animal-friendly wrote:
The Canadian laws allow pigs to be transported to up to 36 hours without food or water. In this regard, Canada is lagging. Can you imagine, in 80 degree temperatures, or 0 degree temperatures? Of course 80 degrees is a heat wave when you are travelling such long distances/hours without food or water. No wonder those animals were in need of water. So basic.
Well, when you can say that 80 degrees F is a heat wave, you have gone off into the ether and left reality behind.
Quote:
When I was growing up, I remember that 78* was hot. We didn't huddle together in those days of 78* sun temps. We sought shade. 80* is hot. Call it 80*or call it a heat wave, or call it simply hot. 80* is 80* by all accounts.
Nowadays, I am used to much hotter temps, but I still don't choose to travel in either temp, and I am not terribly interested in even shaking hands with another human when both of us are in such climes for such long distances and so huddled together.
Quote:
No hit from your logic can cure this or justify it.
Of course not, you have already decided that it is unacceptable and would probably do so no matter the changes in the legislation.
Quote:
You have also decided on your position. We both have. Are we aiming to change each others minds? Yes and no. There's not much that either of us can do as individuals anyway, but discussion is always good. The wisdom is always in the question. There can be no conclusion.
Quote:
Dazzle me with your brilliance Wayne, but no amount of justification can justify this.
These animals are forced to endure ridiculously inhumane practices as a means of human employment. Cheap.
I know there can be no justification for you because you already made up your mind and closed it tight.
Quote:
My mind is open & I would hope yours is too. It's the only way to tango.
Quote:
And the conversation is a bit boring because "temperature records" and the interpretation of them in regard to the actual experience of these animals is nit-picking and a distraction from the actual fact of what these animals actually experience on their way to slaughter.
The ACTUALLY experienced temperatures of no more than 80 degrees F because there were no temperatures for that location higher for the entire month.
Quote:
Wow! Seems you missed my point. Whether it was 75 degrees, or eighty ....... or 2. By Canadian standards, which are lagging, we are seeing dead animals upon arrival (DOA), from heat exhaustion or from cold. It's happening. It's a fact.
Quote:
I believe you are arguing that these animals are actually quite comfortable on their way. They are not. Some of them arrive quite sick and some already dead.
Really? How many of these particular animals arrived dead?
Quote:
Oh right. I guess I got carried away there. You are asking about the particular as I am describing the probability in a system of both mass slaughter and mass transportation. (bacon/sausage for breakfast, ham or salami for lunch, chicken, steak or pork chops for dinner!). Cultural conditioning keeps the conveyor belts running. It's an industry ya know ... a cog in the machinery of an economic system we can't blame God for.
Quote:
"Of the 700 million farm animals killed each year in Canada, nearly every one will undergo transport at least once in its life. According to reports by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), three million animals die during transport every year. The suffering these animals endure is unfathomable. According to the Humane Society International Canada, the conditions of these transport trucks offer poor ventilation, and expose animals to outdoor temperature extremes. Often animals cannot lie down during long journeys, and can overheat. Overcrowding on trucks is another factor, which leads to some animals getting trampled and killed. The journey also subjects animals to decrease in airflow, as well as high ammonia levels, and poor air quality."
If you have that data you know which date it was they were shipped and we can get the exact maximum temperature for the trip
Quote:
You use the word 'shipped'. You ask about the maximum temp. 80* isn't enough under these conditions for animals to be "shipped"? What is it for general cargo?
through "town." you say? The animals only had to cross "town" you say? Oh well then ... Let's not talk about the highways, cities with their traffic and noise and confusion, traffic lights stalling movement, long delays, etc.
Perhaps there were none dead but merely "quite sick" as you said. That number would also be of interest for this shipment for the same reasons.[/quote]
Quote:
Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), "three million animals die during transport every year".
And we didn't agree that the trip was only through "town" since it included a highway or two, plus a lot of other confusion.
So what about this particular "shipment" that was given water?
Perhaps you would prefer this interpretation: The pigs were naturally curious about the offering. Pigs are curious. They weren't thirsty at all. They took the water thinking it was food of any kind because pigs like food of any kind. It turned out to be only water which the pigs guzzled because they were simply curious about food. They weren't thirsty at all, and their guzzling of the water only indicated a natural curiosity of food. We don't know how long this particular 'shipment' had been travelling, but it was ONLY the outer edges of this particular 'shipment', the ones who happen to have been situated by the windows, who were thirsty. The ones who were not near the window were obviously not thirsty.