Annotated+Bibliography


 * "Animal Testing.” //Issues & Controversies On File//. Issues & Controversies On File, 1 Sept. 2000. Web. 13 Oct. 2010. .**

Facts On File is an award-winning publisher of print and online reference materials for the school and library market. Their databases are unique because they contain authoritative Facts On File reference content that is tailored to school curricula and designed for ease of use. Issues and Controversies helps researchers understand the crucial issues we face today, exploring more than 800 hot topics in business, politics, government, education, and popular culture. Updated weekly, Issues and Controversies offers in-depth articles made to inspire thought-provoking debates. This database is great for research papers and debate preparation, making it an awesome source for my presentation. This one source was especially accommodating in the way that it laid out its information in a clear, sensible order. Each subject has a lot of solid information, evidence, and examples that made this source so dense. It begins by giving a list of topics that are elaborated upon beneath them. The topics, “History of Animal Rights,” “Animal Rights v. Animal Welfare,” “The Animal Welfare Act,” “Need for Animal Testing Questioned,” “Advances Owed to Animals,” “Animal Alternatives Debated,” and “The Future of Animal Testing” are all topics that I had intended on incorporating into my presentation, and the way that this site connects them makes it easier to understand and develop a project with them. Some statistics are provided, such as 22 million animals being used each year in scientific testing, which are then elaborated on how and why it happens. This same format is applied to the rest of the source. Again, since this article is slightly biased—in favor of animal rights—it is extremely helpful for the project that I am conducting since I am on the same side. All of the included aspects are going to be a crucial part of my presentation.

**“11 Facts About Puppy Mills.” //DoSomething.org//. N.p., 2010. Web. 23 Oct. 2010. .**

DoSomething.org is one of the largest organizations in the US that helps young people rock causes they care about. A driving force in creating a culture of volunteerism, DoSomething.org is on track to activate two million young people in 2011. By leveraging the web, television, mobile, and pop culture, DoSomething.org inspires, empowers and celebrates a generation of doers: teenagers who recognize the need to do something, believe in their ability to get it done, and then take action. The contributors to this site are insightful, smart people who are genuinely concerned with and dedicated to showing the many controversial topics of the world. They do this in hopes of getting people more involved to help out. The particular source that I found is merely a list of facts about puppy mills. What prompted me to research this was the story that I found out about Sweetpea, a dog with Finding Shelter that was involved in harsh treatment at a puppy mill before being rescued. I was interested in the objectives of puppy mills, and this source helped me address the questions that I was wondering, plus more. This source states the eleven most important facts about puppy mills, giving me the overview that I was looking for. For this reason, no bias or opinion is exemplified. For example, the facts “No states have laws against a breeding kennel legally keeping dozens of dogs in cages for their entire lives, if food, water, and shelter are provided” and “Dogs at puppy mills are often not actually purebred, and the breeders sometimes lie about lineage records” do not contain any bias yet there are still impactful because they are thought and response provoking. At the end of the article are other topics related to the one regarding puppy mills, which helps one develop a solid understanding of this issue and how much this website has to offer about it. What they say makes people want to do something about it and make a difference, which is the whole purpose of this website. Different from all of the other articles and research that I have gathered so far, this source, being unbiased, helps me add my own insight based on the factual information that they provide for me. I am able to develop my own thoughts as other peoples are not influencing my thinking. This will help me with my final presentation by allowing me to insert personal opinion and sentiment, not just telling of other people’s perspectives.


 * Finkelstein, Susan. //Abuse of Animals Can Signal Violence in Families//. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2009. N. pag. //Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context//. Web. 27 Sept. 2010. . **

The author of this article, Susan Finkelstein, is a frequent contributor to Bellwether, the magazine of the University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine. She has produced many reliable, brilliant articles for this well-known, prestigious school. In this article, she merely states the hard facts and avoids expressing any of her biased opinions. By her incorporation of other contributors from the University of Pennsylvania, one may realize that this information was well-researched and can therefore be trusted. The information provided addresses my topic head-on and gave me a lot of insightful data. This source provides me with scholarly information as to why some humans treat animals, more specifically their pets, inhumanely. It says that those who are abused or have been abused in the past are more inclined to abuse their pets. This not only applies to adults, but children, too, repeat the aggressive behavior that they see in their parents and take out their anger and frustration on their pets. They hurt the only one in the house who is less powerful than them. Furthermore, this source provides a real example of familial issues hidden by animal cruelty. A woman went over to her neighbor’s house for a visit, and while there she witnessed a young boy trying to strangle their kitten. Later on, it was found that the single mother was a drug addict and very dangerous to her children. The last section of this article is devoted to explaining how different shelters and organizations not only help these animals who are being domestically abused, but they help the families who are in crisis as well. Shelters not only house animals, but they may house the owner on a temporary basis. It goes on to explain how increasing awareness of these conflicts is saving many animals’ lives. While 41 states and the District of Columbia currently have felony-level convictions for serious acts of animal abuse, some law enforcement officials still do not think that animal abuse is worth all the trouble. They think that there are more significant issues that are happening in the world, and because of that, they overlook it.


 * Harnack, Andrew, ed. //Animal Rights//. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, Inc., 1996. Print. Opposing Viewpoints. **

Opposing Viewpoints, the series to which this book belongs, is a well-known scholarly source. It talks about a conflict from two different points of view, demonstrating how the conflict is viewed in the eyes of both sides. Doing this allows one to obtain a lot of insight and truth that one may not get from a regular informative novel. The editor of this particular book, Andrew Harnack, works as an English professor at Eastern Kentucky University. He is incredibly erudite in his knowledge and understanding of controversial topics, especially when it comes to that of animals’ rights. This source addresses several of the topics that I intent on discussing in my presentation. The five chapters, “Do Animals Have Rights?,” “Is Animal Experimentation Justified?,” “Should Animals Be Used for Food and Other Commodities?,” “Does Wildlife Need to Be Protected?,” and “What Issues Need to Be Resolved Within the Animal Rights Movement?” are all questions that have crossed my mind when thinking of my project. As far as opinion goes, the book switches back and forth from viewpoint one to viewpoint two on every one of the aforementioned questions. Incorporated in this book is a timeline of medical advances made using animals from the American Medical Association, Use of Animals in Biomedical Research from 1989. This timeline dates from pre-1900 to the 1980s, revealing how medical treatment has evolved and improved over the years due to the help of animal testing. For example, in the 1920s, insulin was discovered, and in the 1970s, a way to prevent measles was found. There were many more medical findings, all supporting the idea that the ban of animal testing would be dangerous. But then, the opposing side speaks of why animal testing is wrong, and this same process continues for every subject. This book really helps me gather both insight and information about specific areas of study that I plan on including in my presentation.

**Lufkin, Martha. “US Supreme Court Grills Public Prosecutor in Animal Cruelty vs Freedom of Artistic Expression Case.” //Art Newspaper//. WilsonWeb, 2009. Web. 22 Oct. 2010. .**

Since its foundation in 1898, H.W. Wilson has dedicated itself to providing its customers and their patrons with the best possible library experience. In print, and now on the web, H.W. Wilson products have become familiar to generations of library patrons as standard tools in college, public, school, and special libraries around the world. Delivered on the powerful WilsonWeb system, H.W. Wilson offers 78 reference databases to meet today’s research needs. These databases are maintained by editorial staff members who are experts in library science and other subjects, and updated daily by staff in New York and Dublin, Ireland. They are also supported by sales representatives around the country who are committed to ensuring the standards of quality and service that have built and sustained the H.W. Wilson reputation for excellence over 120 years. Art Newspaper is an investigative newspaper that regularly publishes breaking news that gets taken up by the daily papers. All of its writers, including Martha Lufkin, are aware of what is going on in the world and they are very knowledgeable in this regard. Because it is a newspaper, this source tends to be more unbiased. Although the article expresses different opinions and viewpoints, the overall tone of Lufkin does not show her personal emotions or thoughts. In this article, the more political side of what defines animal cruelty and what should be displayed to the public is discussed. It talks about a “lawsuit seeking to overturn a ban that limits depictions of cruelty to animals” that “resulted in a clash last month at the US Supreme Court, where opposing arguments were made by lawyers for the US government and a man convicted of selling dog-fight videos, Robert Stevens” (Lufkin par.1). It goes on to portray the viewpoints of those who do not agree with this action, should it be taken. Stevens’ point of view is that this would violate his constitutional rights granted in the First Amendment and the College Art Association’s is that showing animal cruelty on film could criminalize the sale of art or images showing these horrific things. This source defines animal cruelty “as intentionally wounding or killing a live animal” (Lufkin par.3) and states that demonstrating this to the public is not doing anything to help its cause. This site helped me get a sense of where the issue of animal cruelty stands with the government and what kind of disputes are going on in regard to it. It contributes to my understanding of how significant or insignificant people consider this issue, and it is definitely something that directly pertains to my essential question.

 **Newman, Jason. “Animal Rights Movement.” //Issues: Understanding Controversy and Society//. ABC-CLIO, 2010. Web. 11 Oct. 2010. **.

 ABC-CLIO is an award-winning publisher of reference, contemporary thought, and professional development content. This site is most famous for the way it delivers its information; it uses hypotheses to drive its articles backed up with elaborate, scholarly evidence. Because of this, the insight provided from this website is so insightful and thought-provoking, making it a good site to research issues and controversies. ABC-CLIO contributors are all erudite and knowledgeable who value objectivity and balance the most in their writing about important worldly conflicts. In this one particular source, they speak of the animal rights movement, lending much information about some key historical facts regarding the topic. They talk about where the fight for the rights of animals originated and how it has evolved since. For example, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, which placed restrictions on the killing and use of animals like bald eagles, whose populations were threatened by such industrial pollutants as the pesticide DDT, came after the counterculture awakening of the 1960s when environmental groups were the first to express alarm at the wasteful use of animals in the meat and household-product industries, particularly the use of rabbits and other small animals as test subjects by cosmetic companies. And then in 1986, animal rights activists organized the first Fur-Free Friday, a nationwide protest that has been held each year on the day after Thanksgiving to discourage shoppers from purchasing fur. This fashion of delivering information stays true for the whole article, and at the end, they mention different organizations that are currently helping animals’ cause, such as PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), who are constantly battling for the sake of animal rights. Since this article is slightly biased—in favor of animal rights—it is extremely helpful for the project that I am conducting since I am on the same side. It offered me a prodigious amount of new information and addressed the historical and evolutionary aspect that is going to be a crucial part of my presentation.

**O’Connor, Jennifer. “Zoos.” //Big Cat Rescue//. N.p., 19 Apr. 2006. Web. 29 Oct. 2010. .**

Big Cat Rescue, a nonprofit educational sanctuary, is devoted to rescuing and providing a permanent home for exotic (i.e. wild, not domestic) cats who have been abused, abandoned, bred to be pets, retired from performing acts, or saved from being slaughtered for fur coats, and to educating the public about these animals and the issues facing them in captivity and in the wild. The sanctuary is home to the most diverse population of exotic cats in the world, with 16 species and subspecies of wild cat represented among more than 100 residents. These include tigers, lions, liger, leopards, cougars, bobcats, lynx, ocelots, servals, caracals and others, many of whom are threatened, endangered, or now extinct in the wild. Consisting of passionate volunteers and many people who know what they’re doing, this website is prime for revealing the truth about what goes on behind closed doors regarding certain issues. This source states many points about bad treatment of animals in zoos. Breeding animals in the United States “that have no hope of ever being returned to the wild is done to attract a paying public and not for the greater good of the animal” (O’Connor par.8). This source mainly focuses on the tigers in zoos that are shipped all over the place to meet the criteria of the species survival plan and thus never have a feeling of permanence or safety. Tigers are cats are anesthetized annually and teeth checked, blood drawn, x-rays may seem good, but the fact of the matter is that these animals do not take well to the anesthetic. There are other ways in which they are treated badly behind the scenes. Because “the public wants to see the big cats moving around…frequently a zoo will own several of the big cats who live in tiny cages in the back or in the basement for most of their lives and then are rotated through the exhibit a day at a time to keep the public happy” (O’Connor par.11). When the author says, “My goal is to put ourselves out of business by causing people to think about their choices so that there no longer is a need for a safe haven. You have the power of the pocketbook; something the animals do not. You can speak out for them with the choices you make economically. Please don’t support any place that breeds big cats for life in a cage” (O’Connor par.14), it is evident that they are incorporating bias into their work. Furthermore, they are attempting to encourage their audience to follow their beliefs and tell them what to do based on what they think is right. This article continues to demonstrate how zoos are “pitiful prisons.” Zoos teach people that it is acceptable to interfere with animals and keep them locked up in captivity where they are bored, cramped, lonely, deprived of all control over their lives, and far from their natural homes. They speak of came specific cases, such as Rose-Tu,, an elephant at the Oregon Zoo who suffered “176 gashes and cuts” inflicted by a zoo handler wielding a sharp metal rod and another elephant, Sissy, who was beaten with an ax handle at the El Paso Zoo. They reveal how zoos are more for propaganda than education. They do not promote respect or understanding of animals, not do they provide much information other than the animal’s species, diet, and natural range. The animals’ normal behaviors aren’t observed because their natural needs are rarely met. Birds’ wings may be clipped so that they cannot fly, aquatic animals are often without adequate little water, and many animals that live in large herds or family groups in nature are kept alone or, at most, in pairs. Animals are closely confined, lack privacy, and have little opportunity for mental stimulation or physical exercise. These conditions often result in abnormal and self-destructive behaviors or “zoochosis.” The information provided and bias expressed in this work helps me further my comprehension of how horribly zoos treat animals. It is ironic that many schools take field trips to the zoo in hopes of exploring the wildlife and learning more about these animals when it is, for the most part, unrealistic. This is something that I was previously unaware of but that I definitely intend on making use of in my presentation.


 * Roleff, Tamara L., ed. //The Rights of Animals//. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, Inc., 1999. Print. Current Controversies. **

Similar to Opposing Viewpoints, Current Controversies is a series of books that offer two sides to common controversies. And as Opposing Viewpoints does, Current Controversies addresses several of the topics that I will mention in my presentation. Tamara Roleff, book editor, is a published author and editor of Biomedical Ethics. She has an incredible amount of knowledge regarding the rights of animals and how different people perceive this issue. Although this source talks about many of the same issues that are in “Animal Rights,” it also includes a lot of different information. For instance, this book talks about hunting, experimentation, and general abuse—topics that are not as paramount in the other book, but topics that I definitely am planning on speaking about. Throughout the course of the book, quotes are incorporated that summarize the subjects that they are included in. What I mean by this is, under the title “The Benefits for Humans,” the quote “Cloning and gene targeting requires fewer animals. It will be quicker, which means new health products will come on line more quickly” (page 69). This book includes a lot of bias and opinion since there are two sides to every story, and while side feels a certain way about a particular subject, the other side tends to disagree and then supports it with their own insight and evidence. This process continues for the entire book, providing me with a lot of insightful information that I had not previously considered. It is an extremely helpful teaching tool, as it shows the ins and outs of animal rights. Furthermore, this book tells of what goes on during hunting season, at circuses, and how farms obtain the meat that they eventually sell for profit. It not only shows a perspective that either encourages or discourages this, but it allows one to truly see what distinct animals go through on a daily basis. Even though some might disagree with it, that doesn’t change the fact that it is still providing one with a clear window of what happens at or during specific events.


 * Welch, Michelle K. “Animal Cruelty Cases.” //ProQuest//. ProQuest LLC, Aug. 2009. Web. 21 Oct. 2010. .**

More than a content provider or aggregator, ProQuest is an information partner, creating indispensable research solutions that connect people and information. Through innovative, user-centered discovery technology, ProQuest offers billions of pages of global content that includes historical newspapers, dissertations, and uniquely relevant resources for researchers of any level and sophistication. The author, Michelle Welch, is an erudite contributor to this website. In the beginning of this article, she bluntly states that “this article is not meant to be an overview of every state’s animal cruelty laws, but simply an overview of what cruelty toward animals entails in a basic case” (Welch par.1). She gives the purpose of the article, and right away one may see that this article may be slightly biased. With further reading, this idea is supported with the incorporation of opinionated thoughts that support how wrong it is that some animals are treated horribly. This works for me since I am in agreement with everything she has to say. The three main subjects: “Cruelty,” “Neglect,” and “Dog-fighting” are all supported with hard evidence and many examples of cases in which these incidents have occurred. This is helpful because it brings about truth and reality to my presentation and will be extremely helpful in relating what I am saying to things that have actually happened. One of the biggest dog-fighting cases with Michael Vick was referred to and relevant to the information given. The article talks about how this case was brought to center stage because of Vick’s celebrity status. Because of this, it underwent much discussion. But until that point, not many cases of dog-fighting had been noticed or cared about. This is the same with many other cases of animal cruelty, which this article helps bring out. All of these issues I had intended on expressing in my presentation, so this article was a prodigious aid.

**Wolf, Stacy. “The Veterinarian’s Legal Role in Animal Cruelty Cases.” //ASPCA.org//. N.p., 2010. Web. 29 Oct. 2010. **.

ASPCA.org provides tools and resources for animal welfare professionals and advocates, including public and private animal protection organizations and rescue groups, veterinarians, law enforcement agencies, and emergency responders. They have gathered information and knowledge from experts, along with profiles, sample materials, and inspiration from proven programs in the field to share and use. Because this organization is devoted to saving the lives of animals, all of their contributors are passionate and knowledgeable about animal cruelty and all of the other related issues that they write about. Sharing this some passion and drive to help promote animal wellbeing, this source is extremely helpful in addressing the issues that I, too, hold close to my heart. This particular source talks about the legal aspect of animal cruelty and the role that veterinarians play in it. At the beginning, they state the topics that they are going to be addressing: “What is Animal Cruelty?,” “How Do Veterinarians get Involved in Cruelty Cases?,” “When Veterinarians Report Cruelty,” “Why is the Veterinarian so Vital to a Cruelty Case?,” and “Conclusion.” When defining animal cruelty, they say that although it differs from state to state, the general association is with “offenses against animals generally, including abuse, neglect, animal fighting, abandonment, and practicing veterinary medicine without a license” (Wolf par.1). Supporting this notion, they incorporate different states’ rules regarding this issue. For example, New York law covers “every living creature except a human being,” while California law covers “every dumb creature.” In Arizona Criminal Code, “animal” includes mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians. In Alaska criminal law, “animal” means vertebrates, but not fish. “Among the 43 states that have felony animal cruelty statutes, some make the felony offense applicable to any animal, much the same as the misdemeanor provisions. Other states apply their felony provisions to dogs and cats, livestock, and animals acting in certain official capacities, such as law enforcement and service animals, search and rescue dogs, or dogs used by peace officers” (Wolf par.4). When talking about neglect, this source states that the failure to provide adequate food and water “either endangers the animal’s health or causes physical injury or death” (Wolf par.8). The main point that one may extract from this source is that animal cruelty and what defines it is very ambiguous. For instance, things such as customary agricultural practices, pest control, lawful hunting, fishing, trapping, animal experimentation, as well as cosmetic veterinary procedures (tail docking, ear cropping, declawing) may be expressly exempted from the cruelty provisions. Veterinarians help in two main ways: by merely doing their jobs and at the request of law enforcement or through court order. Either way they play a critical role in preventing further acts of animal neglect and abuse by making their community a safer place for both human and animal inhabitants. Despite this organization one that supports the fight against anti-cruelty towards animals, this source is unbiased. That way, I am able to develop my own personal opinion based on the information provided, and I am given a closer look into the legal, ambiguous world of what defines animal cruelty. This helps me recognize the fact that not all states act upon animal abuse similarly and that it is, for the most part, dependent on state and beliefs. These are things that I plan on speaking about in my presentation, so this source contributed to strengthening my knowledge of this topic.