enough, they go outside every day to their own pen, where they eat hay, run around, bask in the sun, etc. Nobody goes for veal, although that’s probably only because the farmer hasn’t figured out how to market it.
The cows are not forcefully inseminated on a “rape rack,” whatever that is. They are in their stanchions, as usual, when Jackie comes along to quickly and easily inseminate them. Or they are bred by a bull if there is a mature one willing at the time.
The cows are only milked once a day because the farmer can’t really afford to pay somebody to milk his cows, and he does have plenty of other chores that need to get done. Once-a-day milking means less money for the farmer but allows a little easier life for both him and the cows. I don’t remember how many years the cows stay around before they are shipped off. It depends on the cow. If she just doesn’t get bred, she has to go. It is always heartbreaking for the farmer to decide to ship a cow. I’ve known old farmers to keep “useless” old cows around the barn just because they can’t stand to send them off.
We are not the only animals who consume dairy products. When there’s too much milk around, for one reason or another, I give it to my dogs and my chickens. They love it. Cats do, too. So do pigs.
There may be no such thing as “humane” dairy production. There may be no “humane” way to raise any animal—dogs, cats, and goldfish included. We just do the best we can. I urge all your readers to learn more by visiting a nearby small farm. Show up at haying time and you might even be invited back.
Wendy Ireland
Guilford
*
Down on the (Dairy) Farm
To the writer of last week’s letter, “A Cow’s Life,” I say this: I echo your beliefs and sentiments and am thrilled to have read your letter. Many people are unaware of the cruelty involved in the dairy industry. As we know, cows can only give milk when pregnant. Thus, they are forced to become pregnant over and over again only to have their babies taken from them hours or days after birth. Whether it be a small, large, factory or family farm, the process is still the same. There are many more healthy, delicious and compassionate alternatives to dairy.
Also, in regard to Mark Roessler’s recent cover story about the People’s Pint in Greenfield (“The People in the Pint,” May 19): I find the term “humanely treated,” when applied to animals raised for meat, to be contradictory; animals raised on “humane” farms will still be slaughtered before they have lived out their natural lives, and they will also most likely be slaughtered at the same slaughter facilities where other animals go to die. The transporting process itself is extremely stressful for the animal, and it is simply inhumane to end the animal’s life early.
This misnomer results in higher priced meats and perpetuates our society’s exploitation of animals.
Nicole Graziano
Via web comment
*
PETA: No to Meat
May 21 to 28 is World Week for the Abolition of Meat, a time when people around the globe reflect on the many reasons not to eat animal flesh.
For starters, there would be no factory farms or slaughterhouses. Newborn piglets wouldn’t be taken from their mothers and packed into pens to be raised and killed for pork. Chickens would no longer have parts of their sensitive beaks seared off or be scalded to death in defeathering tanks. Cows would never be dismembered while they’re conscious, and their babies wouldn’t be crated and killed for veal.
Animal waste would stop spilling into our waterways, and greenhouse gasses would be dramatically reduced. Humans would be healthier without fatty, cholesterol-laden meaty meals, which can contribute to obesity, heart disease, diabetes, and cancer.
If you celebrate Meatless Mondays, you are helping to make the world a kinder, greener, and healthier place, but, ultimately, meat production must be abolished entirely—just as slavery, child labor, and other social ills were. Until then, please consider abolishing meat from your own diet, even if only for a week.
Heather Moore
The PETA Foundation
*
Power to Disarm
In response to the 21 April 2011 letter “Nukes related to Defense?“:
It is little known that uranium from disassembled nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union is already being fissioned in civilian reactors in the United States to make electricity. In addition, according to The New York Times of 11 April 2011, the United States is building a plant to enable plutonium from weapons to be used in civilian reactors to make electricity. Seven other countries already do this.
Contrary to what many opponents of nuclear-generated electricity claim, nuclear-generated electricity is the biggest force on Earth for nuclear weapons disarmament.
Although it is politically fashionable to oppose nuclear electricity and even though there are concerns about its safety, arguing that it facilitates nuclear weapons production is inaccurate when in fact the opposite is true.
Tim Walter
Plainfield
*
Loose Talk Aids Enemy
As a former naval officer who served a tour of duty as an intelligence officer, I am astonished at the covert information released to the media by the U.S. government. The operation against Bin Laden is an example of this problem.
The media reported details of the military operation, including the designation of the units assigned to the task. They received access to information on a dog involved in the operation, the name of the dog trainer and the location of the training base. When President Obama visited the troops to congratulate them, the names and faces of many individuals were plainly visible on TV.
The media reported we captured Bin Laden’s computers, CDs, and telephone numbers with information on numerous al Qaeda terrorists and future plans of the terrorist group. It even received some access to Bin Laden tapes.
One story reported the activities of the U.S. intelligence agencies and how they found Bin Laden. Media even reported on a CIA operation inside Pakistan.
And why didn’t we keep the death of Bin Laden a secret while we mined the information we gathered and sought out al Qaeda terrorists?
Our loose talk and openness continues to aid the enemy.
Donald A. Moskowitz
Londonderry
