The New York Times ran an intelligent article today about Animal Welfare. The article focuses on Farm Sanctuary, an organization that was featured in a film also called Farm Sanctuary from this year’s Media That Matters Film Festival.

What I most appreciate about the article is its exploration of the gap between Animal Rights activists and people who are advocating more humane treatment of animals in order to respond to the growing market for humanely raised animal products. As the article explains, activists are beginning to explore a more moderate approach: “Mr. Pacelle [head of the Humane Society] understands that not everyone is going to stop eating animals, so he focuses on what he calls the three R’s: refinement of farming techniques, reducing meat consumption and replacement of animal products. That way, he hopes, the Humane Society tent is big enough to include both ardent meat eaters and hard-core vegans.”

From my point of view, this approach to addressing the problem piecemeal, changing practices slowly rather than holding out for a wholesale conversion by American consumers, seems the one most likely to have a significant effect in the long run, and of course if we eliminate half of the animal suffering caused by our consumption practices, that’s good news for half the animals, which is a lot! The article also introduces the perspective that animal welfare is getting more attention, “because American gastronomic consumers increasingly want to do right by the animals they eat.” Even many who eat meat and don’t feel philosophically conflicted about it, still want to minimize the suffering of the animals that provide their food, and they are willing to pay the increased cost. As one animal rights activist says in the article, “We’re not really in philosophical alignment, but I like to think we’re in strategic alliance.”