SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
animals
In an Era of Hardening Borders, Wildlife Corridors Bridge Peoples and Species
From Costa Rica to Colorado, wildlife corridors have been about the connections people make when they care about animal mobility.
Jun 14, 2026
Driving on the Interamerican Highway from Monteverde Biological Reserve to Rincón de la Vieja National Park, I couldn’t help but notice a series of rope bridges that crossed the six lanes of traffic. Each crossing structure featured traffic warning signs with silhouette images of monkeys or sloths as nonstop flows of diesel semitrucks and electric cars zoomed by.
Costa Rica is known for its protected areas, which cover one-third of the country and function as core zones for conservation, but the “green republic” should also be recognized for its corridors. What started as an NGO effort in the 2000s when organizations like Kids Saving The Rainforest started installing aerial bridges to improve habitat connectivity later became national policy with a 2024 presidential decree requiring electrical companies to build crossing structures so that animals like howler monkeys and kinkajous avoided electrocution from using power lines. These monkey bridges also keep tropical rainforest more intact for mobile creatures.
Beyond Central America, wildlife corridors are popular in the western United States. According to recent surveys from the Environment America Research and Policy Center and the Pew Charitable Trust, respondents approve creating more wildlife crossings at rates of 85-90%. And that support spans the political spectrum. In March 2026, the Idaho State Legislature passed Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 124, officially supporting the development of wildlife crossing infrastructure, such as highway overpasses and underpasses, to reduce animal-vehicle collisions. In December 2026, California’s Wallis Annenberg Wildlife Crossing is set to be completed across 10 lanes of Los Angeles freeway, making it the largest structure in the world.
Wildlife corridors could receive a financial boost by the bipartisan BUILD America 250 bill, considered by US House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee this week. If passed, it would increase funding for the Federal Highway Administration’s very popular Wildlife Crossings Pilot Program (WCPP) to $80 million annually ($400 million total). The 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act allocated $350 million to 35 projects across 30 states, but demand far exceeded with $500 million in requests.
Today, the benefits of conserving wildlife corridors might be just as much about the social as the biological.
If we’re living in a worldwide golden age for wildlife corridors, where did this idea come from? I trace the origins of this dominant conservation strategy in my new book, Borders of Biodiversity: How Gray Wolves, Monarch Butterflies, and Giant Sequoia Transformed Large Landscape Conservation, published by University of North Carolina Press.
In the 1970s and 1980s, new technologies provided windows into animal mobility. For wolves, radio- and satellite- telemetry allowed US biologist Diane Boyd and Canadian biologist Paul Paquet to track the interchange of dispersing juveniles along the Rockies. For example, Boyd collared wolf #8551, named Kay, west of Glacier National Park; the wolf turned up six months later dead after it was legally shot near Pouce Coupe, British Columbia. The 600-mile movement northward was interesting scientifically because it was two-thirds of the way to the Yukon Territory, but Kay’s movement also had major conservation implications. Wildlife corridors facilitated wolf dispersals; transborder dispersals could facilitate wolf recovery under the Endangered Species Act.
In the 1990s, wildlife corridors were thought of as proactive tools against habitat fragmentation. Responding to Boyd and Paquet’s work, conservationists in Alberta, British Columbia, Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming created the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative in 1993 to keep core areas—like Yellowstone National Park or Banff National Park—connected. Projects included lobbying the Canadian government to build wildlife overpasses and underpasses along the Trans-Canada Highway, which Y2Y founder Harvey Locke called the “Berlin Wall of Biodiversity” for its high rate of wolf and elk fatalities. Or investing in predator-deterrence tools like range riding and electrified fladry fencing for ranching communities so wolves and grizzlies could use rural spaces as biological passageways.
By the 2000s, however, wildlife corridors were also understood to help with climate adaptation in a warming world. A scientific meta-analysis documented that of 4,000 animals recently tracked, almost three-quarters of them shifted their ranges to cooler lands or waters. Terrestrial species, on average, were moving 12 miles (or 20 kilometers) every decade toward the poles. Animals relocate to adapt.
Today, the benefits of conserving wildlife corridors might be just as much about the social as the biological. In 2012, Ben Bobowski of Rocky Mountain National Park and Yaxine María Arias Núñez of Santa Elena Biological Reserve created a series of personnel exchanges between the two protected areas called the Naturalmente Juntos-Naturally Together Project. Their connection was based on bird banding studies that revealed 150 bird species, like yellow warblers, migrated along the Continental Divide between Colorado and Costa Rica. In 2015, Rocky and Santa Elena entered a formal sistering agreement.
From Costa Rica to Colorado, wildlife corridors have been about the connections people make when they care about animal mobility. In an era of border-hardening nationalism, corridors can help people of different nationalities facilitate solidarities among shared species.
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP Ripped for 'Grotesque' Farm Bill Full of 'Industry-Backed Poison Pills'
"Chairman Thompson appears poised to check off industry's cruel wish list," one critic warned.
Feb 13, 2026
Advocates for animal welfare, environmental protection, public health, and small family farms fiercely condemned various "industry-backed poison pills" in the long-awaited Farm Bill draft unveiled Friday by a key Republican in the US House of Representatives.
"A new Farm Bill is long overdue, and the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 is an important step forward in providing certainty to our farmers, ranchers, and rural communities," said House Committee on Agriculture Chair Glenn "GT" Thompson (R-Pa.) in a statement.
While Thompson has scheduled a markup of the 802-page proposal for February 23, critics aren't waiting to pick apart the bill, which aligns with a 2024 GOP proposal that was also sharply rebuked. The panel's ranking member, Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.), said that from what she has seen so far, the new legislation "fails to meet the moment facing farmers and working people."
"Farmers need Congress to act swiftly to end inflationary tariffs, stabilize trade relationships, expand domestic market opportunities like year-round E15, and help lower input costs," Craig stressed. "The Republican majority instead chose to ignore Democratic priorities and focus on pushing a shell of a farm bill with poison pills that complicates if not derails chances of getting anything done. I strongly urge my Republican colleagues to drop the political charade and work with House Democrats on a truly bipartisan bill to address the very real problems farm country is experiencing right now—before it's too late."
Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, similarly blasted the GOP legislation on Friday, declaring that "this Republican Farm Bill proposal is a grotesque, record-breaking giveaway to the pesticide industry that will free Big Ag to accelerate the flow of dangerous poisons into our nation's food supply and waterways."
"This bill would block people suffering from pesticide-linked cancers from suing pesticide makers, eviscerate the EPA's ability to protect rivers and streams from direct pesticide pollution, and give the pesticide industry an unprecedented veto over extinction-preventing safeguards for our nation's most endangered wildlife," he said, referring to the Environmental Protection Agency.
"If Congress passes this monstrosity, it will speed our march toward the dawn of a very real silent spring, a day without fluttering butterflies, chirping frogs, or the chorus of birds at sunrise," Hartl warned. "No one voted for Republicans to allow foreign-owned pesticide conglomerates to dominate the policies that impact the safety of the food every American eats. But this bill leaves no doubt that's exactly who is calling all the shots."
Food & Water Watch (FWW) managing director of policy and litigation Mitch Jones also sounded the alarm about industry-friendly poison pills, arguing that any draft containing the "Cancer Gag Act" that would shield pesticide companies from liability or the Ending Agricultural Trade Suppression Act—which would block state and local policies designed to protect animal welfare, farm workers, and food safety—"must be dead on arrival."
Sara Amundson, president of Humane World Action Fund—formerly called Humane Society Legislative Fund—also made a case against targeting state restrictions for animals like Proposition 12 in California, which the US Supreme Court let stand in 2023, in response to a challenge by the National Pork Producers Council and the American Farm Bureau Federation.
"Once again, the House Agriculture Committee Republican majority is bending to the will of a backwards-facing segment of the pork industry by trying to force through a measure to override the preferences of voters in more than a dozen states, upend the decisions of courts all the way up to the Supreme Court, and trample states' rights all at the same time," Amundson said Friday.
The National Family Farm Coalition highlighted that "instead of addressing the widespread concerns of family-scale farmers—ensuring fair prices for farmers, improving credit access, addressing corporate land consolidation, and creating a trade environment that benefits producers—this draft perpetuates the status quo that enriches and empowers corporate agribusiness. The result is an accelerating farm crisis that continues to hollow out rural communities across the US."
Thompson also faced outrage over other policies left out of the GOP legislation—particularly from those calling for the restoration of $187 billion in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) that congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump forced through last year with their so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act (HR 1).
"HR 1 shifts unprecedented costs to already cash-strapped states, expands time limits, and strips food benefits away from caregivers, veterans, older workers, people experiencing homelessness, and humanitarian-based noncitizens," noted Crystal FitzSimons, president of the Food Research & Action Center.
"HR 1 is an unforgiving assault on America's hungry, deliberately dismantling our nation's first line of defense against hunger," she continued. "Yet, when given the opportunity to correct this harm in the latest Farm Bill proposal, Chairman Thompson unveiled a package that will only deepen hunger instead of fixing it. Hunger is not something Congress can afford to ignore."
Jones of FWW said that "families and farmers are hungry for federal policy that supports small- and mid-sized producers and keeps food affordable. Instead, Chairman Thompson appears poised to check off industry's cruel wish list."
"America needs a fair Farm Bill," he emphasized. "It is imperative that this Farm Bill repeal all Trump SNAP cuts and restore full funding to this critical nutrition program; stop the proliferation of factory farms; and support the transition to sustainable, affordable food."
Keep ReadingShow Less
I Rescued 4 Chickens From Abuse; Now I’m the One Facing a Felony Trial
I refuse to accept that helping a few baby birds makes me a criminal, let alone a dangerous one.
Sep 09, 2025
As I write this, a GPS ankle monitor shows law enforcement exactly where I am. This invasive device has been strapped to my leg for nearly two years. It has come with me to family dinners, to doctors’ appointments, to university classes, and more. I have been forced to wear it in order to remain free pending a criminal trial, which begins next week. I face nearly half a decade in jail.
My trial is expected to last several weeks, though there is no doubt that I did what prosecutors say. My alleged crime? Taking less than $25 worth of chicken. This wouldn’t normally lead to felony charges or a government-monitored GPS tracking device. But, you see, the four chickens I took were alive.
In the city of Petaluma, about an hour north of San Francisco, nestled between a Subway and a Starbucks, lies a heavily guarded fortress. Nearly every night of the week, more than 40,000 live birds are driven through its gates. In the mornings, their deceased and dismembered bodies are wrapped in plastic, decorated with claims about sustainability, animal welfare, and a lack of antibiotics. Finally, they’re stamped with the brand names “Rocky the Free Range Chicken” and “Rosie the Organic Chicken.” By the time their bodies reenter the outside world, shipped to grocery stores like Safeway and Trader Joe’s, the birds have been thoroughly objectified, their suffering repackaged as ethical consumption.
This fortress is the Petaluma Poultry slaughterhouse, a subsidiary of Perdue, one of the nation’s largest poultry producers. In important ways, Perdue’s Petaluma Poultry represents the worst of animal agriculture. Its branding is frighteningly deceptive, the company a master of manipulative marketing. Petaluma Poultry touts the supposed “luxuries” its chickens enjoy, posting seemingly staged videos of birds frolicking in the grass while, in reality, the birds live and die in factory farm conditions. Factory farming is widely known to be horrific, and companies like Petaluma Poultry represent a major obstacle to stopping it: They advertise animal suffering and slaughter as moral goods.
I know how birds at Petaluma live and die because I have been inside its facilities. In 2023, as an investigator with Direct Action Everywhere, I entered multiple Petaluma Poultry facilities. On these factory farms, I found chickens crowded together in filthy barns. One facility had mortality rates more than double the industry standard. Birds were suffering from severe neglect and dying from blood infections caused by multidrug-resistant bacteria. An investigation of the slaughterhouse found similar trends. One night, in April 2023, over 1,000 chickens from one shipment were condemned post-slaughter when workers opened them up and found their bodies full of infection.
Since 1993, Perdue has claimed its chickens “grow up healthy.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Of the multiple facilities I’ve been inside, I haven’t seen a single chicken I’d describe with such a word. Chickens in the meat industry are systemically unhealthy. They’ve been genetically manipulated to grow three times faster and larger than natural. Their legs collapse as they struggle to hold their own weight. Their hearts fail, and their feet develop pressure sores. The poor health of the birds in Petaluma Poultry facilities is exacerbated by their poor housing conditions and lack of medical care.
In court, I will view myself simply as a representative, a body and a voice, for all of the chickens who have been wronged by Perdue, and by the animal agriculture industry as a whole.
Much of what I have documented at Petaluma Poultry’s facilities is criminal animal cruelty in the state of California. However, repeated reports to law enforcement, over multiple years, have not resulted in any enforcement. Haunted by the knowledge of the immense violence within, I entered Perdue’s Petaluma Poultry slaughterhouse on June 13, 2023. Partially disguised as a worker, I stepped into the cool night and approached a truck stacked high with crates crammed full with baby chickens. I rescued four of them, including one I named Poppy, who had an injured toe, a body covered in scratches, and intestines filled with parasites. I got all four birds veterinary care and shared their stories, asking members of the public to join me in calling for immediate action from law enforcement.
The rescue of four little hens finally sparked law enforcement intervention. However, instead of investigating years of reported criminal animal cruelty, law enforcement set off on a mission to gather evidence on what was likely the first act of compassion to be carried out within the slaughterhouse’s carefully constructed walls—and to charge me with crimes.
Months after the rescue, as I was walking toward the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office to once again file a report of documented animal cruelty at Petaluma Poultry, I was placed in handcuffs and arrested on seven counts of felony conspiracy. I was told about warrants obtained to access my cell-phone data and other records. Though some charges have since been dismissed or consolidated, I still face one felony, three misdemeanors, and nearly five years in jail. I have been forced to wear a GPS ankle monitor and adhere to other harsh pretrial release conditions for nearly two years because the government is afraid I might rescue more birds.
Why? It’s certainly not the monetary value of the birds. The value of a relatively healthy chicken raised in agriculture is only a few dollars, and the routine deaths of thousands before they even reach slaughter is deemed the cost of business. Moreover, there are so many animals in these facilities, it is unlikely anyone would have even noticed four chickens were gone if I had not publicized it. Instead, what is threatening is the idea inherent in my actions: that animals are individuals with lives worth living.
I’m a 23-year-old university student. I’ve been rescuing animals from abuse since the age of 11, when I founded my nonprofit, Happy Hen Animal Sanctuary. In the past, I’ve been able to work with law enforcement. Together, we’ve rescued roosters from illegal cockfighting rings and placed farmed animals in loving forever homes. But now, for saving four chickens, my entire future is at stake.
As I’ve gone to court over the past 20 months, represented by the Animal Activist Legal Defense Project, it has become obvious that the prosecutors are trying to make an example out of me to scare other concerned members of the public. But that’s okay. Let me be an example. Let me be an example of courage in the face of repression and of compassion in the face of violence. Let me be an example of just how impossible it will be to stop the movement for animal rights.
I will not apologize for my actions. I will not hang my head in shame. I refuse to accept that helping a few baby birds makes me a criminal, let alone a dangerous one. To apologize would be to say that Poppy, Ivy, Aster, and Azalea deserved the cruelty inflicted on them. It would be to say they deserved to shiver in a crate, covered in scrapes and bruises, as they were eaten alive by parasites. Any apology would be a lie. I am not sorry I saved their lives.
Next week, I will be taking this case to trial. In court, I will view myself simply as a representative, a body and a voice, for all of the chickens who have been wronged by Perdue, and by the animal agriculture industry as a whole. I will tell the jury about the birds I rescued, and the birds failed by Sonoma County law enforcement.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Why We Must Defend the Marine Mammal Protection Act
Kirsten Donald, a marine biologist, educator, and advocate with the Pacific Marine Mammal Center, explains why the animals she works with need more protections, not fewer.
Aug 31, 2025
In July MAGA Rep. Nick Begich of Alaska introduced draft legislation that aims to gut the 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act at a time when marine mammals are at greater risk than they've been in decades. It would get rid of protections against "incidental takes" from ship strikes, fishing gear entanglement, or deafening sounds from oil exploration, leaving it illegal only to directly shoot or harpoon a mammal.
Rep. Jared Huffman of California, the top-ranking Democrat on the House Resources Committee, calls these proposed changes "a death sentence" for marine mammals. I decided to have a conversation with someone who deals with marine mammals every day to help clarify the situation. Kirsten Donald is a marine biologist, educator, and advocate with the Pacific Marine Mammal Center (PMMC) in Laguna Beach, California.
It's one of California's leading marine mammal rescue centers where they care for, rehabilitate, and release hundreds of sick and injured animals each year. Before coming to California, Kirsten worked for 18 years at the Dolphin Research Center (DRC) in the Florida Keys. In her 30-year-career she's worked with whales, dolphins, manatees, harbor seals, elephant seals, and sea lions. So thanks, Kirsten.
Kristen Donald (KD): A pleasure. Ever since I was a little girl, I got the thrill of being able to go to the ocean because my family had lived in Maryland for a time and I was just utterly fascinated and I just remember seeing dolphins swimming by and being absolutely enamored by them (and wanting to study marine mammal science).
And then, initially when I went to college, I didn't know what I wanted to do. I was kind of lost and went into communications. And when I was about 26, I had a midlife crisis early and went back to career counseling and realized that I needed to be back in science and reminded myself that I loved animals. I happened to hear about this place called the Dolphin Research Center that offered a program called the Dolphin Lab, which allowed people to come down for a week and interact with their dolphin colony there. So, I traveled all the way down to Florida and I just fell in love with the dolphins and the mission to educate the public to be more compassionate to the issues that we face with these guys in the wild. And after a bit they asked me to apply for a job and that was in 1997 and I've been doing it ever since.
David Helvarg (DH): And the Dolphin Research Center, just so people understand, it's not SeaWorld, it's not all about entertainment?
KD: Oh, no. The, dolphin Research Center has some of the highest standards in the world for the care of the animals.They are an educational, nonprofit, and research facility that has a colony of dolphins that were born there mostly and some retired from other facilities. They also had some that stranded as babies and needed homes because they could not be put back in the wild. And so now the dolphins participate in everything from interactions with humans so people can realize that these animals should be conserved to a significant amount of research on the capabilities of these animals, both acoustically and cognitively so that we can understand the other species in the ocean and the parts they play in the ecosystem. It's a really wonderful place. It's all about the dolphins first.
The stranding coordinator came up to me and said, "You're the only person I have left. Here's a net, here's a kennel (like a dog carrier). Take the car and go to this beach." And I'm like, "I've never done this before."
I remember whenever we would do a session, you come down and if you had something in mind and the dolphins are like, "No," you had to change gears. That was your job, you gotta figure out what they want to do because it's not about making them do anything. But the thing was we made everything a game and exciting and fun. And so, the dolphins were always excited to come over and play. And really the drive behind it is the fact that we are not the owners of this planet. We share it.
I also got involved a bit in the research, whether it was taking behavioral research observations or later on developing a field research program on bottlenosed dolphins in the middle Keys, which had never been done before. And they're still doing that and have expanded that program today, which is really phenomenal. I became the director of education. And I became the director of the College of Marine Mammal Professions, which basically took all of the different Dolphin Lab weeklong classes… to create our own college and be able to grant an associate's degree in marine mammal behavior and care training, which was the first one in the world.
DH: So, you were 18 years there in Florida. What got you connected with the Pacific Marine Mammal Center?
KD: At the time I'd been at DRC for 18 years and believe me, it was the hardest change I ever had to make because all of those dolphins were very much a part of my family. But my daughter was growing up and I wanted her to have more opportunities. The Keys are kind of rural in a way and all of a sudden, this job popped up at Pacific Marine Mammal Center to run the Education Department.
And so, I decided to check it out and it reminded me very much of DRC when I first started. When I started at DRC, there were only 30 employees. And by the time I left there was over a 100 and even more volunteers. When I came to PMMC, we only had about 15 people at the time and just a handful of education programs. And I could see that there were so many opportunities to widen the educational opportunities and really reach a more diverse audience. Also, it gave me the chance to learn more about pinnipeds…We're dealing with the problems that are happening right now in the ocean and so, PMMC rescues typically in any given year, anywhere from like 100 to 200 pinnipeds and a few cetaceans as well.
DH: That would be seals, sea lions, and dolphins.
KD: Exactly. Seals, sea lions, and dolphins. And there have been years also where it was crazy. Like my first year happened to be the worst year on record for strandings. That was back in 2015. And from 2013 to 2016, we had an unusual mortality event because of that warm water blob (a massive marine heatwave known as "the blob") overlapping with the El Niño (cyclical Pacific warming). The waters were ridiculously warm.
And PMMC rescued over 500 animals, much more than we'd typically rescue. And it was due to the fact that since the warm water is there, the fish like colder water. So, they would either go deeper or further out to sea or further up north. And the pups that are on the Channel Islands (breeding colonies off Central California) couldn't swim that far in order to get nutrition. In addition, the mothers that are tied to the islands can't swim very far away because they've got to nurse their pups. And so, it became a situation where mothers were abandoning pups. Pups weren't getting enough to eat, and so there was just a constant influx of these animals.
And it was crazy because my second week at PMMC all the trucks are out, all the rescuers are out. And then the stranding coordinator came up to me and said, "You're the only person I have left. Here's a net, here's a kennel (like a dog carrier). Take the car and go to this beach." And I'm like, "I've never done this before."
"It's fine. You just pick them up and put them in the kennel, you know?" And I'm like, "Okay, I'll give it a try." And so, I went and the sea lion happened to be a very small pup that was on a pier, San Clemente Pier, curled up. Didn't even move when I picked him up, he was so emaciated. And so, I popped him in the kennel and then this lady ran up to me and she's like, "There's another one over there."
And he is really skinny. And you know, I'm from a different background in terms of when you work with animals that are in human-managed care, you introduce them slowly, you know, you let them get to know each other. And I only had one kennel and I'm like, how could I put another animal in this kennel? I can't do that. What should I do? So, I call her and she goes, "Oh no, just get them both. They don't care. Just shove them in. They'll be fine."
DH: This is triage. This is emergency room type activity?
KD: Yeah. And this is also me not being as familiar at the time with sea lion behavior because they do lie over each other. They create piles, especially as pups. And so, this one was going in and out of the water and I had to actually get the net and get between it and the water so I could net it and then put it in the kennel (with the first pup) and bring it back. So, that was my very first rescue, and I named the animals Yin and Yang because they were very different (personalities). And it was quite the experience.
DH: And as you say, it was a traumatic time because the blob was the worst of these major marine heatwaves that we've experienced linked to climate change. So, there was loss of prey, there was starvation at the time. And these marine heatwaves have also supercharged Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) that can also poison marine mammals.
KD: Exactly. And that's what's happened. This year we have had the worst harmful algal bloom on record. These animals are struggling right now with regard to climate change as well as plastics and chemicals in the ocean. I can give you two really good examples. Number one the gray whale, which was actually a huge success under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). It was one of the major successes of the MMPA. They were the first large whale species to be delisted (taken off the Endangered Species Act list) after whaling (was banned). They were almost decimated, and they came back 27,000 strong. And between 2019 and 2023, their population has plummeted down to 13,000 animals. So, half the population is gone and scientists looked into it and discovered that this was very much connected to climate change.
Basically, what was happening is that since the (polar) ice cover was receding earlier and the algae that grows underneath it, instead of falling to the bottom and feeding the amphipods (tiny shrimp-like crustaceans that the whales feed on) the ice would recede. The fish go in and eat up all the algae and the amphipods die. And these guys (the migrating gray whales) go up there to eat the pods but there's not enough up there. And so, they spend longer and longer trying to eat, expending more and more energy. But they're still coming back emaciated. And they are dying in droves all up and down the coast from Canada to Mexico.
I think that's what everything going on in society is telling us, that people really need to step up and get involved.
So, it was an international event. And actually, they closed the Unusual Mortality Event (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration designation) after 2023. And just this year we are already having a ton of these animals stranded up north around the Monterey Bay area, starting again. It's considered an unusual mortality event because it's something that we normally don't see and is not a natural cycle. So, they thought it was over in 2023, but just this year, in 2025, it's begun again. So, these guys (gray whales) are not out of trouble. In fact, if they can lose half their population in just a few years, this is the worst time to take away their protections.
The other example is California sea lions that breed around the Channel Islands. And one of the studies that our veterinarian did was in looking at the high levels of DDT in these sea lions because there's DDT that was dumped back in the 60s near those islands (by the Montrose Chemical Corp. and others via LA storm drains).
And DDT is a very toxic persistent organic pollutant, which is basically a fertilizer but it stays in the environment for thousands of years. These animals are accumulating it through nursing as well as the food that they eat. And what we've discovered is that they will develop cancer because the DDT interacts with a herpes virus, which pretty much they all have, and is a catalyst for cancer. And so about 25% of the adult patients that come through PMMC are diagnosed with terminal cancer unfortunately, and that's the highest rate of cancer in any mammal on the planet. So again, we're dealing with, human impacts on these species and so they need the protections. In fact, they need more protections than the MMPA provides currently.
DH: We had a few decades where the Marine Mammal Protection Act was working well. The Florida manatees went from 1,000 to 10,000, right?
KD: The Marine Mammal Protection Act is great. It has helped a lot of species, but there are still species that need even more protection like the North Atlantic right whale. There's only 370 of them left. And the changes that are proposed (in the MMPA) actually will delay any action to help them by reducing entanglements (in fishing gear) or ship strikes which are the two major things that are hurting their population. And they don't have 10 years to wait because they've lost half their population since 2017. So, you can see the trajectory that they're already on.
DH: They're trying to roll back all environmental protections. With something like NEPA, the National Environmental Policy Act, people may not know what it's about, but with the Marine Mammal Protection Act, it's right there in the name. In the 1990s popular movements got us to dolphin-free tuna where they used to put the nets around schools of dolphin knowing tuna where underneath them and they'd kill hundreds of thousands of dolphins along with the tuna. Under this so-called MAGA "reform" of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, there's nothing to stop them from doing that again.
KD: Exactly, and we do need the power of the public right now. I think that's what everything going on in society is telling us, that people really need to step up and get involved.
DH: People need to not only volunteer with the Pacific Marine Mammal Center and other marine animal rescue centers for example but also to call their congresspeople and senators and say, "This is not acceptable."
KD: Exactly, that's something that we talk about all the time, and this is why I am such a big proponent of education, helping people understand that they have power, they have a voice. To stand up and call your congressmen if everybody is doing that and letting them know that they care about these issues. If you're a congressperson and not listening to your constituents, you're probably not going to get reelected. And you're there to represent the people's interest. And so, we need people to express that interest.
DH: And again, there's this disingenuous argument being put forward by Republican sponsors of rolling back the Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act, which is these laws have worked so well that these animals are no longer at risk. And this is simply bunk. Like who are some of your patients right now?
KD: Well, actually our patients are all gone right now. We're very excited. We had a really tough year with the unusual mortality event we went through, with the harmful algal bloom because I gotta tell you, it was very rough. Literally most of the animals that came in, or at least half of them, had to be euthanized because they had too many toxins in their system that damaged their brain. Because that's what happens with domoic acid poisoning. It's produced by the algae, and the fish eat it. And then the sea lions eat the fish and get concentrated doses and that toxin goes to the brain, damages it, and it doesn't allow them to be able to navigate spatially. They do things they're not normally doing…
DH: Wandering up on the highways. There was a lot of publicity recently about a sea lion that was biting surfers.
KD: Exactly. People were up in arms about sea lions biting and they don't normally do that. They normally leave you alone. But the animals were so out of their minds because their brains were damaged, that they were being aggressive. And so, there were quite a number, a large number of animals that we had to euthanize. And what was even sadder is that the majority of California sea lions that came in should be doing what they do every year—breeding.
The biggest help that we can provide is standing up for the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act because they're the two strongest, most important (animal protection) acts that have been passed in the United States.
And so many were pregnant. And they were not yet close to term. They were about three-quarters of the way through their pregnancies. But they were having to euthanize these females and in some cases, they'd have to induce abortions to try to save the females because there are so many toxins in the amniotic fluid that the female can reabsorb those unless we induce abortion.
And so, what's even sadder is when they would induce these abortions, some of the pups would try to take a breath, even though that they were not viable yet, they were not fully developed. And so, literally as the babies were coming out, they were brought to the veterinarian who then had to turn around and euthanize them.
It was a really traumatic year for our animal care. And it's really worrisome that again, this is the fourth year in a row that we've had a harmful algal bloom, and this was the worst on record. What are we in store for in the years to come? That's a real concern of ours. So, yes, it was a tough year.
DH: And again, at the federal level, we're both denying the reality of climate change and now trying to deny the reality that marine mammals are in serious trouble.
KD: Right. And when you look at things happening in the ocean, there's no denying climate change anymore. There's absolutely none. It's happening. It's affecting the animals. They're showing it to us. It's sad when we have these animals. We get them back up to speed, they're ready to go out, they're healthy. And then we realize we're releasing them into a damaged home, a broken home that we need to help fix because we broke it. And so, it's really personal to us.
DH: Okay. I really appreciate the work you're doing, and so let's end on a happy note. What was your last release?
KD: The last release I was on, it was great because I got to go with my entire staff and with some animal care people out on a boat release, because sometimes it's better to release the animals off boats (rather than from beaches), especially if they're like adult animals.
We get them further away from the beach so they don't present a hazard to people. That's where they're normally meant to be anyway, further out in the ocean. And so, we had three different animals, and you would basically move the crate up to the edge of the boat and open the kennel and they look around, they dunk their head in the water and look around and then slowly climb in.
And then you just do one after the other. And it's sometimes funny because I've seen elephant seals do the same thing where one will like stick his head in the water, then look at his buddy and wait for the buddy to go in. And then look in the water again and make sure, I'm thinking he's making sure there's no sharks, you know, let his buddy go in first.
So, it's neat and sometimes they'll look back at us too you know, and we like to think it's a "Thank you for helping me." And then they just swim away and do what they're meant to be doing. So, it's really gratifying to see them go home, but it gives us even more motivation to try to help get word out about these issues so that people can take action in their own lives to help, because there are all these simple things that we can do… The biggest help that we can provide is standing up for the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act because they're the two strongest, most important (animal protection) acts that have been passed in the United States and that also are unique.
This story is based on my interview with Kirstin Donald for Blue Frontier's Rising Tide Ocean Podcast that aired on August 25, 2025.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Instead of a Climate Villain, Livestock Can Be a Solution With Legs
For places where livestock is deeply embedded in livelihoods and culture, it is critical to see these farm animals from our perspective and help channel climate and biodiversity finance into their potential as a force for good.
Oct 08, 2024
Livestock are a vital component of both the African food system and rural livelihoods. The continent has around 400 million cattle alone, and the livestock sector accounts for a significant 30-40% of the total agricultural gross domestic product across the continent.
Small amounts of meat, milk and eggs can have life-changing benefits in tackling malnutrition, and these animals also provide a reliable income source when alternatives simply do not readily exist.
Yet, from an environmental perspective, livestock are often perceived only as a problem, contributing to habitat loss, greenhouse gas emissions, and land degradation. This narrow view can hold back much-needed finance into the sector, yet it misses a much more nuanced reality.
International climate finance should prioritise support for sustainable livestock systems, recognizing their unique role in tackling broad environmental challenges while providing food, livelihoods, and economic growth.
As the United Nations prepares for three major environmental meetings over the next few months—on biodiversity conservation, climate change, and land management, respectively—it is important for the world to rethink how it perceives livestock in the context of development progress, and to begin to see such animals as cows, goats, camels, and pigs as “solutions with legs” in combating these intensifying climate and environmental crises at scale.
For countries like Kenya, where livestock is deeply embedded in livelihoods and culture, it is critical for U.N. meetings to see these farm animals from our perspective and help channel climate and biodiversity finance into their potential as a force for good.
Firstly, contrary to popular belief, livestock can be powerful agents of biodiversity conservation when managed correctly. Well-managed grazing systems help maintain ecosystems, control invasive species, and foster the regeneration of diverse native plant life in degraded areas. Pastoralist communities in Kenya, from the Maasai to the Samburu, have long understood this, using livestock grazing as a tool to balance ecosystems and promote biodiversity while providing essential sources of income and producing almost 20% of Kenya’s milk.
And in many conservancies, livestock are intentionally integrated into wildlife conservation strategies. Cattle are grazed rotationally, mimicking natural patterns seen in wild herbivores like zebras and gazelles. This approach helps prevent overgrazing, maintains healthy grasslands, and supports both livestock and wildlife populations.
Secondly, in terms of climate action, the role of livestock is often framed solely around their methane emissions, particularly in the case of ruminant animals like cattle. However, the potential for livestock to contribute to climate solutions is much broader, particularly in places like Africa.
In terms of mitigation, improved rangeland management and the adoption of climate-smart feeding practices can significantly reduce livestock-related emissions. For instance, integrating climate-resilient forages into grazing systems improves both productivity and environmental outcomes.
Moreover, sustainable grazing practices can play a crucial role in lowering the emissions intensity of meat and dairy production through carbon sequestration. Rangelands, often considered wastelands, are actually some of the planet’s largest carbon sinks. When managed properly, they store significant amounts of carbon in their soils, and proper management can contribute as much as 20.92 gigatons of climate mitigation by 2050.
On the adaptation front, livestock are a critical lifeline for communities facing increasing climate variability, including in Kenya’s arid and semi-arid lands. By moving their livestock across landscapes in response to rainfall variability, pastoralists effectively manage scarce resources while avoiding overgrazing.
This adaptive mobility, coupled with the use of Indigenous livestock breeds adapted to harsh climates, provides a critical buffer against droughts and other climate stresses—even more so when index-based livestock insurance is available. The East African Zebu cattle, for example, are better equipped to survive on limited, poor-quality forage in dry conditions, making them crucial to climate resilience in Kenya.
Lastly, as the global land degradation crisis worsens, it is becoming increasingly clear that sustainable livestock management can be a tool for land restoration and rehabilitation. Somewhere between 25% and 35% of rangelands globally suffer from some form of degradation. If left unattended, they become unproductive, reducing food security and driving people to abandon rural areas. Livestock systems can actually help reverse this trend by promoting soil health and regenerating landscapes.
Sustainable grazing practices, including rotational grazing and controlled stocking densities, allow grasslands to recover and restore soil fertility. By moving livestock strategically across the land, these practices prevent overgrazing and promote the growth of deep-rooted plants, which stabilise the soil and improve water retention. Furthermore, healthy rangelands support a wide variety of plant species, protect watersheds, and improve overall ecosystem resilience.
Which begs the question, if livestock are so critical to all these environmental issues, why does the sector receive so little funding? International climate finance should prioritise support for sustainable livestock systems, recognizing their unique role in tackling broad environmental challenges while providing food, livelihoods, and economic growth.
Livestock are not the enemy in this fight. Rather, they are an integral part of the solution, especially in places like Africa where pastoralist and livestock-keeping communities depend on them for survival.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Astonishing' Study Shows Infant Deaths Rise in US When Bat Populations Fall
Experts hailed the study as "groundbreaking" and "sobering" for the connections it draws between ecosystem and human health.
Sep 06, 2024
Bat die-offs in the U.S. led to increased use of insecticides, which in turn led to greater infant mortality, according to a "seminal" study published Thursday that shows the effects of biodiversity loss on human beings.
Eyal Frank, an environmental economist at the University of Chicago, authored the study, which was published by Science, a leading peer-reviewed journal.
Bats can eat thousands of insects per night and act as a natural pest control for farmers, so when a fungal disease began killing off bat populations in the U.S. after being introduced in 2006, farmers in affected counties used more insecticides, Frank found. Those same counties saw more infant deaths, which Frank linked to increased use of insecticide that is harmful to human health, especially for babies and fetuses.
The study was greeted by an outpouring of praise from unaffiliated scientists for its methodology and the important takeaways it offers.
"[Frank] uses simple statistical methods to the most cutting-edge techniques, and the takeaway is the same," Eli Fenichel, an environmental economist at Yale University, told The New York Times. "Fungal disease killed bats, bats stopped eating enough insects, farmers applied more pesticide to maximize profit and keep food plentiful and cheap, the extra pesticide use led to more babies dying. It is a sobering result."
Carmen Messerlian, an environmental epidemiologist at Harvard University, told the Times the study "seminal" and "groundbreaking."
The study shows the need for a broader understanding of human health that includes consideration of entire ecosystems, said Roel Vermeulen, an environmental epidemiologist at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. "It emphasizes the need to move from a human-centric health impact analysis, which only considers the direct effects of pollution on human health, to a planetary health impact assessment," he told New Scientist.
Reporter Benji Jones echoed that sentiment in Vox, calling Frank's findings "astonishing" and writing that such studies could help us fight chemical pollution by corporations.
"When the link between human and environmental health is overlooked, industries enabled by short-sighted policies can destroy wildlife habitats without a full understanding of what we lose in the process," Jones said. "This is precisely why studies like this are so critical: They reveal, in terms most people can relate to, how the ongoing destruction of biodiversity affects us all."
NEW: This is one of the more stunning (and sobering) studies I've covered in a while:
It found that a decline of bats in the U.S. had come at a deadly cost to human babieshttps://t.co/M82FXxBrtO
— Dino Grandoni (@dino_grandoni) September 5, 2024
Frank, who said he started the work after stumbling on an article about bat population loss while procrastinating, happened upon an excellent natural experiment. The spread of white-nose syndrome, the fungal disease, was well tracked on a county-by-county level, leaving him with high-quality data that is hard to find for researchers who study the intersection of human and animal life.
The benefits of biodiversity on humans, and the drawbacks to its loss, are normally very difficult to quantify.
"That's just quite rare—to get good, empirical, grounded estimates of how much value the species is providing," Charles Taylor, an environmental economist at Harvard Kennedy School, told The Guardian. "Putting actual numbers to it in a credible way is tough."
Taylor himself is the author of a somewhat similar study that showed that pesticide use and infant mortality rose during years in which cicadas appeared; the insects do so at 13-17 year intervals.
David Rosner, a historian based at Columbia University, said the new bat study joins a large body of evidence dating back to the 1960s that links pesticide use with negative human health outcomes. "We're dumping these synthetic materials into our environment, not knowing anything about what their impacts are going to be," he said. "It's not surprising—it's just kind of shocking that we discover it every year."
Frank's claim about the cause of increased infant mortality should be taken with some caution, said Vermeulen, the Dutch researcher. He said the loss of agricultural income caused by bat die-offs could be connected to the increased deaths in complex ways.
The exact causal mechanism isn't known, Frank told media outlets, but the data shows the rise of infant mortality didn't come from food contamination by insecticides—rather, it's more likely it came via the water supply or contact with the chemicals.
Frank's other research extends beyond pesticide use. He and another researcher recently estimated that hundreds of thousands of human beings have died in India due to the collapse of the country's vulture population, as rotting meat increased the spread of diseases such as rabies.
Frank is not the first to study the impacts of white-nose syndrome on humans. Other studies have shown a reduction in land rents in counties hit by the bat plague and documented the billions of dollars that farmers have lost as their natural pest control disappeared.
The syndrome attacks bats while they hibernate. It was first identified in New York in 2006 and has since spread to much of North America. It's believed to have been brought over from Europe. It doesn't affect all bat species, but it's killed more than 90% of three key species, and bats also face a myriad of other threats, including habitat loss, climate change, and the dangerous churn of wind turbines.
Frank's bracing study should be a call to arms, experts said.
"This study estimates just a few of the consequences we suffer from the disappearance of bats, and they are just one of the species we're losing," Felicia Keesing, a biologist at Bard College, told The Washington Post. "These results should motivate everyone, not just farmers and parents, to clamor for the protection and restoration of biodiversity."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Discovering Intelligence in Unexpected Places
If our human intelligence has discerned over thousands of years which plants are edible and nutritious and healing, wouldn’t the evolutional ingenuity of plants which feed and sustain us and all life also constitute intelligence?
Aug 27, 2024
From the largest to the smallest and the oldest to the youngest creatures on Earth—Antarctic blue whales and coastal redwood trees, minute bacteria and human beings—we are all enmeshed in layers of relationships. We need each other, though some more than others.
Plants evolved hundreds of millions of years before the first humans and transformed the Earth—through their creativity in surviving predators—into a livable environment for all animals, including humans. We needed plants for our evolution and need them now for our survival from climate disaster. They, however, did not need us for their existence and would survive without us.
Putting humans at the top of the evolution chain as the crown of intelligent life, a Western worldview, is—as some keenly grasp—mistaken. The baleful consequences of this simplistic hierarchy are everywhere: out-of-control climate change; accelerating rates of animal and plant extinction; dead zones in the oceans and mass mortality of coral reefs; the vast pollution of land, air, and water; and the mounting likelihood of human extinction with nuclear war. All caused by humans, humans with financial and political power much more egregiously than others.
Perhaps you have you noticed that late summer asters and goldenrod tend to grow as companions. Why? Together—their combined beauty—attracts more pollinators.
Certain scientists who study plants—from the simplest to the exotic—are stirring controversy with their “ Are plants intelligent?” Consider that we humans owe our lives to plants for their food, medicines, and critical balance of 21% oxygen in the air we breathe. If our human intelligence has discerned over thousands of years which plants are edible and nutritious and healing, wouldn’t the evolutional ingenuity of plants which feed and sustain us and all life also constitute intelligence?
Studies have found that elephants recognize themselves in a mirror, crows create tools, dolphins demonstrate empathy and playfulness, and cats exhibit similar styles of attachment as human toddlers. The given explanation is that they have brains with neurological capacity for consciousness and intelligence.
But plants do not have a central brain. Could their mode of learning to evade insect predators and maximize their growth come from a diverse form of intelligence, possibly be distributed across their roots, stems, and leaves? Could the whole plant, then, function as a brain? Recent studies of plants have stirred the possibility that they are conscious and intelligent. Take communication, something we humans claim as our domain through language and more recently acknowledge that animals also possess.
Botanists have found that not only do alder and willow trees alter their leaf chemistry to defend themselves against an invasion of tent caterpillars, but that leaves of faraway trees also change their chemical composition similarly. Warned, as they are, by airborne plant chemicals released from the original trees under attack. Goldenrods signal an attack by a predator through strong chemical communication sent to all other goldenrod neighbors, just as humans warn their neighbors about a nearby fire or flood or crime.
Without any recognizable ears, plants sense sounds. The vibration of a predator insect chewing on its leaves causes a plant to make its own defensive pesticide. Beach evening primrose responds to the sound of honeybees in flight by increasing the sweetness of its nectar to attract them for pollination. Tree roots grow toward the sound of running water, including in pipes, where the roots often burst through causing great difficulties for municipalities. How do the various plants hear these stimulating sounds?
Plants have memory, some anticipating from past experience when a pollinator will show up for the plants’ pollen. Plants express social intelligence: Members of the pea family form relationships with bacteria living in their roots to have the bacteria supply beneficial nitrogen for the plants’ growth. Several kinds of plants provide a home and food for compatible ants who then attack the plants’ ant pests. Perhaps you have you noticed that late summer asters and goldenrod tend to grow as companions. Why? Together—their combined beauty—attracts more pollinators.
In finishing, I express my immense respect for the Indigenous worldview where wind, rocks, air, and rain are our kin, together with plants and nonhuman animals. We, humans, the most recent beings, depend on all of these elder kin; and this awareness, this worldview of connectivity among all beings, is our path back to Earth well-being.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Enough Is Enough': US Factory Farm Takeover Continues With 1.7 Billion Animals
"The USDA's new data show that without policy changes, factory farms will continue to get bigger and bigger, wreaking havoc on public health, the environment, and the climate," said one expert.
Feb 13, 2024
Critics of factory farming renewed demands for U.S. policy reforms on Tuesday in response to new federal data on the nation's agricultural activity, which is released every five years.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) put out its report about the 1.9 million farms and ranches that collectively spanned more than 880 million acres as of 2022—a loss of nearly 142,000 operations and over 20 million acres since 2017. The document features state tallies and other details including inventory and values for crops and livestock.
"The USDA's new data show that without policy changes, factory farms will continue to get bigger and bigger, wreaking havoc on public health, the environment, and the climate," warned Environmental Working Group (EWG) Midwest director Anne Schechinger.
Schechinger highlighted some of the key data points for EWG's website:
For cattle and broiler chicken farms, the number of the largest factory farms has grown since 2012. In 2012, there were 1,124 cattle farms in the U.S. with 5,000 cattle or more per farm. But that increased to 1,270 mega factory farms in 2017 and 1,453 in 2022, according to the USDA's Census of Agriculture data—a 29% increase.
And the largest chicken farms increased by 17%, from 6,332 farms with 500,000 or more birds in 2012 to 7,211 farms in 2017 and 7,406 farms in 2022. The number of the biggest hog factory farms increased greatly, from 3,006 in 2012 to 3,600 in 2017 but went down slightly to 3,540 in 2022.
Across all three animal types—cattle, chickens, and hogs—the number of animals produced in the largest factory farms increased. There were 28% more cattle produced in the largest facilities in 2022 than in 2012, 24% more hogs, and 24% more chickens.
Food & Water Watch (FWW), which also analyzed the new government data, found that "there are currently 1.7 billion animals raised on U.S. factory farms every year; an increase of 6% since 2017, 47% more than roughly 20 years ago in 2002."
The group emphasized that "as factory farms take over, the number of small dairies raising animals outside the factory farm system plummeted, with barely one-third as many today compared to 20 years ago."
FWW research director Amanda Starbuck declared that "America today is truly a factory farming nation. Status quo legislating in Washington is enabling a corporate feeding frenzy in rural America."
"As industrial confinements drive family-scale farmers off their land, we are left with skyrocketing numbers of animals on factory farms producing enormous amounts of waste," she continued. "The benefits flow to private coffers while our communities and environment are left holding the bag."
The 24,000 U.S. factory farms produce 940 billion pounds of manure annually, according to Starbuck's group. That is "twice as much as the sewage produced by the entire U.S. population" and "52 billion pounds more than in 2017, equivalent to creating a new city of 39 million people (or nearly two New York City metro areas) in the past five years," FWW explained.
Animal waste from factory farms, or concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), "often pollutes our water and air," noted EWG's Schechinger. "These environmental damages are also dangerous for public health, with toxins from animal manure sickening people and poisoning wildlife."
"The largest livestock operations are also bad for the climate," she added. "Cows release methane to the atmosphere through their burps, and cattle and hog manure releases methane and nitrous oxide, two greenhouse gases more powerful than carbon dioxide."
Starbuck argued that "enough is enough—Congress must pass the Farm System Reform Act to ban factory farming now."
That bill (S.271/H.R. 797) "would, among other things, strengthen the Packers & Stockyards Act to crack down on the monopolistic practices of meatpackers and corporate integrators, place a moratorium on large factory farms... and restore mandatory country-of-origin labeling requirements," according to its sponsors, U.S. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
The pair reintroduced that legislation last February alongside the Industrial Agriculture Accountability Act, Protecting America's Meatpacking Workers Act, and Protect America's Children from Toxic Pesticides Act.
"I have been very proud to partner with Sen. Booker to try and reform our broken food system to maintain fair competition, high animal welfare standards, and level the playing field for family farmers, ranchers, and agricultural workers," Khanna said at the time. "These bills shine a light on the disturbing practices in our current system and can help usher in a new, safer, and more resilient system."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Captivity is Degrading': Historic and Controversial Buenos Aires Zoo to Close
140-year-old venue will shut down after years of criticism over its treatment of animals
Jun 24, 2016
The historic and scandal-prone Buenos Aires zoo is set to close and all animals transitioned to nature preserves because, as the city's Mayor Horacio Rodriguez Larreta put simply on Friday, "Captivity is degrading."
The 140-year-old zoo in Buenos Aires' Palermo neighborhood will be turned into an "ecopark" when it reopens later this year after its 2,500 animals are removed, although some of the older and infirm animals will remain on site, the Guardian reports. That includes the orangutan Sandra, who made headlines in 2014 when an unsuccessful bid to have her freed from captivity nonetheless resulted in her being termed a "non-human person" deserving of rights by a Buenos Aires court.
As an ecopark, the site will also provide "refuge and rehabilitation" for animals rescued from trafficking operations.
"This situation of captivity is degrading for the animals, it's not the way to take care of them," Larreta said Thursday during a press conference.
The ecopark will also serve as a venue "where children can learn how to take care of and relate with the different species," he continued. "What we have to value is the animals. The way they live here is definitely not the way to do that."
In recent years, the zoo has attracted criticism for its inadequate conditions, such as its handling of polar bears during the city's scorching hot summers.
Gerardo Biglia, an animal rights activist who has long pushed for the zoo's closure, said in a press release, "The most important thing is breaking with the model of captivity and exhibition. I think there is a change coming for which we are already prepared because kids nowadays consider it obvious that it's wrong for animals to be caged."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Idaho's "Ag-Gag" Law Latest to Criminalize Defenders of Animals
Despite losses in other states, Idaho lawmakers pushing hard to paint activists as "terrorists"
Feb 13, 2014
Though similar efforts in other states have failed, a bill moving swiftly through the Idaho legislature this week is trying to criminalize the activities of animal rights advocates who expose the mistreatment of farm animals and livestock by documenting abuse by their human handlers.
Known broadly as 'Ag-Gag' legislation, the specific bill in Idaho is titled SB 1337 and is pitched by its backers--which include large agribusiness interests in the dairy and meat industry--as an "agricultural security measure" defending farmers, dairies, and processing plant owners against "ag terrorists," their unkind moniker for those who might secretly videotape abuse of animals without express permission.
"Consumers want better treatment of animals used for food not for the agriculture industry to cover up illegal acts and penalize those who try to expose cruelty." --Matthew Strugar, PETA
But opponents of animal cruelty say laws like the one in Idaho not only endanger animal welfare, but are an assault on the public's right to know about the treatment these animals receive in certain facilities when operators think no one is watching.
"Consumers want better treatment of animals used for food not for the agriculture industry to cover up illegal acts and penalize those who try to expose cruelty," said Matthew Strugar, senior litigation counsel for the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), in an email sent to Common Dreams.
SB 1337, sponsored by State Senator Sen. Jim Patrick (R-Twins Falls), would ban unauthorized video recordings on agricultural facilities and treat those found engaging in such activities as criminals, with punishments of up to one year in prison and fines up to $5,000.
On Tuesday of this week, the bill was voted out of committee and is now headed to the full Senate for a vote.
As local journalist Kimberlee Kruesi reported for the Twin Falls Times-News:
The bill is being endorsed by Idaho's $2.5 billion dairy industry just two years after an animal rights group released undercover footage of abuse at Dry Creek Dairy southwest of Murtaugh, owned by large-scale dairy owner Luis Bettencourt.
The video was obtained after an investigator - who was employed by Los Angeles-based Mercy for Animals - began working on the Bettencourt dairy in July, 2012. Within three weeks of working on the facility, he recorded employees using a tractor to drag a cow on slippery concrete by a chain wrapped around its neck, employees punching and stomping on milk cows and one employee beating a cow with a pink cane.
Though animals rights groups have helped defeat similar laws in other states, the tensions in Idaho are strong. Backers of the bill have repeatedly vilified those with animal rights concerns while couching the law as one that defends the rights of private property owners.
"The cruelty [documented at the Bettencourt Dairies] drew nationwide attention and condemnation, but instead of taking meaningful steps to improve animal welfare, the state's dairy industry is simply trying to silence its critics." --Matthew Dominguez, Humane Society
According to the Associated Press, during Tuesday's committee hearing, Sen. Patrick described those who film animal abuse in dairies or slaughterhouses as "comparable to marauding invaders centuries ago who swarmed into foreign territory and destroyed crops to starve foes into submission."
"This is clear back in the sixth century B.C.," Patrick said. "This is the way you combat your enemies."
And another supporter of the law, state Sen. Jim Rice (R-Caldwell), said farmers shouldn't have to worry that someone is monitoring the treatment of animals on their property. "Do you have a right to control your own activities on your property or not?" he asked at the hearing. "Throughout our history, the answer has been yes."
But animal rights activists say these arguments are both absurd and a distraction from the real issue: preventing cruelty to animals and improving the public perception of all farmers by creating a culture of transparency, not secrecy, when it comes to farming and food processing operations.
"If the Idaho state legislature passes this bill and it becomes law, people all over the country will think Idaho's agriculture sector has a lot to hide," said PETA's Strugar.
PETA has long used undercover investigators to expose animal cruelty like that found in Bettencourt case.
"It's vital that the public retain the right to document abuse wherever it occurs," Strugar explained to Common Dreams, "because there are no inspections of farms for cruelty violations and workers who report abuse are often ignored, evidence from undercover investigations is crucial in prosecuting criminal acts."
The Humane Society of the United States, which has been active in opposing the Idaho law, released this television ad to help make its case to the public:
Idaho Ag-Gag Commercialwww.youtube.com
Matthew Dominguez, who works on farm policy for the Humane Society and has been actively lobbying against the bill, says the argument about private property rights is a red herring pushed by agribusiness to confuse the issue.
"The real motivation behind these dangerous ag-gag bills," Dominguez told Common Dreams, is "to prevent the public from learning about the horrors occurring on factory farms."
He continued: "The cruelty [documented at the Bettencourt Dairies] drew nationwide attention and condemnation, but instead of taking meaningful steps to improve animal welfare, the state's dairy industry is simply trying to silence its critics."
Both Strugar and Dominguez agree that though the AG-Gag bill now before Idaho's full senate is designed to insulate the dairy and agriculture industries from outside critics, what its really doing is making consumers in the state and across the country less trusting of the people who are responsible for caring for the many millions of animals used for food production each year.
"This dangerous effort by Idaho's dairy industry is going to hurt the public's trust in all of Idaho agriculture," said Dominguez. "Other farmers should resent that the dairy industry for giving the impression that all of the state's food producers have something to hide.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy