Interesting research. I first became aware of this issue from being involved in the animal welfare movement, specifically with small/”pocket” pets where sale of breeding “overstock” for reptile consumption is sadly common. Unfortunately, some people simply enjoy the spectacle of their pet consuming live prey. More generally, it’s part of the broader issue of carnivore pets in general—the meat produced for consumption by dogs and cats is likely to come from factory farms similar to those raising meat for human consumption, where conditions may be little better than those of the mice pictured here. This has led me to a personal decision to refrain from having non-vegetarian pets, and I know that other EAs have done likewise.
It seems that meat produced for consumption by dogs and cats normally comes from the very same factory farms that produce human food. Because Animals claims that
Pet foods are made from both 4-D meat (animals that are dead, dying, diseased or disabled), and the leftover bits—referred to on pet food labels as “meat by-products”—of slaughtered farm animals. These parts include the snouts, udders, lungs, feet, organs, ears and other parts that humans don’t want to consume.
Of course, this doesn’t change much. Pet food allows meat industry to be more profitable, which leads to them farming more animals. I agree that this is a strong consideration against having carnivorous pets. There was a discussion about it in the EA forum here.
I wonder if outreach to not buy dogs and cats could be more effective for reducing the number of farmed animals than vegan advocacy. And if corporate campaigns that encourage dog and cat food manufacturers to use higher welfare animals (e.g. gestation-crate-free pigs, broilers that are stocked less densely) could be effective.
This is definitely an interesting idea (two interesting ideas, I guess) worth exploring more. I worry though that some issues that might hold up these ideas are (1) these things generally being harder to compare, (2) not having any knock-on / flow-through effects of encouraging better behavior toward animals more specifically, and (3) companion animals being an important influence for people going veg.
A natural human tendency is to choose a dog’s or cat’s food that seems to be ‘people’s food;’ pet owners want to provide dog or cat with the same quality of food they would prepare for each other’s family members. Certain pet foods use ingredients such as ‘people food,’ while others do not. Worse news, pet foods are using human quality and low quality ingredients and pet foods are not as simple as it looks. Pet food rules do not provide any laws or regulations to guide or warn pet owners about higher quality ingredients.
Interesting research. I first became aware of this issue from being involved in the animal welfare movement, specifically with small/”pocket” pets where sale of breeding “overstock” for reptile consumption is sadly common. Unfortunately, some people simply enjoy the spectacle of their pet consuming live prey. More generally, it’s part of the broader issue of carnivore pets in general—the meat produced for consumption by dogs and cats is likely to come from factory farms similar to those raising meat for human consumption, where conditions may be little better than those of the mice pictured here. This has led me to a personal decision to refrain from having non-vegetarian pets, and I know that other EAs have done likewise.
It seems that meat produced for consumption by dogs and cats normally comes from the very same factory farms that produce human food. Because Animals claims that
Of course, this doesn’t change much. Pet food allows meat industry to be more profitable, which leads to them farming more animals. I agree that this is a strong consideration against having carnivorous pets. There was a discussion about it in the EA forum here.
I wonder if outreach to not buy dogs and cats could be more effective for reducing the number of farmed animals than vegan advocacy. And if corporate campaigns that encourage dog and cat food manufacturers to use higher welfare animals (e.g. gestation-crate-free pigs, broilers that are stocked less densely) could be effective.
This is definitely an interesting idea (two interesting ideas, I guess) worth exploring more. I worry though that some issues that might hold up these ideas are (1) these things generally being harder to compare, (2) not having any knock-on / flow-through effects of encouraging better behavior toward animals more specifically, and (3) companion animals being an important influence for people going veg.
Let me know if you’d want to look into this. :)
I agree with you Sir dogs
A natural human tendency is to choose a dog’s or cat’s food that seems to be ‘people’s food;’ pet owners want to provide dog or cat with the same quality of food they would prepare for each other’s family members. Certain pet foods use ingredients such as ‘people food,’ while others do not. Worse news, pet foods are using human quality and low quality ingredients and pet foods are not as simple as it looks. Pet food rules do not provide any laws or regulations to guide or warn pet owners about higher quality ingredients.