Introduction

 Animal Cruelty is the intentional infliction of physical harm, suffering, or death upon any kind of animal beyond the means of normal discipline. Animal Cruelty includes, animal abuse or neglect, animal testing and the exploitation of animal welfare.

The fight against Animal Cruelty is one that is battled everyday around the world, from the ill treatment of domestic pets to the massacre and cold-blooded hunting of many endangered species. In this blog, four arguments will be mounted in the hope of raising awareness about the inhumane treatment many animals face and will include a selection of groups taking charge of preventing these inhumane acts of crime.

It Happens at Home

Despite New Zealand being a country promoted as a place of adventure, with wide open spaces and photogenic natural beauty there is a seamy underside in the treatment of our animals; particularly those under domestic care.

One of the 33 dogs killed at the Wellsford property in 2010

Domestic animals in New Zealand have come under a lot of harsh treatment in recent years and is one of the worst places for abuse to happen according to SPCA chief inspector Charles Cadwallader. Workers of SPCA have come across some extreme cases, such as: dealing with a man who used duct tape to hold the muzzle of his dog closed then later slitting her throat, finding a dog's facial injury had been left unattended resulting in half of the face rotting away, dogs being hung from trees in Gisborne and a mass-shooting of 33 dogs (including 21 puppies) near Wellsford.

In 2011, SPCA's Annual List of Shame featured some of the worst cases they had ever come across - July 2011 saw the prosecution of a man who had beaten a 6-month old puppy to death with a golf club and in the Waikato region, a 12 week old kitten was beaten and burned to death in front of the owner's daughter and granddaughter. In fact quite recently, a puppy had to be rescued from its 12-13 year old owner and friends after witnesses saw the pup being kicked, struck against a tree and thrown through a basketball hoop.

On a Global Scale

Globally, the mistreatment of animals goes further than the domestic border. Some even venture into the extreme, forcing people to question the extent of which humanity will go to for means of entertainment and nourishment without stopping to think of the consequences.

This video shows that the market for bushmeat and wildlife is a thriving business that is often too risky for authorities to control.

The commercial and illegal bushmeat trade for example, threatens the primate and wildlife population to the point of extinction. According to Save-the-Primates.org.au (2007) bushmeat 'is a term commonly used for meat of terrestrial wild animals, hunted and killed for subsistence (food) or for commercial purposes'.


However there are dangers in using bushmeat as sustenance. Recent studies have shown that the Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has been found to have jumped from primates to people on at least 7 seperate occasions. But the real danger is found when people showing symptoms of HIV are testing negative for the HIV virus and the primate equivalent SIV - this means that new strains of an HIV-like virus are circulating in wild animals and infecting those that then eat the meat of the contaminated animal, fueling fears of a global HIV pandemic.


On a less dire measure, although just as concerning is the current trend of dyeing chicks for Easter in America. Coming in a range of festive colours from neon to pastel, the popularity of the novelty overshadows the procedures of creating the fluffy eye-candy. The dye is either injected in the incubating egg or quickly sprayed on the hatchling, and is claimed to be harmless by poultry farmers 'as long as the dye is nontoxic, the chicken's health is not affected'.

However all those opposed say 'it turns live birds into holiday playthings that are quickly discarded', as well as many being returned after the novelty had worn off. Animal rights workers claim that this experience for the young birds is very stressful and claim the animals are too young to be sold. There was also a swift response from animal rights groups when a bill was passed to overturn a 45 year old ban on dyeing animals in Florida - at the request of a dog groomer who wanted to enter a contest where people 'elaborately sculpture and colour their pets'.

Either way, the dyed Easter chicks are a hit. 'People buy whatever is available. They'll usually take one or two of each colour, maybe 10 or 15 of them'.

The Price of Beauty

According to In Defense of Animals (n.d.), 'Every year, cosmetics companies kill millions of animals to test their products' on the premise that 'they test on animals to establish the safety of their products and ingredients for consumers'.

Draize test leaves rabbits blind in some cases

Products are commonly tested on animals to measure the levels of skin irritancy, eye tissue damage and the level of toxicity in the substances used in cosmetics. Some tests are extremely painful for animals, such as the Draize test in which 'caustic substances are placed in the eyes of conscious rabbits to evaluate the damage to sensitive eye tissues'. As a result of the application many 'often scream when the substances are applied and sometimes break their necks or backs trying to escape the restraints'.

Lethal Dosage (LD) tests are used to determine the fatal levels of substances. In some cases 'subjects are forced to ingest poisonous substances until half of them die ... reactions to LD tests include convulsions, vomiting, paralysis and bleeding from the eyes, nose, mouth or rectum'.

Moreover, the results of these tests may not necessarily apply to humans. Peter Tatchell (2009) reports that the human physiology is sufficiently different to those of animals and will therefore counteract any cures derived from animal experimentation. There is no dispute that animal testing provides data, but whatever is discovered from these tests will have to then be re-tested on humans in order to correctly ensure they work. So not only do animals inevitably suffer a cruel cause that could have ultimately been avoided, the patients trying out the novel treatments will also suffer from the irrelevant data collected.