# Mass graves from US meat research center



## Tracer (Sep 16, 2012)

> ... ewes are giving birth, unaided, in open fields where newborns are killed by predators, harsh weather and starvation.


Um... Isn't that how most sheep give birth? Here in Australia it is, and the majority of our lambs make it fine. Admittedly, we don't have as many predators, but still...

It's sad that I don't find the article overly surprising. I don't see why people can't leave well enough alone. There are obvious flaws in everything they are trying to achieve, and it's just sick.


----------



## Foxhunter (Feb 5, 2012)

Animals starving to death is one thing but I would rather lamb sheep in an open field than inside if the weather is suitable. Early lambing or wet weather, the ewes came inside. 

There are always lamb deaths and here in the UK where, unlike inOz and NZ ewes have multiple lambs, ideally only two left on each ewe, it is common for a ewe to 'loose' a lamb and the shepherd have to reunite them. 

As long as People want cheap food and rightly or wrongly experimentation on trying to get beasts to grow fast on as little food as possible it will continue.


----------



## jimmyp (Sep 5, 2013)

Any body who thinks lambing, or calving in an open field is some how cruel has no clue how the world works. ALL wild animals are subject to this exact issue, it is life. We lamb any where from 30-70 lambs a year on open pasture in the winter/spring. even offered a shelter 90% of the ewes will go outside to give birth. All of our heifers give birth on pasture...

Jim


----------



## natisha (Jan 11, 2011)

jimmyp said:


> Any body who thinks lambing, or calving in an open field is some how cruel has no clue how the world works. ALL wild animals are subject to this exact issue, it is life. We lamb any where from 30-70 lambs a year on open pasture in the winter/spring. even offered a shelter 90% of the ewes will go outside to give birth. All of our heifers give birth on pasture...
> 
> Jim


It may not be cruel but it may not be the smartest idea either. Sheep operations often keep the lambing animals close because it minimizes loss if there is a problem. The same with cattle. It's easier to intervene if needed if you know where the animal is & can keep a close watch.


----------



## Yogiwick (Sep 30, 2013)

Didn't make it far in the article as the first several comments were all "well yeah those are pretty basic things".

Pigs can do and will squish babies. They are very large and cumbersome animals.

Animals giving birth outside? Heaven forbid..

FYI that is something largely ADVOCATED by many experts.


----------



## jimmyp (Sep 5, 2013)

natisha said:


> It may not be cruel but it may not be the smartest idea either. Sheep operations often keep the lambing animals close because it minimizes loss if there is a problem. The same with cattle. It's easier to intervene if needed if you know where the animal is & can keep a close watch.



If thats what works for you then I won't argue. But, we don't have much issue....

Jim


----------



## Yogiwick (Sep 30, 2013)

jimmyp said:


> If thats what works for you then I won't argue. But, we don't have much issue....
> 
> Jim


My sheep lamb in my backyard in the barn with regular checks through the night. That is because I have a whopping <10 ewes and they are pretty much pets. I can't imagine doing that with a large flock, it's hard enough as is!

Thinking of all the farmers in the west with hundreds of head of livestock. You really think they watch them all? I definitely would not criticize if not.

Lots of pros to doing it that way, yes there are some cons and some precautions need to be taken. But a completely normal and "ok" thing to do!


----------



## KsKatt (Jun 2, 2014)

You might go back and try reading the entire article. 
The sheep in question were "domesticated" sheep, accustomed to human help. They were just left out, try to make them self sufficient. The fact that there were times the lambs were seen, and just left to die. I believe if any of you saw a lamb in distress you wouldn't just walk away. I hope. 
Seeing an animal dieing of a jaw abscess, starving to death, "eventually died", 245th to succumb, from abscesses. Would be nice if they had been treated, or euthanized.
The animals are being "retooled". I, for one, would rather not eat Frankencow.
The part about the young cow "a teenager" in a pen with "as many as 6 bulls", the bulls being studied for their sexual libido. 
Her head was locked in a cage like devise, to keep her immobile. 
For hours.
Her back legs were broken, her body was "just torn up".
They couldn't find the scientist for permission to euthanize her. She died a few hours later. 

Kind of reminds me of the way Hitler's "scientists" performed their experiments.


----------



## 4horses (Nov 26, 2012)

The number of deaths they are experiencing seems to indicate that they are doing something wrong.

If your horse has a sick foal, do you call the vet?

I think these are avoidable deaths. Providing antibiotics/veterinary care and even self treating injuries to avoid infections goes a long way to maintaining the health of the animals. 

If you noticed your horse had an abscess or white line disease/thrush would you ignore the problem or attempt to treat it at home? If you noticed your herd has a respiratory infection, would you ignore the problem or act?

Most farmers at least provide some care for their animals. Yes free range is probably better than being locked in overcrowded conditions, but doesn't excuse wanton neglect. 

These are not wild animals we are discussing here... nor are these people farmers. These are scientists running experiments and doing surgery or euthanasia, even though they are not vets. If even the vets are complaining, then I would assume there are some serious problems with the research being done.

Most farmers probably do not want twins in cows or horses given the level of complications....

I can see why farmers on here feel defensive... but this is not related to farming. This is about scientific experiments that will probably not be useful to the rest of the world. Who wants cows that have twins or triplets but die in the process, or lean pigs that can't reproduce? Or animals with deformities?

I think scientists need a system of checks and balances. As they do extremely unethical research, with almost no practical value in the outcome. All this needless suffering for what purpose? It certainly doesn't seem like they have made much progress...


----------



## Foxhunter (Feb 5, 2012)

Trouble with most 'scientific' trials is that the scientists are not stockmen/women. A good stockman will know their animals and spot a problem as it starts. 

As for calling a vet out, especially for sheep, it isn't going to happen. By the time the vet has been paid it costs more than the sheep is worth. Doesn't mean you allow the animal to suffer.

Hen you get blatant cruelty as with the cow and the bulls, then reports should be made and prosecutions enforced for animal cruelty. Subsidies removed and the officials thrown in jail.

Majority of the so called animal experiments can be answered without having to have scientists involved just by asking stockmen. 

I ended up with ewes that were easy lambers just by selling any ewe that had had problems lambing. I had over 200 ewes, they were all the same cross breed, they all looked the same to a layman and many looked the same to me but when it came to lambing I could tell you the ones I knew I would have to help. 
A scientist would probably know this after the fact by reading the ear tag number and consulting the records.


----------



## Yogiwick (Sep 30, 2013)

At KsKatt's prompting I went back and read (OK only half, didn't realize it was that long.)

My thoughts have not changed. There are to many holes and not enough logic and while it may be "scientists" as opposed to "farmers" does that really change anything?

While I am definitely NOT promoting this I don't think there is anywhere near enough factual AND rational information given in the article to make a decision. Do well all jump and shout BAD because something appeals to us as animal lovers? There's a reason why so many people promote PETA. Doesn't mean it's a rational organization.

An orphaned lamb? Probably orphaned for a reason, that's how things work. Either way by the time you get a hold of it it's quite likely too late anyways.

A "teenage" cow? How many licensed veterinarians would use that term?

Comparisons made to foals? Horses are different from other livestock in that they are often not viewed or handled as livestock and are either money makers (so you get the vet out) or beloved pets (so you get the vet out). Not a good comparison.

I do think things need to be understood as being scientific research. Does that condone inhumane treatment? Absolutely not, but it's also not something to get upset about because it's different. Unless you want to be vegan or support PETA (don't have anything against vegans though I do think PETA is pretty silly in it's extremes)

I just don't want to jump on the bandwagon as part of the crazy mob when such limited factual information is given. The article is clearly biased and poorly written. Why would I sign a petition based solely off of that information?

(As Foxhunter brought up I do think it would be highly practical for the scientists to employ and work with some stockmen! IF they aren't already.)


----------



## KsKatt (Jun 2, 2014)

I did some skimming myself, it is long!

From the sounds of how many orphans and deformed; I think someone needs to be going around with a gun. I wasn't really thinking about a vet in those circumstances, but euthanasia, one way or another.

I don't think the report was being made by any kind of veterinarian. Something they should have more of.

You have a better opinion of PETA than I do.:wink: They kill more animals and cause more suffering than just about anybody else. But that's a whole different thread.

Honestly, this is far from the first negative report I've seen about this facility. The fact that our tax dollars support this makes me sick.


----------



## Yogiwick (Sep 30, 2013)

I don't have the best opinion of PETA but was trying not to get into that!! lol

As I said I am not saying this isn't true just that I would like to see more and better written _facts_ before jumping to conclusions. This thread is all I know on this facility, so I disagree with the "sign this petition based off this poorly written report". That is all.

I do think the "for sake of science" is a very interesting side thread though very controversial I'm sure. I definitely support it though only in humane ways, which I think can be a little blurry sometimes. (A very long and in depth side thread I'm sure so not trying to start it! haha)

If the facility is indeed funded by taxes that I do disagree with. I do think I would be more open to a private facility (though very regulated of course) doing this.


----------



## 4horses (Nov 26, 2012)

The reason I believe most of what was written in the article is because the university I went to had extremely questionable ethics. So I can certainly believe that bad things happen "behind the scenes". 

For example, any horse that was no longer useful for experiments was placed on a "cull" list for euthanasia with very limited effort to adopt them out. These were young healthy animals that had nothing wrong with them, but just needed training. 

Horses living in mud up to their knees, horses with sores on their eyes from not having a fly mask. Having too many animals and too few employees. Breeding 50+ mares every year despite the fact that the stallions were donated and should not be bred to anything ever again.

And the experiments on primates were just downright barbaric. How they treated the beagles wasn't much better either. 

Farmers tend to treat their livestock better because that is their livelihood, whereas scientists in my experience just don't care what pain or suffering they put the animals through. 

I'm certainly no PETA lover, but I really hate to see experiments that simply have no practical value.


----------



## sunset878 (Nov 26, 2012)

We live in the middle of farming country which is crops and sheep. It is winter here and the ewes are lambing in the fields at the moment. We had 4 days of non- stop rain last week, and the night temps are between -2-4degrees Celsius.
The farmer who has sheep in the paddocks next to us lives in town and only checks his stock a couple of times a week, even during lambing season. The other day I dragged a dead ewe out of our shared dam as I didn't want it to contaminate the water, it had been in there for 3-4 days, and when we rang him the first time we saw it in there, he didn't seem in a hurry to do anything about it, that is why we did it. A lot of farmers sheer their sheep in winter as well. I don't agree with these farming practises, but no one listens.


----------



## Tarpan (May 6, 2012)

The "deformed" vaginas of the female twin calves is not unique to this breeding experiment. Most of the time (in line with the 95% numbers they quoted) the female of a male/female twin pair will be masculinized due to receiving male hormones from a shared blood supply with the male twin. Freemartins are not fertile and have a shorter vagina when compared to a normal heifer. I can't see this as a debilitating deformity given that a freemartin is not a breeding animal, so the length of her vagina is irrelevant and does not effect quality of life in any way.


----------

