OldDog/NewTricks
Well-known member
From the USDA Office
I edited a couple of emails that allowed me to forward the comments
Response 1
Some links:
Initial story:
http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/animal-rights-organization-releases-video-of-saddistic-dairy-farm-abuse/15000.html
Suspect charged:
http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/farm-animal-abuser-arrested-arraignment-set-for-thursday/15006.html
Remains in custody:
http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/dairy-farm-abuser-charged-with-12-counts-of-cruelty-to-animals/15021.html
response 2
While the video is appalling, it is the disturbance within the man that creates the activity. No welfare law or management rules will correct the behavior of individuals. Holding Conklin Dairy accountable for employing a person that is internally disturbed does nothing to correct the problem. Unfortunately, some of the public believes that a pound of flesh is required from all involved, with exception of the person paid for the video taken one month ago and presented just a few days ago. That leads to suspect of intent and involvement by the person taking the video. The circumstances leading to the abusive activity are not questioned.
Response 3
Abuse. Pure and simple. Kudos to MFA. This time (unless this is staged), they actually found some.
Now the system should work and put them in jail but, tell me, how did the farm not see this? Out of control abuse. I'd like to know EVERYTHING about these workers from the day they were born. They should be studied and we should figure out how to protect animals from such sadistic people! Not sure how many in the population carry this defect, but there must be ways to protect livestock from them. Interview questions? Nanny cams?
Horrible video but important for everyone to see. Animals truly are at risk from such people and this is what the our animal welfare institutions were designed to address. Let's test them as this case goes through the process. Unless this is some sort of set up, if the owners of this farm were aware of this abuse, they too should be prosecuted and lose their herd.
Response 4
…this is just another example of astute political agenda setting running up to the November ballot initiative.
Response 5
Why in hell isn't the ******* who took the pictures and didn't report this to the police IMMEDIATELY being charged as an accomplice?? Or maybe he conned the idiot into doing it "for sport" just to get damaging pictures. I can't believe that any dairy operation---good or sorry---would allow such to go on. They can't possibly stay in business and allow such treatment. My Dad would have "blistered my butt" 'till I could no longer sit down for a week at least, if I had ever done such as this. Damn, this is sickening!!!
Response 6
When you look at some of these undercover videos some of the people are playing to the camera and doing things they would not admit to and would never want anyone to see [I cannot image the fellow on the latest dairy video doing this for public exposure, … ]. Not making excuses or rationalization or taking anything away from what happened, but…
Taking all these videos together as a general statement or analysis leaves several unanswered reasons for their existence, and it is not in my opinion just violent abuser activity. I do not understand how anyone could want to do any of these things, particularly knowing there would probably be criminal charges or at least public humiliation and disgrace to his/her family. That leaves several options: 1. The camera person or someone else befriended this probably below normal intelligence person, provided ideas to the abuser, and instigated their actions; 2. The same as number one but the abuser was "showing off" for the camera person; 3. The same as number one but the abuser was seeking revenge on management for any number of reasons; 4. The same as number three [e.g., the HyLine video, where the person indicated there were many of these chicks that were on the floor and they were just ignored and the photo shows a drenched chick] but the abuse is not the direct action of the employee. What sort of employee would just leave the chick on the floor like that, and admit they did nothing? 5. The camera person or someone else paid the person do to some of these things; 6. The same as number 4 but there were other "incentives" to help the camera person; 7. The camera person or someone else blackmailed the abuser to do some of these things; 8. Other options probably exist, such as the person was under the influence of drugs or hypnotized or in some other sort of suggestive state, or other bizarre situation.
Or, there is the potential reality that the abuser is just stupid and violent and wanted to have 15 minutes of fame.
Response 7
A few years back, I remember a case where a mother secretly video-taped her nanny interacting with her child in her absence. What she found was that, after she left, the nanny was dreadfully abusive and neglectful to her child and the mother brought charges of child abuse against the nanny. After that, there were several firms that specialized in setting up surveillance so that people who hired nannies could be assured that the nanny they hired was treating their child well when they thought no one was watching.
The reason why this reminds me of this case is because many of the particulars are similar--nannies are not uniformly trained and licensed, they are often low paid workers and they spend a lot of time alone caring for individuals who can't report how they are being treated. In this case the owner was at fault for assuming that the cows were being treated humanely and with respect and it took an undercover camera by a third party to get the owners and managers to recognize that they had left some innocent victims who can not report what is happening to them alone with some humans who have neither the temperament, empathy or training to be caring for them. Really, the mistake in this case was that it was not the owner, instead of a third party, filming his employees to see that they are treating the cows with a minimum set of handling standards. One should not fault the third party for gathering this evidence, because it really took place and it should have been the owner of the dairy himself who verified the kind of treatment his animals were getting behind his back.
All of which makes me wonder about the people we hire to care for our animals on farms in this country. They are often low paid and under educated. Most are okay, some are just plain ignorant and there are a few who should never be left alone with anything helpless that is in their control. And it is this last category, though few, who really give American farmers a bad name with the public.
It seems to me that this is one place where the USDA could provide farmer support. It is really hard for a farmer to find out that they have hired a person with sadistic tendencies and I am sure that many of them don't think of this as a possibility because they were never act in that way themselves and so they have a hard time imagining it in an employee. How can they possibly keep control over all their employees (more easily done in a large facility than a medium or small one) at all times. So what would be the possibility of starting a program in the USDA whereby a farmer could enroll and this would get several things: First, they would have a animal handler training course (designed for each production system) available to all new employees (could be done by webinar) that shows handling standards that are expected of them as a worker on the farm and an exam at the end that needs to be taken showing that the prospective employee took and understood the short course. Secondly, the employees need to sign a contract that says that they understand that misuse of animals will be grounds for firing and that the farmer would be setting up surveillance at unannounced times and places to verify that the standards of care expected of the employee are being practiced and third, having enrolled in this program, the farmer will receive assistance in how to monitor and enforce this program (not all of us are good with setting up surveillance or can afford the equipment) and so some assistance with this may be needed so that the owner/farmer can make sure that the minimum handling and management practices are being followed. Lastly, having entered this program, the USDA will assist (including with legalities) if an employee needs to be reprimanded or fired. This way the farmer is not in an adversarial position with his employees, instead, he can just indicate that he is in this program and the USDA is advising him.
I think it does us little good to react to these things in a reactive way (especially we should not slam the third party who uncovered this abuse--instead we should thank them for bringing it to our attention so that we can fix it). Instead this should inspire us in a proactive way to develop ways to prevent a culture of abuse from developing on any farm. And then we should move forward, with the knowledge that there are some people who should never be left alone with any helpless individual and these are people we never want to mistakenly hire to work on our farms.
Response 8
I think the URL you want is http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/27/national/main6523923.shtml
The URL you sent was of the comments only. The video itself is at http://www.mercyforanimals.org/ohdairy/
I see what you mean about being horrific. He definitely has anger issues and should never be around animals let alone own any (probably beats women and children too). I can't believe the guy videotaping isn't saying anything – at least it is not recorded on the video.
Response 9
The worst video I have ever watched, and I've watched a lot.
I edited a couple of emails that allowed me to forward the comments
Response 1
Some links:
Initial story:
http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/animal-rights-organization-releases-video-of-saddistic-dairy-farm-abuse/15000.html
Suspect charged:
http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/farm-animal-abuser-arrested-arraignment-set-for-thursday/15006.html
Remains in custody:
http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/dairy-farm-abuser-charged-with-12-counts-of-cruelty-to-animals/15021.html
response 2
While the video is appalling, it is the disturbance within the man that creates the activity. No welfare law or management rules will correct the behavior of individuals. Holding Conklin Dairy accountable for employing a person that is internally disturbed does nothing to correct the problem. Unfortunately, some of the public believes that a pound of flesh is required from all involved, with exception of the person paid for the video taken one month ago and presented just a few days ago. That leads to suspect of intent and involvement by the person taking the video. The circumstances leading to the abusive activity are not questioned.
Response 3
Abuse. Pure and simple. Kudos to MFA. This time (unless this is staged), they actually found some.
Now the system should work and put them in jail but, tell me, how did the farm not see this? Out of control abuse. I'd like to know EVERYTHING about these workers from the day they were born. They should be studied and we should figure out how to protect animals from such sadistic people! Not sure how many in the population carry this defect, but there must be ways to protect livestock from them. Interview questions? Nanny cams?
Horrible video but important for everyone to see. Animals truly are at risk from such people and this is what the our animal welfare institutions were designed to address. Let's test them as this case goes through the process. Unless this is some sort of set up, if the owners of this farm were aware of this abuse, they too should be prosecuted and lose their herd.
Response 4
…this is just another example of astute political agenda setting running up to the November ballot initiative.
Response 5
Why in hell isn't the ******* who took the pictures and didn't report this to the police IMMEDIATELY being charged as an accomplice?? Or maybe he conned the idiot into doing it "for sport" just to get damaging pictures. I can't believe that any dairy operation---good or sorry---would allow such to go on. They can't possibly stay in business and allow such treatment. My Dad would have "blistered my butt" 'till I could no longer sit down for a week at least, if I had ever done such as this. Damn, this is sickening!!!
Response 6
When you look at some of these undercover videos some of the people are playing to the camera and doing things they would not admit to and would never want anyone to see [I cannot image the fellow on the latest dairy video doing this for public exposure, … ]. Not making excuses or rationalization or taking anything away from what happened, but…
Taking all these videos together as a general statement or analysis leaves several unanswered reasons for their existence, and it is not in my opinion just violent abuser activity. I do not understand how anyone could want to do any of these things, particularly knowing there would probably be criminal charges or at least public humiliation and disgrace to his/her family. That leaves several options: 1. The camera person or someone else befriended this probably below normal intelligence person, provided ideas to the abuser, and instigated their actions; 2. The same as number one but the abuser was "showing off" for the camera person; 3. The same as number one but the abuser was seeking revenge on management for any number of reasons; 4. The same as number three [e.g., the HyLine video, where the person indicated there were many of these chicks that were on the floor and they were just ignored and the photo shows a drenched chick] but the abuse is not the direct action of the employee. What sort of employee would just leave the chick on the floor like that, and admit they did nothing? 5. The camera person or someone else paid the person do to some of these things; 6. The same as number 4 but there were other "incentives" to help the camera person; 7. The camera person or someone else blackmailed the abuser to do some of these things; 8. Other options probably exist, such as the person was under the influence of drugs or hypnotized or in some other sort of suggestive state, or other bizarre situation.
Or, there is the potential reality that the abuser is just stupid and violent and wanted to have 15 minutes of fame.
Response 7
A few years back, I remember a case where a mother secretly video-taped her nanny interacting with her child in her absence. What she found was that, after she left, the nanny was dreadfully abusive and neglectful to her child and the mother brought charges of child abuse against the nanny. After that, there were several firms that specialized in setting up surveillance so that people who hired nannies could be assured that the nanny they hired was treating their child well when they thought no one was watching.
The reason why this reminds me of this case is because many of the particulars are similar--nannies are not uniformly trained and licensed, they are often low paid workers and they spend a lot of time alone caring for individuals who can't report how they are being treated. In this case the owner was at fault for assuming that the cows were being treated humanely and with respect and it took an undercover camera by a third party to get the owners and managers to recognize that they had left some innocent victims who can not report what is happening to them alone with some humans who have neither the temperament, empathy or training to be caring for them. Really, the mistake in this case was that it was not the owner, instead of a third party, filming his employees to see that they are treating the cows with a minimum set of handling standards. One should not fault the third party for gathering this evidence, because it really took place and it should have been the owner of the dairy himself who verified the kind of treatment his animals were getting behind his back.
All of which makes me wonder about the people we hire to care for our animals on farms in this country. They are often low paid and under educated. Most are okay, some are just plain ignorant and there are a few who should never be left alone with anything helpless that is in their control. And it is this last category, though few, who really give American farmers a bad name with the public.
It seems to me that this is one place where the USDA could provide farmer support. It is really hard for a farmer to find out that they have hired a person with sadistic tendencies and I am sure that many of them don't think of this as a possibility because they were never act in that way themselves and so they have a hard time imagining it in an employee. How can they possibly keep control over all their employees (more easily done in a large facility than a medium or small one) at all times. So what would be the possibility of starting a program in the USDA whereby a farmer could enroll and this would get several things: First, they would have a animal handler training course (designed for each production system) available to all new employees (could be done by webinar) that shows handling standards that are expected of them as a worker on the farm and an exam at the end that needs to be taken showing that the prospective employee took and understood the short course. Secondly, the employees need to sign a contract that says that they understand that misuse of animals will be grounds for firing and that the farmer would be setting up surveillance at unannounced times and places to verify that the standards of care expected of the employee are being practiced and third, having enrolled in this program, the farmer will receive assistance in how to monitor and enforce this program (not all of us are good with setting up surveillance or can afford the equipment) and so some assistance with this may be needed so that the owner/farmer can make sure that the minimum handling and management practices are being followed. Lastly, having entered this program, the USDA will assist (including with legalities) if an employee needs to be reprimanded or fired. This way the farmer is not in an adversarial position with his employees, instead, he can just indicate that he is in this program and the USDA is advising him.
I think it does us little good to react to these things in a reactive way (especially we should not slam the third party who uncovered this abuse--instead we should thank them for bringing it to our attention so that we can fix it). Instead this should inspire us in a proactive way to develop ways to prevent a culture of abuse from developing on any farm. And then we should move forward, with the knowledge that there are some people who should never be left alone with any helpless individual and these are people we never want to mistakenly hire to work on our farms.
Response 8
I think the URL you want is http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/27/national/main6523923.shtml
The URL you sent was of the comments only. The video itself is at http://www.mercyforanimals.org/ohdairy/
I see what you mean about being horrific. He definitely has anger issues and should never be around animals let alone own any (probably beats women and children too). I can't believe the guy videotaping isn't saying anything – at least it is not recorded on the video.
Response 9
The worst video I have ever watched, and I've watched a lot.
