Litigation Anxiety, Oregon’s IP 28, and Cattle That Are Bred to Shut Up | Rising Anxieties

And, uh, mostly, you know, it's mostly animal ag, but not exclusively. Uh, a little bit about what's worrying me. Probably something about what's worrying you, if you worry a lot, as does everybody these days.

Don't forget we're a podcast. We're on YouTube. Please subscribe, hit like wherever you listen. And our first story is from one of our favorite commentators. That's Hannah Thompson Wemhoff. She's writing for Meatingplace. And, uh, she, she's just writing her standard article on... Because she's the president of the Animal Agriculture Alliance.

They keep an eye on, on conferences, uh, animal rights conference, uh, conferences and animal law conferences and, uh, offer their opinions and what they have learned. Uh, I guess they sneak around unless, I guess, unless it's online, in which case they watch online. So, uh, it's always interesting. It's not that interesting.

It's nice to know that they're nervous, you know? Recent conversations among animal rights activist groups and what they mean for meat. Uh, and she was recently asked about, um, brand-busting issues. I did not know what that was, but that's an an activist campaign that is designed to damage a company's reputation.

And they wanted to know what they should be worried about. And she says a lot of people are asking her that, and so that's why she pays attention to what's happening at the conferences. She also-- she's talking about the ALDF conference, I think that was online, the Animal Law Symposium, and the, the big one, the AVA Summit, uh, Animal and Vegan Advocacy, that was in Toronto, um, a few weeks ago.

And she points out that activists are increasingly combining litigation, corporate pressure campaigns, investigative tactics, and strategic communications that are designed to influence public opinion, policy making, and business decisions. And I was particularly pleased to see how focused she is on litigation, since that's a topic that I follow, and I do think that we have some remarkable lawyers doing litigation these days, and there's some really interesting stuff.

As hard as it is to come up with ways to sue the industry, there are people who are doing it. And she does point out the overall message was clear: litigation continues to be viewed as one of animal rights movement's most valuable tools for advancing its objectives. I totally agree with you, Hannah. Um, and she, uh, talked about how there was the debate, which there has been a debate at every animal rights conference since the beginning of time, whether incremental reforms are helping or hurting the movement.

I think the debate is a little less acrimonious than it used to be, but still, you know, people are trying to figure out the right theory of change since none of them seem to work. And, um, and she pointed out that al- although activists differed on strategy, there was little disagreement about the movement's ultimate objective.

Yeah. That's really true. We wanna shut you down. Um, rather than concentrating solely on company executives, speakers encourage activists to research an organization's entire network, including board members, investors, suppliers, and business partners to identify multiple points of influence. Yes, excellent, excellent advice, and one that's obviously concerning Hannah.

Uh, and, um "Industry messaging surrounding animal welfare and sustainability also remained a major focus." I would think it would be if they're worried about litigation 'cause they lie all the time. Uh, "Neither conference introduced entirely new tactics." I have to agree. These are things that we've talked about in the past.

"Instead, both demonstrated how activist organizations continue refining and coordinating their efforts across multiple fronts." I'm so glad that she's, she's impressed. "Discussions at the AVA summit," she also points out, "revealed that while activists may disagree on the best path forward, many remain committed to eliminating modern animal agriculture."

Hannah gets it. That is actually completely right. Then she gets back to the question about brand busting, which she never answered and she still doesn't, so I don't, I don't know what to make that... That just concludes by saying, "The companies that stay informed are better positioned to respond with sound science, transparency, and proactive communications before activist narratives take hold." Her real messaging there is, like, pay your dues to the Animal Agricultural Alliance so I can write stupid articles like this.

All right. Another article on Oregon's IP 28, which I just love this. I just love it. This is so good. This is from the Northwest Horse Source. That is not easy to say. Try saying that three times fast.

Um, Don't Ignore Oregon IP 28: It's Just the Beginning of the Animal Extremist Agenda. And of course, I have talked about this before. It is the, uh, ballot measure that would, uh, that would eliminate all of the exceptions to Oregon's cruelty law, which basically all those exceptions are for all the industries, particularly animal agriculture.

And so it would basically make them all illegal in, in Oregon. It has... It's kind of the opposite of the sales ban. It makes doing it illegal. Selling it would be fine. Uh, they can still sell meat. They can take, get meat from Idaho or whatever, wherever Oregon would get its meat from, and sell it. But Oregon would be a, a, a place where you can't be cruel to animals, no exceptions.

This article points out... Let's see. Do I know who this is by? No, I don't think it has an author. They don't want to admit who they are, I guess. Uh, nope. Uh, Oregon's Initiative p- Initiative Petition 28. Initiative Petition is also difficult to say. Init- Initiative Petition 28 is not just another ballot measure. It is a symptom of a calculated long-term campaign by animal rights extremists to fundamentally reshape society.

Again, they totally get us. That is exactly right. Uh, and though, though he points out that, um, those putting, uh, Oregon IP 28 on are not, um, deceived about the fact that it's not very likely to pass, see, she-- he points out that, or whoever this is, they point out that the likelihood of failure is not a concern.

The real objective is normalization, getting radical ideas about banning or severely restricting animal use onto the ballot, into the news cycle, and eventually into the public consciousness. This incrementalism - this is incrementalism at its most insidious. I totally agree, except for the idea that these ideas are radical.

These ideas are mostly things that people already think and already agree with. We just have to, like, explain to them, like, how it's actually working in the real world. But that's what they're really nervous about, as far as I'm concerned. He's talking about David Michelson, who of course was on the podcast, you know, a couple years ago when they were doing a pr- previous iteration, which didn't manage to get on the ballot.

Though, uh, and he quotes David: "For our campaign, what a win looks like is so different than what some other campaigns would call a win, because we know that this isn't going to pass in 2026. But we still feel like we're winning when we're having those conversations, when we're seeing our numbers of people involved in the campaign grow."

Yeah, God forbid people should talk about what's happening in animal agriculture. That's exactly what they're scared of. Exactly. All right. Uh, so it, it points out that the earlier version failed to gather enough signatures to reach the ballot, but it does seem poised to qualify. It still hasn't qualified, I might add.

They do seem to have the right number of signatures, but, you know, who knows what can go wrong? They have many s- many- tricks up their sleeves. Um, and again, animal rights extremists have mastered the art of the long game. God, I love that sentence, except for the extremist part. Uh, terms like puppy mill, slaughter pipeline, backyard breeder, and welfare ranchers did not emerge organically into everyday conversation.

They were deliberately injected w- 'cause, 'cause we have the power to control the language. You just have no idea how powerful we are. We use a word and all of a sudden everybody's using it. It's, it's so convenient that that happens. Um, what begins as emotional rhetoric about, quote, "cruelty" evolves into policy.

Yeah, that's because emotions are a perfectly valid response to, to what's happening, and it, it's actually-- what's happening is actually cruelty by anybody's definition. Uh, make no... Uh, the article goes on. Make no mistake about the end goal. This movement does not seek better welfare standards or responsible stewardship. It seeks the complete elimination of animal use by humans in any form.

And then it, it offers some quotes from, from, uh, leading figures. Uh, I'll just, I'll, I'll just offer this one from Patrick Battuello of, um, Horseracing Wrongs, who has been on the podcast of course. Then sterilized to extinction, a planet devoid of Thoroughbreds, Quarter Horses, Standardbreds, and everything in between.

Yeah, we don't need domesticated animals, it's actually very true, who are being born to be abused. I want you to remember that quote for, for the next article because it's relevant, I think. This is... There'll be a quiz at the end. Compounding the threat is the influx of foreign funds and foreign actors bankrolling these campaigns.

That one appears to be completely made up. I don't know. Like, I wish that there was a country out there that was donating money for this, but, uh, I haven't heard about it. Um, Oregonians and Americans everywhere must recognize IP 28 and similar efforts for what they are, stepping stones toward a radical future where humans are separated from animals entirely.

I'm not sure separated, just like not abusing them? Is that the same thing? I guess for some people that is the only thing we do with animals. Our relationship with animals, it goes on, rooted in respect... ha... Responsibility and thousands of years of shared history deserves to be defended, not dismantled.

Yeah, not so much. Not so much. Boy, they're, they're, they are up in arms about this. All right, another thing that everybody's up in arms about, I've been seeing all the articles about banning horse, um, horse and ca- carriage horses in, in, in New York City, but I haven't really seen a lot of the opposition.

But I came across one today. This is from AM New York, which is a, a, you know, a mainstream publication. Op-ed, Horse Vet: Celebrate and Regulate Carriage Horses and Drivers. Don't Ban Them. This is by Dr. Gabriel Cook, and he first wants to point out, 'cause he knows, he, he kn- he kn- he's a vet, so he knows all about animals.

"It's not true that horses should not work. They are domesticated animals that have worked alongside humans for 5,000 years. They are designed to work. They like to work, and if healthy, they absolutely should work."

Oh my God. Oh, I'm not gonna make any slavery analogies, but, you know, it's, it's right there, isn't it? Um, he points out that they don't pull the carriages. They just, they get really strong, so they gain momentum and just walk. Okay, whatever. I don't think the main, the main... I mean, you know, it depends. Like, if they're, if they're on a flat surface, I'm sure there's some momentum going on, uh, with the carriage.

If they're going uphill, I'm sure there's not. Uh, you know, like, it depends. If they're stopping and starting as they do in traffic all the time, then they have to use their considerable strength to gain the momentum every single time they have to stop and start. So this is stupid. It's just stupid. Uh, and it's also n- not, hardly the only complaint about what's going on with these horses.

By the way, he points out stablemen maneuver these carriages around the stables on their own every day, yet they don't have people in them at that point. And it's probably not that much fun. Um, second, this is really an interesting one. It's difficult to find suitable homes for horses, let alone 200 horses, which is the number providing tours of Central Park.

So we should allow abusive and horrible industries to exist because we have all too many animals and we wouldn't know what to do with them. Sounds like animal agriculture, doesn't it? Yeah. I mean, I'm not saying it's easy to know what to do when we have backed ourselves into the corner of, like, having all these animals and not having, not having the wherewithal or the will to treat, to come up with a way to treat them kindly.

But is that really a reason to continue the industry ad infinitum? I do not think so. Um, if New York City bans carriage rides, the potential fate of these horses is terrifying. Well, who created that situation? And let's make it less terrifying by putting some money towards it. And he points out that, that sanctuaries are frequently, uh, not good.

There are no federal standards. Well, let's get some federal standards. That's easily fixed. Oh, god. There's nothing like watching city kids meet, touch, and interact with a horse for the first time. Yeah, there's, there, there are. There are other things that are good in the world. It, at this point in the article, he points out that he works with the industry.

You might have guessed that, but, uh, but yeah, that's what he does. And he really wants them to reform. All of a sudden, uh, people in the industry are jumping up and saying, "No, we want more reforms. Every industry has a few bad apples, and the city has been sticking its head in the sand and doing nothing about rule compliance."

Yeah, let's, let's, let's p- let's have taxpayers pay even more money to, uh, make sure these horses are, are well cared for by these drivers who are apparently, you know, not well, caring well for them. Oh! "On the medical side, there should be a chief veterinarian with final say on whether a horse is ready to return to work."

Guess I, I wonder who would be jockeying for that job. Uh, interesting, right?

Alright, next. This is from Watt Poultry. Historic French heat wave claims millions of birds. I'm just... You know, you probably know this and it's als- or, or could surmise it, uh, because we've all heard of the, the heat wave in France and other countries in Europe. Um, and this is by Mark Clements, and the coun- Because the subtitle is, "The country has recorded its hottest day ever and the poultry sector is paying a heavy price." The poultry sector. I'm just really talking about the way this is written. Uh, "with temperatures in Europe again rising after the storms of last week, spare a thought for poultry farmers in France."

No mention of the birds. Like, um, well, there, it does mention that two and a half to 3 million of them were lost in a few days. They were, they, they weren't lost, they were dead. They still knew where they were. Um, in Brittany, the country's leading poultry producing region, the equivalent of 6,600 metric tons has been lost.

So we're measuring the birds' lives in tonnage now. Uh, rendering companies have been overwhelmed. "The government, which is facilitating insurance payments," so, you know, don't worry too much about the quote-unquote farmers, "has temporarily allowed carcasses to be buried on farm." Uh, that was nice of them.

While it may have helped... the Ministry of Agriculture, while it may have helped farmers through facilitating insurance claims, so they not only get the money, they actually get help filling out the forms, I guess, there is little it can do to influence the expected increase in food costs and temperatures keep rising.

Well, actually, there is something it could do. Like, it could actually mention the word climate change and actually ban animal agriculture. That's what it could do. But this guy ain't mentioning the word climate change. No way. Oh. All right, from Drovers, "Life is too short for mean cattle. Why docility is the ultimate profit trait."

Could say that about men. Life is too short for mean men. Yep. Anyway, I digress. Whether it's reducing dark cutters at the plant... Or women, too. All right. Whether, whether it's reducing dark cutters. You can imagine what a dark cutter is. I, well, I don't know. It, it obviously has something to do with, um, the way the meat looks, and clearly has something to do with emotion.

Um, I don't think that's clear. I don't know why I'm saying that's clear. I think that's what it is, though. Um, or boosting AI. AI is artificial insemination in their world. AI conception rates in the pasture. The genetics of docility are redefining modern cattle selection. This is... This article is so gross, and it really...

I mean, they're, they're, they're manipulating the genetics of these animals to make them less trouble to, uh, raise and kill them, and we know they're doing that, but the way they talk about it is so gross. All right, they're, they're quoting this, this cattle rancher, Paul Holton. "For the average customer, disposition..."

That means, you know, ranchers, uh, who are buying, uh, I don't know, buying semen, whatever it is they buy. "For the average customer, disposition means a lot. I don't tolerate bad disposition. When I was younger, it didn't bother me, but I was young and dumb, and I didn't really realize the consequences it has when they do make it to the feed yard. Those cattle, the offspring, are gonna be goofy, too. It hurts their overall gains. You get the dark cutters."

Like, fuck you, Paul Oh, a trait that has been... It goes on to say, "A trait that has been directly correlated to genetic heritability is often wondered how much environment impacts docility." Uh, so they know it's genetics.

They're just wondering how much, um, you know, how, how, how horrible they can be to them without that also causing them to not be as docile. And, uh, but Holton has seen firsthand how docile genetics trump environmental chaos. So, you know, it's making it a lot easier to do whatever you want to them because, because, you know, we bred them, uh, that way.

This is it's just so sick. It really is. All right. He says, "I had a set of cows years ago that were just recipient cows," whatever the hell that means, "and they weren't the gentlest, I'll say. I put embryos in those cows and..." Oh, I guess it's cows that, that they put the embryos in, and then they raise them as their own.

"And thought they're gonna be idiots. It had zero effect on those calves. Of course, if you don't ever go check your cattle and they don't see humans but once a year, I'm sure they're gonna be a little bit dumb." Like, everything is dumb. "But overall, I think the genetics will trump just about everything." Oh, another, um, rancher or, or, um, yeah, another rancher, Christine Mushrush.

"First and foremost, docility is important for safety. Life is too short to deal with uncooperative animals." And, uh, "I do believe our buyers definitely look at that score that's listed in the lot profile, and more and more we are hearing, 'I need a quiet bull,' or, 'I need a quiet heifer. I need them to be cooperative.'"

Yeah, they love their animals. They're, they're like turning animals into... well, I mean, I know that's always been done. They've always bred for, for traits, but the way they talk about it is just so gross.

All right, who is this Millie Bobby Brown? I never watched Stranger Things. It's too scary. So I'm not really familiar with her, but like, what the hell?

She, she doubles down after saying quinoa smells like a vegan. Millie Bobby Brown still hates quinoa, but says she was not hating on the vegan community. This is from Plant Based News. Like, I'm not crazy about quinoa myself, but what? So she was given... It's in some, some TV show. She was asked to guess what food was hidden underneath a silver serving dish, and she said, "I already don't like the smell of it. It smells like a vegan. Am I right?"

And she found out it was quinoa, and she said, "Yeah, I'm right. I hate quinoa. It looks like little dead ants in a bowl." Like, what does this have to do with being vegan? Like, there are non-vegans who eat quinoa. There are vegans like me who are not crazy about... I'll eat it, but I'm not crazy about it.

I know it's really good for you. I do. Um, and then she got in all sorts of trouble and, and she felt bad about it, and she says, "All right, everybody's saying that I'm hating on the vegan community and, like, I'm not. It's what you eat. It's not you. It's just a food. I just don't like quinoa." Well, then why did you bring up vegans?

Like, like, all of a sudden it's become, like, funny just to make fun... Yeah, I mean, I guess it makes friends because people don't like vegans. I don't know. Why don't people like us? Why? We're so... By and large, we're so nice. At least I am. I don't know about you. Um she got a lot of response. It was-- it went big on social media, of course, and one user commented, "It's funny when people think plant-based food is gross but have no problem eating animal carcass." Yes, ma'am or sir. Exactly. She sounds like an idiot.

All right, from Pro-ProPublica, I'm not gonna be able to summarize this whole article. It's hugely important, and it's horrifying. Um, the first major overhaul of public lands grazing regulations in a generation looks to cut out public involvement. For the first time since 1995, the Bureau of Land Management is rewriting its grazing regulations.

The new rule, which governs ranching across a hundred and fifty-five million acres of public lands in the West, he- would heavily favor the livestock industry. You know, we've been begging for reform of the, uh, of the grazing regulations. I'd like to see them just eliminated and, and not allowed at all, um, for a long time, and so they're making them worse.

That's what they're making. Um, "the federal government," it says, "is writing its rules governing ranching on public lands to increase the number of cattle, sheep, and other livestock grazing on one hundred and fifty-five million acres in the West, an area twice the size of New Mexico. Public lands grazing is overseen by a nearly century-old system that heavily subsidizes some of the wealthiest Americans while doing little to address its harms to the environment.

Even though rangeland management experts say overgrazing has degraded public lands," as we all know it has, "the new rules being drafted by the U.S. Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management, the first overhaul since 1995, would instead expand the practice." And they're not only trying to expand it, but they're, like, drastically ratcheting back the opportunity of the public to participate.

Um, there's, uh, one quote here, "They're clearly trying to reduce involvement of anyone other than ranchers." That's from a BLM employee who did not want to be identified, uh, for obvious reasons. Um, and the, the-- according to Josh Osher, who's a public policy director of the Western Watersheds Project, we can expect considerably more places where cows and sheep are going to be and more damage.

I think we see big impacts on wildlife. Um, and they, they, they-- they're explicitly saying they wanna go back to the Ronald Reagan years, and things have gotten so much worse for them since then. Uh, Native American tribes are really upset. Conservation groups are, are really upset. Um, they-- and, uh, conservation groups Uh, like both Native Americans and conservation groups have, um, told the reporters here that they, they were not given an opportunity to provide any input.

Just came from the ranchers. That's all they wanted to hear from. And, uh, there was th- this woman, Karen Bud Falen, uh, who's a high-ranking official in the Interior Department, long time grazing advocate, and guess what? Her family are ranchers. What a surprise. She's the one who said, "We went back to the Ronald Reagan years that are putting back in those regs."

That's what they want, to go back to when there was as little... Like, and it's not like, you know, things have gotten worse environmentally since then. This is so sad. Uh, so I, like I said, it's a, it's a pretty long, um, article. And so I don't have time to summarize it all, but it's in ProPublica. Um, within months, I'll just end with this.

Within months of President Donald Trump returning to the White House, political appointees instructed staff to build lists of every vacant plot that might be eligible for more livestock. They plan to put animals in all of those plots. Wow. It's by Mark Olalde, I should have said that.

All right, so, uh, I guess that's it. That's all I got for you. Um, oh, no, I have one more thing from Goose Rodriguez. He had, he had, uh, sent me an article about Canada, which you might have heard me talk about, and how Canada, um, has-- it's put in this whole big new food policy and plan for food security, and did not mention, um, plant-based foods at all.

Japan, apparently... This is not a bad story. This is the good news. Japan, they have a newly proposed public-private investment roadmap, and there-- this huge, um, sixty billion dollar industrial push, that's a lot of money for a relatively small country, and, um, six point two billion for the new food sector explicitly targeting non-animal derived protein production.

And it's interesting because, um, they're not emphasizing cultivated meat at all. They're trying to emphasize traditional foods, which totally makes sense for Japan, which of course has, you know, these, uh, very powerful traditions. A lot of fermentation, seasoning technologies, rice flour products, and high quality agricultural marine ingredients.

I, I, that could-- Some of that-- I mean, this is supposed to be plant-based, so I assume those are both plants and seaweed, which of course is popular in Japanese cuisine. And, uh, they have long-term commercial goals as well. They're targeting a lot of money to, um, uh, to promote, um, domestic and international sales for these new products.

Go Japan. Always wanted to... You know, there-- I, I've no desire to travel to most places, but Japan is kind of an exception. I watch Japanese television all the time, which is why I haven't seen things like Stranger Things. Um, all right. That's it. That's all I got for you. thank you for joining me today and letting your anxieties rise along with mine.

Thanks for tuning in. Don't for- just forget to subscribe, like, and comment on your favorite podcatcher on YouTube, and tune into The Hen Report and the Our Hen House interview, and I will see you next time.