Day 114 - 04 Apr 95 - Page 72
1 I would not -- if I use the word "improved" it sounds as
2 if, perhaps, it is good. It is not a word I would use. I
3 do not want to have words put in my mouth. I would still
4 think that it needs further reform, but it has been, if you
5 like, it has been improved to some extent which indicates
6 that it had shortcomings before.
7
8 Q. What is the number of pigs, do you think, in the last 44
9 years, or whatever it is, maybe longer, 50, I do not know,
10 that you have seen stunned and killed?
11 A. That would be a greater number.
12
13 Q. Roughly?
14 A. I suppose two or three hundred.
15
16 Q. Is there any form, any method, of killing animals for human
17 consumption that you would find acceptable?
18 A. No, I would not because I do not believe in killing
19 things if they are enjoying a life. If you did have a
20 caveat in what you said. Of course, if you were dealing
21 with animals like stray dogs, you would use an injection or
22 you would do this with a casualty animal.
23
24 Q. I did say for human consumption. We do not normally eat
25 dogs in this country.
26 A. No, but I think there is a very strong welfare matter
27 there because the animal is having to undergo a less
28 satisfactory process because it has been sacrificed to the
29 plate. I think that is an important part for us
30 welfarists, that it is commercial considerations that
31 override the essentials of welfare.
32
33 Q. Do you accept then that where humans choose to raise and
34 kill animals for food there is, of necessity, a compromise
35 to be sought?
36 A. My attitude is while this goes on animal welfarists
37 must do their best. I myself have reacted because, with
38 the evidence that I have seen, I am not satisfied that it
39 is a method based on welfare, and so I do not have any
40 complicity with it. I do not eat meat and I do not use
41 dairy produce.
42
43 Q. But you never would, would you?
44 A. Well, I used to once upon a time.
45
46 Q. No, I mean now you never would?
47 A. Well, no, not unless I could be persuaded that it was a
48 satisfactory process.
49
50 Q. In your mind, it is not satisfactory simply because they
51 are animals; is that not right?
52 A. Not at all. It is because I regard it as an affront to
53 human dignity to inflict this sort of fate on animals.
54 I actually used to like the taste of meat, I used to like
55 the taste of cheese as well, but I think that we have the
56 wit and resource to get round this. It is unnecessary
57 cruelty and, as I say, it is an affront to the dignity of
58 our own species.
59
60 Q. Just two other things, Dr. Long, before we go away to meet
