style animal production. Sadly, as far as the animals are
concerned,therehasbeenverylittleimprovementsincethe
firsteditionofthisbookwaspublishedfifteenyearsago.At
thattimeitwasalreadyclearthatmodernproductionmethods
areincompatiblewithanygenuineconcernforthewelfareof
the animals. The evidence was first compiled in Ruth
Harrison’spathbreakingbook,AnimalMachines,publishedin
1964, and was authoritatively supported by the Brambell
committee,acommitteeappointedbytheBritishministerof
agriculture that consisted of the best qualified experts
available.InadditiontoBrambell,himselfanotedzoologist,
the committeeincluded W. H. Thorpe,the director of the
departmentofanimalbehavioratCambridgeUniversity,and
other expertsin veterinary science, animalhusbandry, and
agriculture. After a thorough investigation, in 1965 they
publishedaneighty-five-pageofficialreport.Inthereport,the
committeefirmlyrejectedtheargumentthatproductivityisa
satisfactoryindicationof theabsenceofsuffering—the fact
that an animal is putting on weight can, they said, be a
“pathological condition.” They also rejected the view that
farmanimalsdon’tsufferfromconfinementbecausetheyare
bredforitandareusedtoit.Inanimportantappendixtothe
report, Thorpe stressed that
observationsofthebehaviorofdomesticanimalshaveshown
that they are “still essentially what they were in the
prehistoricwild,”withinnatebehaviorpatternsandneedsthat
arestillpresenteveniftheanimalhasneverknownnatural
conditions. Thorpe concluded:
Certainbasicfactsareclearenoughtojustifyaction.Whilst
acceptingtheneedfor muchrestriction,wemust drawthe
lineatconditionswhichcompletelysuppressallornearlyall
the natural, instinctive urges and behavior patterns