Nilsson 1 Sera Nilsson Professor Baird English 1010-093 April 22, 2014 Positions Paper What is considered animal

cruelty? This is a question that many people ask because it has become a huge controversy between general society, scientific community, pet owners, farms, animal activists, etc. This controversy begins with the personal opinion of different people all over the world, and ends with what by law is considered animal cruelty. This issue has become more popular in the past few years due to the many people that have been charged or accused of animal cruelty. Peoples opinions have changed to being more against the idea of animal cruelty over the years, and so how have laws concerning animal rights. I have chosen to further research this controversy about animal cruelty because I will be majoring in veterinary medicine and this issue will come up a lot throughout my work, also I am sure that my personal opinion will be questioned by the people fighting over this issue. I also chose this topic because I have two family dogs that have been abused by their previous owners, seeing how my dogs had to adapt to their new life styles and overcome their fear of being beaten again was hard to experience. However writing this essay I am going to further research cases of animal cruelty from an owner beating a pet to factory farming, and everything in between. I will also find out why people feel the way they do towards animal cruelty. Its law versus peoples viewpoints. So what is considered animal cruelty? Not very many of us really know what by law is considered animal cruelty in the article Animal Welfare Is Different than Animal Rights it gives us an insight into what the law has to

Nilsson 2 say about animal cruelty. In this article it states that because of the strong protective viewpoints of animal activists and others laws are being enforced, to provide protection to animals so they are not treated cruelly. In the United States, laws have been enacted to ensure that animals in research laboratories and professional kennels are treated humanely. Animal welfare endorses the responsible use of animals to satisfy certain human needsfrom companionship and sport, to uses that involve the taking of life, such as for food, clothing, and medical research. Although many cultures have vastly differing views and traditions of animal use, most western societies have adopted basic rules governing human behavior toward animals. By law in the United States you are to give animals their basic needs such as food, shelter, and health, and that they experience no unnecessary suffering in providing for human needs. Staff member for research and testing of animals, kennel employees, etc. are required to follow these laws or they will have their privileges to these animals taken away, and be charged with animal cruelty. Throughout this article it explains the proper way to house an animal, to give it protection and treat it humanely, rather than using these animals for your own personal needs to cause suffering in any way. This article provides us with an insight into what by law is considered animal cruelty versus the complaints of others towards animal research laboratories, professional kennels, etc. Some argue that even if you are giving an animal food, shelter, etc. if you use that animal in any way for your own personal need such as sport, medical research, clothing etc. It is considered animal cruelty. However Towanda Barracks Commander Sgt. Kerby Young would argue against that viewpoint. Kerby Young goes by the law. He was interviewed by Tim Zyla for his article Local agencies explain animal cruelty laws and enforcement. In this article Tim Zyla begins by stating peoples concerns in Bradford County towards animals being left outside in freezing cold

Nilsson 3 temperatures. He specifically spoke about the main concern of local resident Robin Lutz who reported seeing dogs huddled together along State Route 220 during the cold weather that swept across the nation in early January. She had reported the incident to Bradford County Humane Society and the state police but nothing was done. Robin Lutz reported that the "State police told me that if no humans were endangered, they don't enforce humane laws," she said. "[But] humane laws were written to protect animals, not humans," Lutz said. When Tim Zyla interviewed Towanda Barracks Commander Sgt. Kerby Young about the situation he explained why Robin Lutz was told that. "We do and we will investigate reports of cruelty to animals," Young insisted that state police will actively investigate all legitimate reports of animal abuse, but the response may be delayed if other active cases are in progress because such reports may be called in "The issue we were having a while ago was people would call in, and it's 5 degrees outside, about a horse out in the pasture. Well horses live in pastures and there's a barn there (for shelter) so it's not cruelty to animals," Young said. He explained that if an animal has access to food and water and a place to preserve body heat and stay dry, that it is not a crime. This is a perfect example of what is not considered animal cruelty. While some people may think this is considered animal cruelty it the truth behind it is that it isnt considered animal cruelty. Kerby Young tells us exactly what would be considered animal cruelty and what we could look for. I can agree with Kerby Youngs viewpoint because as human beings we act as if we know the answers to everything. We may see an owner spank their dog, cat, or other pets and we automatically assume that animal is being abused by their owner, without even knowing all the facts. Yes we saw that animal being spanked but was the owner spanking them because they really wanted to bring pain to that animal or perhaps that animal did something bad so the owner was disciplining the animal as a training technique. We jump to conclusions and that is

Nilsson 4 something that adds onto the huge debate of animal cruelty. What we think is animal cruelty is actual normal behavior. But who is to question what normal behavior is? Everyone, actually questions what some may believe is normal behavior some of us disagree. Everyone has different viewpoints and here they begin. In the article, The Treatment of Animals in Factory Farms Is a Serious Moral Wrong, by Peter Singer he address the issue of factory farms treating their animal cruelly before they slaughter them and sell the animals meat at our local grocery stores. Factory farming is something that happens every day. Millions of animal are killed every year, and it is considered our normal behavior to peruse factory farming because it is something that is done every day. However Singer explains the situation by giving us an insight of the lives the animals live before they are killed. The overwhelming majority of these animals have spent their entire lives confined inside sheds, never going outdoors for a single hour. Their suffering isn't just for a few hours or days, but for all their lives. Sows and veal calves are confined in crates too narrow for them even to turn around, let alone walk a few steps. Egg-laying hens are unable to stretch their wings because their cages are too small and too crowded. With nothing to do all day, they become frustrated and attack each other. To prevent losses, producers sear off their beaks with a hot knife, cutting through sensitive nerves (Singer, 1). Singer also states the opinion of Matthew Scully, a former speech writer in President George W. Bush's White House and the author of Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy. In Scully's view, even though God has given us dominion over the animals, we should exercise that dominion with mercyand factory farming fails to do so (Scully, 2). Singer states that overall there is not a huge problem with the fact that factory farms kill so many animals for their meat, however it is a waste. Singer states the some people think that factory farming is necessary to

Nilsson 5 feed the growing population of our planet, but it is actually the complete opposite. Singer says factory farming has nothing going for it except that it produces food that is, at the point of sale, cheap. Overall Singer feels that if we are going to over ten billion animals a year the least we can do is let them have a calm nice life before it is taken away from them. I completely agree with Peter Singers opinion. I feel that even though we are giving these animals shelter and necessary food, etc. we are still treating these animals cruelly because we are giving them an unhealthy environment to live in. This article also addresses the issue that factory farming causes suffering to these animals and by law we are not supposed to treat animals humanely, and not use these animals for your own personal needs to cause suffering in any way. Factory farming has become a huge problem over the years due to the rising number of changed viewpoints from people who are becoming more against the idea of animal cruelty, and the rising rate of people trying to protect these animals. These numbers are growing rapidly compared to years ago. To give an insight into how the viewpoint of people are changing a survey was taken by David W. Moore who surveyed a group of people in 2003 and ask for their opinion on animal rights. Three percent of people said Animals dont need much protection from harm and exploitation since they are just animals. Twenty-five percent of people said Animals deserve the same exact rights as people to be free and harm and exploitation. Seventy-two percent of people said that Animals deserve some protection from harm and exploitation, but it is still appropriate to use them for benefit of humans. This survey was taken in 2003 and since then peoples viewpoints have changed dramatically. What is causing our viewpoints to change? One reason we believe our viewpoints are changing is because of the area we live in, whether it be a different area, state, or even country

Nilsson 6 peoples viewpoints are different everywhere we go. Sarah Boslaugh illustrates this for us in her article Animal Cruelty. In the article Animal Cruelty written by Sarah E. Boslaugh she illustrates how the opinion of how people treat animals have changed over centuries. Boslaugh states that there is wide variation in what is considered cruel versus and what is considered normal behavior. Today, the range of behaviors considered cruel by some individuals or cultures encompasses not only deliberate abuse and neglect of pets or work animals, but also the use of live animals for medical and scientific experimentation, the practice of hunting for sport or food, and even the use of animal products for food and clothing (1). Protection against animals has increased over the decades. Boslaugh gives us examples of how viewpoints have changed over the centuries For instance, in the eighteenth century, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant expressed the then-mainstream opinion that animals were important only in relation to their usefulness to human beings, rather than as sentient beings deserving respect. On the other hand, the British philosopher Jeremy Bentham, who developed the philosophical approach known as utilitarianism in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, likened human mistreatment of animals to human mistreatment of other humans in slavery, an analogy also used by the nineteenth-century British philosopher John Stuart Mill (1). Not only does Boslaugh provide histories viewpoints but she also states other countries viewpoints. While most people say they are against animal cruelty, the range of behaviors defined as cruel can differ widely from one individual to another and from one culture to another. There is also a huge difference in what is considered to be animal cruelty. Boslaugh also provides viewpoints towards animal hunting, some individuals see hunting as part of the natural order of the world, while others see it as a primitive and cruel practice that causes needless pain to animals. Another concern Boslaugh states is the opinion over the use of live

Nilsson 7 animals in scientific and industrial testing and research. Although many regulations govern the use of animals in science and medicine, with the specific concern of preventing unnecessary pain and suffering, there is wide variation between countries concerning what is considered permissible (Boslaugh, 2). And finally a concern Boslaugh also provides the viewpoint of people who do not care about the treatment towards animals but are more concerned about if people are to abuse animals why they wont abuse human as well. Frank R. Ascione and Kenneth Shapiro have the same concerns. Ascione and Shapiro address their research towards animal violence being caused by how we are treated, where we grow up, who we are raised by and how we are raised, and also the living conditions we are in. Their research gives us an insight into why people may abuse their animals rather than abusing other human beings. In the article, People and Animals, Kindness and Cruelty: Research Directions and Policy Implications, written by Frank R. Ascione and Kenneth Shapiro illustrates research on childhood mental health, intimate partner violence, etc. can result in animal cruelty. They also discuss issues including how the status of animals as human companions at times may place animals at risk. Frank R. Ascione and Kenneth Shapiro state that For our purposes, we define animal abuse as non-accidental, socially unacceptable behavior that causes pain, suffering or distress to and/or the death of an animal. Acts of omission or commission en-compassed by this definition could be applied to cases of child abuse and neglect, intimate partner violence, and maltreatment of elderly adults or adults with disabilities by substituting human victims for animal victims (2). Studies show that rates of animal abuse are higher in groups of abused children than in non-abused children, in samples of clinically distressed children than in normative samples, and in families experiencing intimate partner violence. These differences have been documented, but our understanding of the etiological factors related to these

Nilsson 8 differences needs to be a higher research priority. Along with people abusing their animals it can make their animals violent towards other animals and even other people. Boslaugh, Ascione and Shapiro are not the only people are have concerns toward violence to animals causes violence to other humans. Philosophers also state their concerns in the article "Whether a Right or Not, Animals Should Be Treated Morally." In the article, Whether a Right or Not, Animals Should Be Treated Morally, Written by Sam Vaknin he states that all animals need protection. The article states that only certain animals are gaining protection while others are suffering pain. Researchers state that A rat and a puppy are both animals but our emotional reaction to them is so different that we cannot really lump them together (1). While cuddly cats, curly dogs, and cute monkeys are being protected other animals that we consider rodents such as rats, mice, snakes, birds, etc. Are taking the beating for everyone by being involved in animal testing and research as well as being killed. Researchers state that we protect certain animals because we feel empathy to particular ones. Many people love snakes, for instance, and deeply empathize with them. Yet we use snakes in research and testing more then we use cats or dogs. Yet they have the same life, they feel the same pain. However the view of philosophers in much different. Philosophers feel that they regarded animals as the organic equivalents of machines, driven by coarse instincts, unable to experience pain (1). However philosophers feel that it may be wrong to torture animals only because it desensitizes us to human suffering and makes us more prone to using violence on humans. Animals cannot feel pain but human can. Researchers and others argue with philosophers statements and say that animals can feel pain, because animals are so closely related to human, how can they not feel pain? Researchers and other also believe that whether or not animals feel pain we still have no right to torture these animals.

Nilsson 9 I agree with this article because I feel we should not use specific types of animals for research, testing, etc. because we protect certain animals because we feel empathy to particular ones does not mean we should limit to specific animal. Majority of people love dogs, cats, or monkeys more than rats, snakes, and birds. However all animals deserve protection not just certain ones. Another article that can relate to the previous article is the article Opinion Has Limited the Use of Stray Dogs and Cats in Scientific Research which also addresses the viewpoints of what certain types of animals are being protected. In the article it addresses the concerns of using cats, dogs, and other cute cuddly animals for research rather than using rodents. In the article Opinion Has Limited the Use of Stray Dogs and Cats in Scientific Research states the opinions of Americans that are becoming less supportive of the use of dogs, cats, and other "companion" animals for scientific research and testing. People did not have a problem with the research and testing when it first started but over the years people are becoming more against the issue and demanding it come to a stop, that these animals need protection. People are more comfortable with the use of rodents such as rats, mice, or birds for research and testing. Researchers believe that the opinion of these people is changing because of the growing rate of dogs and cats occupy a particularly important place in American society in their roles as companion, work, and hobby animals. Researchers say that it is estimated that nearly half of all U.S. households have at least one dog or cat, with a total population of 72 million dogs and nearly 82 million cats and that approximately 94% of owners attributed human personality traits to their pets and said they would risk their lives for their pet because they are considered family (2). Because people are against animal testing and want animals to suffer as little as possible this is causing a huge tension between general society and the scientific community.

Nilsson 10 In the end who really cares? Apparently a lot of people, because it is one of the largest debate today. We need to raise awareness of animal cruelty so all animals are protected from the different varieties of animal cruelty. What is considered animal cruelty by law now may change. In fact some laws are revised, taken away, or become new every day and its because of the viewpoints of people who are taking a stand to stop all types of animal cruelty. In the end like stated before its law versus peoples viewpoints.

Nilsson 11 Works Cited Ascione, Frank R., and Kenneth Shapiro. "People and Animals, Kindness and Cruelty: Research Directions and Policy Implications." Journal of Social Issues 65.3 (2009): 569-587. Academic Search Premier. Web. 3 Apr. 2014. Boslaugh, Sarah E., PhD. "Animal Cruelty." Salem Press Encyclopedia (2013): Research Starters. Web. 3 Apr. 2014. Moore, David W. "Public opinion on animal rights, May 2003." Animal Rights. Ed. Kim Masters. Evans. Detroit: Gale, 2007. Information plus Reference Series. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 3 Apr. 2014. "Opinion Has Limited the Use of Stray Dogs and Cats in Scientific Research." Animal Experimentation. Ed. Susan C. Hunnicutt. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "National Research Council Committee on Scientific and Human Issues in the Use of Random Source Dogs and Cats in Research." Use of Dogs and Cats in Research: Public Perception and Evolution of Laws and Guidelines. 2009. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 3 Apr. 2014. Singer, Peter. "The Treatment of Animals in Factory Farms Is a Serious Moral Wrong." Factory Farming. Debra A. Miller. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2010. Current Controversies. Rpt. From "Factory Farming: A Moral Issue." Minnesota Daily 22 Mar. 2006. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 3 Apr. 2014. Texas Society for Biomedical Research. "Animal Welfare Is Different Than Animal Rights." Animal Experimentation. Ed. Susan C. Hunnicutt. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Animal Welfare and Animal Rights." 2011. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 3 Apr. 2014.

Nilsson 12 Vaknin, Sam. "Whether a Right or Not, Animals Should Be Treated Morally." The Rights of Animals. Ed. Debra A. Miller. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Current Controversies. Rpt. from "The Rights of Animals." Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 3 Apr. 2014. Zyla, Tim. "Local agencies explain animal cruelty laws and enforcement." Daily Review [Towanda, PA] 21 Jan. 2014. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 3 Apr. 2014.