#open rescue

Johnson’s was one of the most highly anticipated farm animal rights cases in recent history, and the outcome is undoubtedly a victory for DxE, a group that since 2013 has been taking animals from factory farms and daring law enforcement to come after them – a practice they call “open rescue”. That has sparked debate over whether activists have the “right to rescue” animals from suffering.

“We are setting a precedent that rescuing animals from situations where they’re in distress is the right thing to do. It’s not a crime,” said Johnson, speaking after the charges were dismissed. But Johnson had hoped to make it to trial. Some might question the wisdom of inviting criminal convictions, but for DxE, breaking laws in order to change them is part of the point. “I think when people see activist repression, it’s actually very positive for movements because you get that sympathy, you get that attention, and people see you as someone who’s suffering unjustly,” said DxE lead organizer Almira Tanner. “And then of course there’s the opportunities for concrete legal victories.”

Marceau, the animal law scholar, believes there’s value in pushing unjust animal treatment laws to trial. If a jury votes to acquit in such a case, he said, that would be a bad outcome from the state’s perspective – making prosecutors reluctant to bring similar cases to trial, and opening up space for activists to do more rescues.

A lamb taken from the slaughterhouse and rushed to a veterinarian.

Protesters hold roses and sing as Oakland police converge on the slaughterhouse.

Pumpkin’s daughter, Charlotte, Attends Open Rescue Training.

Glenn Greenwald being acknowledged for his in-depth and extensive coverage in the Intercept of the FBI’s pursuit of animal rights activists responsible for the open rescue of two injured piglets at Circle Four Farms.

DxE activist and UC Berkeley student interrupted a CAL football game by running out and…

Since my post about the chickens we saved yesterday, I’ve had a few people asking me what open rescue is. I find this to be a very compelling tactic for animal rights activists, and I’m happy to share! Here’s the best explanation I can give.

Open rescue was first developed in the 1980′s by Australian activists with the group Animal Liberation Victoria. It is currently experiencing a surge in popularity, thanks to Animal Liberation Victoria’s continued work and its adoption by groups like Animal Equality, Direct Action Everywhere, and Open Rescue International. Open rescue is an above-ground tactic and an answer to several things. First, it is an answer to the assertion that activists are violent and are terrorists. Second, it is an answer to ALF- style tactics that involve liberating animals, but also involve property destruction and the hiding of one’s identity (these methods are often the cause of terrorism accusations). Third, it is an answer to the idea that some animals (like dogs) should be protected by the police, while it’s illegal to rescue others (like chickens), and ought to remain that way. And lastly, it is an answer to the more traditional type of undercover investigation, which gathers valuable footage, but is typically very expensive, and requires activists to witness (and participate in) horrible acts against animals without being able to help them. To be an answer to these things, open rescue involves the following:

A total absence of violence or anything that can be perceived as violent. This includes actual violence against humans or other animals, and property destruction. Where the ALF might have burned down a lab, open rescue activists leave the facility intact, only doing what is necessary to nonviolently rescue animals.

Not hiding our faces. We proudly show our names and our faces to represent the idea that saving an animal in need of help is not a criminal activity; it’s what any good person would do. We show ourselves and dare law enforcement and corporations to come and get us and allow this idea to be tried in court and the court of public opinion.

Documenting both the rescue and the situation the animals came from. This shows the public exactly why animals needed rescuing, and reveals the conditions inside of farms. This displaces more traditional undercover investigations, because it gathers footage while costing much less. While undercover investigations cost tens of thousands of dollars, the only costs in open rescues are biohazard suits and veterinary care for rescued animals.

Caring for rescued animals. Open rescue activists would never release 10,000 minks into the woods, where a fur farmer could claim they’d die. Instead, we would only take as many as we knew we could provide housing, food, water, and veterinary care for. Once an animal is rescued, the safety of that animal is our responsibility. Open rescue takes this responsibility very seriously. 

Telling rescued animals’ stories. The power of one individual’s story is much greater than any amount of gore shown in an undercover investigation. By telling the story of an individual, we allow members of the public to bond with that individual and realize that a rescued chicken isn’t so different from the dog or cat they share their home with. This is part of what makes open rescue such a compelling tactic. It asks the public “If you would rescue a dog who was about to be killed for food, why not rescue this pig?”