cruelty free knitting
I recently posted about helping out an Australian sheep farmer whose sheep were suffering in the drought. From that story I received a few emails from concerned readers about the practice of Mulesing in Australia and the current campaign by PETA boycotting the Australian wool industry. This issue is not as simple or cut and dried as stated on the PETA website, there is another side.
The other side of this issue is the Australian wool farmers, who are suffering through drought and hardship while trying to keep their livelihood. Who care about their animals, but who are battling the harsh Australian climate and the unique and very aggressive Australian blowfly (Lucilia cuprina). See this website which oulines the Australian wool farmers side of the cruelty to animals debate, and has a response to PETA and advocates a less extreme position.
This is a link to a video on the PETA website claiming to show mulesing – warning: this is a graphic video and is quite upsetting. Wool is best – a website which represents the Australian Wool farmer perspective on this issue, also has a video explaining the practice of mulesing in Australia.
December 21st, 2006 at 8:35 am
I can vouch for the adopt a sheep site! I have a lovely certificate all wrapped up ready to go to my Dad for Christmas, so if you were worried, don’t be, the people are lovely and deserve your help.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:28 pm
The thoughtful voice of reason from kath…yay.
Thank you for pointing out is IS a vexed issue..sort of “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situtation, re: mulesing.
I was just reading this morning in the SMH about Pink condoning PETA’s boycotts and some Pollie wag commented that she was hardly an expert on Australian animal husbandry practices.
I CAN see both sides of the argument of course. I utterly abhor animal cruelty but I also feel that activist groups can sometimes go off half-cocked on some issues.
One has to be informed of the facts and makes up one’s own mind accordingly.
For the record, I’ve also adopted a sheep and I agree with Miss Dot..they really do deserve help. They’re trying to do the right and humane thing by the animals they’re responsible for.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:15 pm
so why cant the industry use anesthetics? i know peta goes way overboard, but i know i would want them on my side if i was a sheep.
how well would a human do if part of their backside was sliced off without numbing the area first? not to mention if the sheep are out loose is anything put onto the open wound to prevent feces and other things to get in there? i dont know if i believe the low incidence of infection rate. it just seems that common decency would urge one to do these things without pain for the animals, if they care for them as they say they do.
December 21st, 2006 at 3:46 pm
I get really frustrated every time this issue comes up in the media. I’m a strict vegetarian, but I’d rather see sheep mulesed if it means that they won’t have to go through the horror of flystrike.
December 21st, 2006 at 5:14 pm
Like crumpet, I’m a strict vegetarian, but I do knit with wool. I read through the Aussie sheep farmer’s blog and they do address that issue – they seem to really care about their animals, and only do what’s necessary to keep them safe.
December 21st, 2006 at 7:02 pm
Thank you so much for this, Kath – and yes, flystrike is AWFUL (ask me how I know…)It is a difficult issue and I am grateful that you have provided links to both sides of the story. Good on yer!
December 21st, 2006 at 8:46 pm
I wonder if it isn’t the same principle as in male circumcision… a medical procedure that would seem to be removing tissue needlessly but which has been proven to work for the best in the long run…
December 21st, 2006 at 9:08 pm
It’s funny that medea mentioned circumcision…
There’s a show on Showtime called “Penn and Teller’s Bullsh*t!” where they do a lot of research into various subjects and then present a logical summation of the information.
In their first season they did a show about PETA. And the organization is full of inconsistencies. The episode changed the way I thought about PETA and their shock campaigns. PETA seems to have strayed from their original goal, and now gives money to radical animal rights groups who engage in activities that can best be described as “terrorism.” People AND animals die as a result of the activities of these groups. That said, I love animals, but I do not believe everything that I hear from PETA, I do my own research. I have found that the PETA information is often alarmist and nearly always skewed.
I hope that as informed consumers, we will all consider the source and do a little research before being reactionary. Thank you Kath for this carefully considered post.
In the second season, Penn and Teller did a show on circumcision… I’ll not post their findings here, but it’s an interesting episode, and again, changed the way I thought about the topic.
December 22nd, 2006 at 7:11 am
I was completely unaware of this issue. Thank you. I wonder if PETA would have such and issue if they animals were given pain relievers. And, I watched the PETA video wondering why there was information at the end about slaughtering the sheep. Sheep aren’t slaughtered for wool. All you have to do is shear the wool off, right? So, if farmers could make sure the animals are comfortable for the mulesing, and then properly bandaged and given antibacterial salve or something- wouldn’t everyone be happy? Surely, being eaten alive by maggots is worse than a procedure.
December 22nd, 2006 at 10:33 am
sheep in large herds are liberally dosed with antibiotics- as are most fiber and food flocks. bandaging happens as the wound is exposed to air. Its called a scab. a bandage is going to prevent the wound from drying, be very “scenty” both of which attract predators.
I’ve spent a fair amount of time around sheep. No bandages -ever. first of all, what bandage is going to stick to lanolin covered fiber or skin? That lamb at the petting zoo has been washed. Sheep in grazing herds are oily, dirty(dirt sticks to oil)bossy beasts.
anesthetics? topical maybe.
I think PETA is against animal husbandry in general, flocks of any kind, for any reason are cruel. I think I have heard it referred to as “animal slavery”.
So anything that happens in that flock be it milking(cows), shearing(sheep), taking eggs(chickens), harvesting honey(bees) is cruel. The selling of offspring is cruel to the mother. I think PETA goes off the deep end sometimes.
Yes everybody loves animals … am I going to quit eating cheese? wearing wool? take off my leather shoes? no, I’m not.
i’m grateful for the animals that feed me and my 2dogs/2cats, clothe me, and I grateful for the farmers/ranchers.
December 22nd, 2006 at 12:32 pm
Thank you for this very thoughtful post! It is so god to see someone in the crafting community talk about both sides of this tough issue.
Well done.
December 22nd, 2006 at 2:34 pm
i would be happy to just see them use a topical anesthetic.
December 22nd, 2006 at 5:51 pm
Tisra: And, I watched the PETA video wondering why there was information at the end about slaughtering the sheep. Sheep aren’t slaughtered for wool.
Sheep may not be slaughtered for shearing, but they’re not exactly retired to pleasant green paddocks when they’re no longer considered economically viable, either.
One market for ‘disposing’ of ex-wool sheep is live export — and that’s pretty spectacularly horrible.
December 22nd, 2006 at 5:58 pm
as a vegan, i strongly dislike PETA; i think that their infantile sensationalism gives people an excuse to avoid facing some unpleasant realities, and makes us all look bad. muelsing is a complex issue, and there are pragmatic realities of stock management to be dealt with — fly strike is horrendous. i don’t think PETA is helping anything by oversimplifying and mischaracterising the issue.
what i think is equally unfortunate, though, is that the wool industry is responding by being just as misleading, sensationalist, and infantile as PETA. instead of using this as an opportunity to raise awareness of the problems facing farmers, and to raise more funding for research into alternatives to mulesing, they’re resorting to muck-raking and mud-slinging.
the industry itself is invested in research into alternatives, because they’re well aware that mulesing is not ideal, that it’s merely the lesser evil.
so, they could be saying
yes, mulesing is cruel, but flystrike is worse — look at these pictures! we wish we could do away with mulesing, but until we have more money for research into alternatives, that won’t be possible
and, by doing so, not insult the intelligence of the general public, and maybe drum up some more research money, which would be good for them, and the sheep, and everyone would be happier…
but no.
instead, their message is
OMG!!! PETA wants to force you to wear nothing but synthetic clothes!!! (err… is cotton animal, or synthetic?).
::sigh::
December 22nd, 2006 at 10:35 pm
rik, good points. I don’t have much knowledge of PETA, so was more trying to get to the heart of what would make them happy on this issue. Also- I’m a suburban mom with not a lick of farming experience. But, I always like healthy debate that leads everyone to their own resolve and am interested in hearing both sides to an issue that I knew nothing about. Personally, I value humans above animals and ultimately will make sure that my decisions reflect that.
January 1st, 2007 at 6:33 pm
Tisra; cotton is neither – it is a plant.
January 1st, 2007 at 6:34 pm
Whoops. Sorry, that was to Amy.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:29 am
There is no such thing as true ‘cruelty-free’ knitting. Synthetics come largely from petroleum, which has obvious environmental and political impact. Semi-synthetics like rayon and the new soy and corn based yarns are processed with some wicked-harsh chemicals like acids – not too eco-friendly, and cotton and it’s ilk are grown with pesticides and herbicides. (Cotton is one of the most pesticide intensive crops commercially grown, anywhere.) Even ‘organic fibers’ use petroleum-based power sources to process them in mills. And many organically grown crops, like corn and cotton, STILL deplete the soil badly and can create dustbowls.
PETA won’t point any of this out. They just want you to go hug a sheep. Or an alpaca. Or a goat (do you have any idea how badly cashmere goats overgraze?)
You can’t have six billion people on this planet and not have environmental impact. Ain’t. Gonna. Happen.
On the other hand, I’m all for humane treatment for animals, and I see mulesing as a humane treatment – it sure beats dying of fly-strike.