PETA sues Whole Foods, claims pork not humanely raised

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is filing a lawsuit against grocery chain Whole Foods Market, alleging the animals raised for the pork it sells are not treated as humanely as the company claims. The class-action lawsuit was filed on September 21 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
The animal rights organization and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, the legal firm representing PETA in the litigation, allege that Whole Foods is violating California consumer protection laws by misleading consumers into paying higher prices for meat from animals raised under more humane standards.
A PETA investigator went undercover at a farm in Pennsylvania operated by Sweet Stem Farm, which supplies pork to Whole Foods. PETA, which filmed a video that can be seen on its website, criticizes the farm operators and alleges they picked pigs up by their ears; kept them in crowded pens; failed to bring in a veterinarian to care for sick pigs; and kept the pigs in a trailer for more than 24 hours before being hauled to their destination.
Whole Foods, in a statement to Fortune, said it is aware that PETA had filed a suit, but the company had not yet been served. A company spokesman further stated: “It is important to remember that PETA’s mission is a total end to animal agriculture and animal meat consumption, and their claims against our business are generated with that specific goal in mind.”
Whole Foods Market has 429 stores in the United States, 10 stores in Canada and nine stores in the U.K., according to the company’s website.

Do we really have to create issues for PETA?

A recent press release by PETA and consequential national publicity in the print and social media highlighted the practice of disposing of depleted flocks by grinding hens alive. We have faced this issue with cockerel chicks and received criticism as an industry. Following the quarantine on the movement of live poultry from San Bernardino and Riverside counties of California in 2002 as a result of exotic Newcastle disease, producers had to find alternatives to shipping hens northward to a Sacramento processing plant. One producer fed live hens into a wood chipper resulting in a public outcry and condemnation.
Now the industry is faced with the aftermath of a PETA disclosure that the management of TWJ Farms located in Wayne County, Neb., regularly disposes of spent hens by grinding live birds without prior CO² euthanasia. The owner of the farm Joe Claybaugh defended the action which hopefully is an aberration, by stating without physiological evidence “that the grinding process kills the chickens more quickly than gassing and is therefore more humane.”
Witnesses of the process recount alleged mutilation and partial dismemberment of individual hens during the process. How this Neanderthal can consider the practice of live grinding “humane” defies imagination. Live grinding is heinous and must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. Cost is the only justification for not gassing hens in “kill carts” or dumpsters prior to grinding or other methods of disposal.
What Claybaugh in his ignorance and self-centered indifference forgets is the effect on the image of the industry. Our loyal consumers can relate to inhumane practices including severe beak trim (read “de-beaking”), starvation molting and now this patently abhorrent method of depletion. The fact that TWJ Farms is a supplier to Michael Foods did not pass unnoticed and this company was forced to respond by banning the practice with immediate effect.
It remains to be seen whether the UEP will issue a statement of condemnation and disassociating the mainstream of the industry from the callous and irresponsible actions of this producer. It does not require a panel of experts to rule on this gross deviation from acceptable management of living animals. It also does not require a consumer survey to establish the public resentment towards live grinding. A rapid response from UEP or their public relations consultants would have been helpful as many consumers may regard silence as endorsement or indifference.
If there are other producers engaging in this practice they should cease grinding live hens immediately and initiate CO² gassing prior to disposal. We absolutely do not want to hand PETA, HSUS and kindred organizations any issues which reflect adversely on what may be regarded as an industry committed to humane practices. Gross violation of acceptable husbandry inevitably leads to restrictive legislation and increased scrutiny by regulatory agencies. This affects the innocent and those who follow acceptable codes of practice.
The Claybaughs within our industry and others with an evident disregard of their responsibilities as participants in the chain of food production and stewardship of living animals should be condemned and their practices brought into conformity with acceptable standards.

Officials reject PETA protest in Colorado

The intent of PETA to erect a five-foot high fiberglass chicken with the inscription “McCruelty, I’m Hating It” directed against the McDonald’s Corporation was denied by Denver, Colo., authorities.
They ruled that the plastic sculpture was in fact a commercial sign and as such could not be placed in a public place.
PETA will continue pressing for its sculpture to be placed near a McDonald’s restaurant claiming that it is a piece of art and therefore in compliance with the city code.

PETA targets Steak 'n Shake restaurants

Animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has asked Steak 'n Shake restaurant chain owner Biglari Holdings Inc. to switch to a poultry supplier that uses more humane killing methods. A report in the San Antonio Express-News said PETA, which owns 640 shares of company stock, submitted a shareholder proposal asking the company to buy its poultry from suppliers that use controlled-atmosphere killing, which it calls less cruel.
The board of the San Antonio-based firm recommends a no vote on the request at an Aug. 13 special shareholders session. Although it stated in regulatory filings that it “respects PETA's position,” the company maintained, “…the corporation, on behalf of its shareholders, is guided by two conditions: (1) what the law mandates, and (2) what customers desire.”

German poultry producer responds to abuse allegations

Wiesenhof, a major German poultry producer, is ending its relationship with an animal transport company and suing a contract grower after a German television station broadcast images of alleged animal abuse by the business partners, according to The Local, a German news Web site.
The problems were made public on January 11 when a television news program showed video footage secretly taped by activists from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. The program included images of a Wiesenhof contract grower’s chicken housing that The Local described as “an unlit, cramped space.” Other footage showed workers kicking and throwing chickens into transport boxes and trucks.
In a statement, Wiesenhof called the birds’ treatment “absolutely unacceptable” and said it “will, as a consequence of this isolated case, no longer work with the outside firm responsible for the transport of the animals.” Wiesenhof pledged to add unannounced checks of contract growers’ facilities to its inspection routine.
Wiesnhof’s parent company, the PHW Group, has said it will sue the contract grower featured on the news show for failing to meet his contractual obligations to abide by animal welfare laws, The Local reported. The company may also ask state prosecutors to press charges against PETA for not reporting the abuse immediately and allegedly encouraging abuse in order to produce more shocking footage.
On January 12, PETA pressed charges against Wiesenhof under animal welfare laws.

Hy-Line investigates alleged abuses

On Sept. 1, PETA posted a video on its website based on an “undercover investigation” by the pro-vegan group, Mercy for Animals, showing operations at a Hy-Line hatchery in Spencer, Iowa. This investigation showed a number of cruel and abusive practices, and focused primarily on the euthanizing of the male chicks.
That same day, Hy-Line International and Hy-Line North America issued a statement which said that the care and safety of the birds and employees is the company’s first priority. Hy-Line also said that they have initiated an immediate investigation to see if any animal welfare policies were violated and to take disciplinary action against anyone violating company policy. Hy-Line stated that the company is committed to meeting or exceeding all industry poultry welfare standards.
The video was taken in late May/early June, but just released. Hy-Line stated that the company wishes that it would have been made aware of the allegations immediately, so that a timelier investigation could have been made.
The video was in the PETA blog section, titled: “Unwanted Males Mutilated and Killed at Birth”. The blog emphasized the main points made on the video: Workers at an Iowa hatchery kill newborn male chicks every single day. Workers grab them by their wings, toss them onto conveyor belts, and throw them down a chute to spend their final moments in a grinding machine while they are still alive.
The Hy-Line release also stated: “Other hatchery procedures are shown in the video. These procedures are supported and approved by the animal veterinary and scientific community. Instantaneous euthanasia by maceration is specifically supported by the American Veterinary Medical Association, Federation of Animal Science Societies, Agriculture Canada, World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) and the European Union.”