Our goal is to curate the most reliable COVID-19 animal-related information—highlighting the positive and dispelling inacurate information that has the potential to harm animals and people.
Welcome to the current issue of the Animals & Society Institute's
Human-Animal Studies e-newsletter.
First, I hope you and your loved ones are all healthy, safe, and weathering
the pandemic situation as best as you can. Things are stressful and
uncertain for us all, and we want to help with that. Toward that end, I’m
restructuring the HAS E-news for a time in order to provide relevant,
credible information and analysis regarding how the COVID-19 is affecting
animals and our relationships with them.
It is important to hold in mind that the coronavirus is called “novel” for a
reason. We have never experienced this virus, and we are scared—for
ourselves, our loved ones, our communities, and the animals of the world. We
crave information, and are anxious to share it with others. But the extent
of our knowledge is changing daily. This means that what we think we know
one day might change dramatically the next. Because social media is so
powerful, it is crucial to take a measured approach to the exchange of
information, in order to insure what we are passing along is both timely and
accurate.
Wild animals
One instance of misinformation that arose this month were stories of
wildlife bouncing back, running free and returning to places now sparsely
inhabited by humans under lockdown. But while swans and dolphins returning
to canals in Venice and elephants strolling through Asian villages might
give us a moment of respite from our situation, in these instances the
stories weren’t true.
Travel restrictions and social distancing efforts are keeping people home,
but that is having both positive and negative impacts on wild animals.
Encouraging examples, for instance, show critically endangered sea turtles
in Brazil and in India are now hatching at higher rates due to deserted
beaches. However, travel restrictions and social distancing have caused
problems for street animals worldwide who rely on humans for food, although
people are stepping up to help.
Companion animals
News circulated this month of isolated cases of pet dogs and cats testing
positive for COVID-9, spawning questions and concerns that pets might have
the potential infect humans.
According to three credible expert sources, there is no evidence that pets
can spread the COVID-19 virus to people. Both the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Illinois College of Veterinary Medicine
see no evidence that companion animals can spread the novel coronavirus to
people. And as of April 19, the American Veterinary Medical Association note
that they have no information that suggests that pets might be a source of
infection for people with the COVID-19 virus.
The issue here is more about keeping pets safe—if we are ill, we should be
concerned with infecting our pets. Pet owners with COVID-19 should avoid
contact with their animals as much as possible, including wearing a face
covering while caring for them.
In other companion animal news, the Institute for Human-Animal Connection
has compiled a list of COVID-19 considerations for companion animals, and
RedRover has published a list of emergency resources for people and pets
that includes emergency funding for veterinary care, boarding, pet food, and
educational resources, among others.
Social isolation
Shelters continue to empty as adoptions spike. But this raises concerns
about the lives of the animals adopted once quarantine efforts cease. Some
shelters fear that large numbers of pets will be returned. It’s also
probable that if not directly abandoned, many newly adopted pets will feel
abandoned once their adopters return to work.
Along these lines, the distressed, edgy and untethered feelings we have
because of stay-at-home orders have fostered positive discussions aimed at
sharing empathetic awareness of the ways such isolation and confinement
might similarly affect the animals in our care—including companion animals,
zoo animals, animals in laboratory research, and those raised as products
under intensive livestock practices. All of these issues deserve more
attention and discussion.
The issue of “wet markets”
Finally, a great deal of attention has focused on identifying the possible
origin(s) of the COVID-19 virus. Initial consensus seemed to be that the
virus originated in Wuhan, China in a “wet market” at which live wild and
farmed animals are sold for food. More recent research notes this is far
from certain. As pointed out in this article analyzing the issue of the
wet-market origin of the virus, “analysis of the first 41 Covid-19 patients
in medical journal the Lancet found that [only] 27 of them had direct
exposure to the Wuhan market. But the same analysis found that the first
known case of the illness did not.”
One advocacy group for small farmers argues that new research points blame
at industrialized models of agricultural, specifically livestock production,
not wet markets. Other commentors point out that it is not the animals who
may be intermediate hosts that have caused the virus outbreak, but our human
behaviors, and that it is our cruel treatment of animals that has led to the
coronavirus.
While the question of the origin of the virus remains uncertain, it has most
certainly spurred positive discussion about the human use of animals in
these ways. At the same time, wet markets “have been portrayed as emblems of
Chinese otherness,” with the outcome of a growing number of xenophobic
attacks against Asians and the Chinese. This thoughtful piece in Earth
Island Journal points out the complex concerns that are often lost with
narrow, unidimensional calls to close these markets, and argues that rather
than pushing for a closure of China’s wet markets we should focus instead on
getting wild and exotic animals out of what are essentially the Eastern
equivalent farmers' markets.
The closure of wet markets is certainly a red flag issue for animal
advocates. (And indeed, recent polls show that 97 percent of Chinese
citizens are now strongly against wildlife consumption.) Given the
unintended consequences some of these recent calls have caused, we might
consider carefully if our advocacy could be used to promote culturally
insensitive narratives that could be misconstrued to endorse xenophobic
actions, and look instead for ways to stimulate positive outcomes for both
animals and people.
Here at ASI, we recognize that COVID-19-related information is fluid and
changes with each day. Our goal is to curate the most reliable COVID-19
animal-related information—highlighting the positive and dispelling
inacurate information that has the potential to harm animals and people. We
will continue to follow scholarly and expert sources, unbiased media, and
social commentary about how these issues affect both animals and people.
Now, as always, we want to ensure that both animals and people are staying
safe.
Return to: Animal Rights/Vegan Activist Strategies