Summary of Telephone Conversation of November 8, 2000 Between Steven Gross and Rob Doughty

To: Rob Doughty, Burger King
From: Steve Gross, Steven Jay Gross & Associates
Date: November 10, 2000
Re: Summary of Telephone Conversation of November 8, 2000

What follows is my understanding of our conversation on November 8, 2000. Please let me know if anything I've stated seems inaccurate to you.

Steve called Rob at 5:30 p.m. (EST). Rob informed Steve that he was using a speaker phone so that one of his colleagues in public relations could listen to the conversation.

Steve asked Rob to describe Burger King's view of its animal welfare program and specifically how it conceptualized the discussions between Burger King and PETA. Rob noted that Burger King is planning to form an animal advisory board that will include Drs. Grandin and Swanson. Once this advisory board is formed, it will help Burger King to understand what animal welfare issues need to be addressed. This process will allow the committee to recommend to Burger King what animal welfare issues need attention.

Rob noted that Burger King does not purchase meat directly from slaughterhouses but buys its meat from grinders. Steve asked for the names of companies that sell meat to Burger King. Rob did not have the names but acknowledged that Burger King does purchase meat from IBP.

Steve asked for clarificationof who is currently on the committee and was informed that the committee was being formed and that only the two candidates mentioned above had been selected. Steve suggested that the committee needs to have a representative from the animal movement. Steve suggested that Dr. Halverson, who serves on the McDonald's animal advisory committee, would be an acceptable candidate. Steve also stated that PETA respects and trusts Dr. Grandin (Steve is not familiar with Dr. Swanson). PETA would expect other committee members to be individuals whom PETA could trust to focus on animal welfare in a professional and compassionate manner. PETA is concerned that the Burger King committee be a group that is genuinely interested in animal welfare and not a group of industry apologists.

Steve asked Rob to define from Burger King's perspective the relationship between Burger King and PETA. Rob stated that he did not see a relationship, but rather the advisory committee was what Burger King is doing.

Steve suggested that much of what Rob was saying was reinventing the wheel. Steve noted that PETA did not perceive Burger King as genuinely working on animal welfare issues. Steve also noted that he had asked PETA to give him an opportunity to work cooperatively with Burger King prior to PETA launching a campaign against Burger King. However, Steve noted that PETA needs to see specific actions that demonstrate that Burger King is serious about animal welfare. Specifically, the issues raised in PETA's letter of October 11, where PETA outlined 11 actions that Burger King must take to address the most egregious cases of animal cruelty. Steve stated that items one through five could be addressed in a very short time frame. Steve noted that steps such as demanding that suppliers slow lines or add stunners, delisting suppliers who fail audits, and initiating unannounced audits are actions that Burger King can take immediately.

Steve asked Rob if he has a dog or cat that he cares about. Rob answered that he has a dog. Steve asked Rob to imagine someone hoisting his fully conscious dog by his rear legs, cutting his throat, and while his dog is still conscious, skinning and dismembering him. Steve noted that this cruelty is taking place every day for thousands of cows and hogs who are skinned and dismembered while fully conscious. Steve asked Rob how he thought people would feel about Burger King, if they knew Burger King could stop this horror but chose not to do so.

Steve outlined how chickens are painfully shackled upside down, sent through an electrically charged brine water bath, where they are painfully shocked so that they become paralyzed but are still fully conscious and totally sensitive to pain. In this state, they have their throats cut, and some chickens are put in the scalding tank while still conscious. Once again, Steve asked Rob what he thought the average person would think of Burger King's approval of this process.

Steve asked Rob to help him demonstrate to his colleagues at PETA that Burger King is serious about animal welfare reform. Steve said that Rob might imagine his dog in that horrible condition previously described to understand the urgency that PETA feels about immediately stopping some of the most egregious cruelty to animals. Burger King needs to demonstrate by action, not words, that it is serious about animal welfare. Steve asked Rob to pick a time when he could get back to him with how and when Burger King would address these first five issues. Steve noted that Burger King needed to put teeth in its recommendations to suppliers that if animals are not rendered unconscious prior to killing, then the suppliers would be delisted by Burger King.

Rob stated that Burger King is a big corporation, and people from the research department would be gone for a week. Steve said that was not acceptable, and if Burger King is serious about animal welfare, Mr. Storm can make it happen in a timely manner that reflects the urgency of the situation.

Rob stated that he would call Steve on Tuesday, November 14, at 8:00 a.m. (CST). Rob noted that he could not commit to any specific action other than calling Steve on the 14th. Steve thanked Rob for his time and reiterated his concern that Burger King needs to demonstrate that it is serious about relieving the horrible animal suffering caused by its lack of action.