PETA's letter to Safeway again spelling out its demands

May 10, 2002

Brian Dowling
Safeway, Inc.
5918 Stoneridge Mall Rd.
Pleasanton, CA 94588-3229

Dear Mr. Dowling,

Thanks for your call. I am (and PETA is) delighted that you are interested in opening a dialog. We do hope that the discussion can lead to a quick resolution of the campaign against Safeway. Please allow me to reiterate, in writing, the items we discussed.

First, as I said, you can end PETA's campaign, easily, simply by agreeing to some very basic farmed animal welfare improvements. If you agree, we will immediately call off our campaign. Again, the two clear avenues we see to this end are:

1) Safeway could agree to implement the farmed animal welfare standards already adopted by McDonald's, Burger King, and Wendy's and to address the Seaboard abuse (either by severing ties with Seaboard or by committing to unannounced audits of all pig suppliers). Very specifically, PETA is looking for the following from Safeway, in Canada and the U.S.:

• unannounced audits of pig-farm suppliers, to reduce gratuitous abuse. Thanks so much for taking the names and numbers of Drs. Swanson and Fraser and Ms. Halverson. I think you will find them very easy to work with. Of course, Dr. Grandin is also excellent.


• a refusal to purchase from suppliers who starve hens to force them into another laying cycle.


• a refusal to purchase from suppliers who give hens less than 72 square inches of usable space per bird.


• humane standards for the transport of all animals, including incentives to decrease injury to chickens and turkeys.


• announced and unannounced audits of all pig, chicken, turkey, and cow slaughterhouses, with a commitment to the 100 percent stunning efficacy for cows and pigs already mandated by the USDA and to maintaining a level for chickens and turkeys such that all (or almost all) animals are killed in the "stun" bath.


• a pledge to continue making improvements in the treatment of all farmed animals.


• transparency, i.e., Safeway would keep the public informed of its animal welfare initiatives.


• verifiability, i.e., Safeway would both put its commitment in writing and work with someone trusted by animal advocates, such as Dr. Temple Grandin (advisor to the FMI, McDonald's, and others), who can verify to PETA that the company is doing what it says it is doing. Working through the FMI panel would be perfect, but Safeway has to be working with them to enforce Safeway's own guidelines.

2) Safeway could agree to implement the FMI/NCCR guidelines when they are released in June. This option is clearly PETA's second choice. It would result in our putting the campaign on hold until the guidelines are released, rather than calling it off altogether. The only upside I see to this is that you may prefer to work within the structure of the FMI.

However, please let me be clear: If the FMI guidelines are not out before the end of June, as we're told they will be, or if they are not at least as good as those adopted by the fast-food chains, you would still, by the end of June, have to match the points made in number 1, or the campaign would resume.

Obviously, we don't expect any of this to happen overnight. We didn't ask that of the fast-food chains, and we're not asking it of Safeway. However, one thing that PETA has learned is that we have to ask for a clear plan of action with a time frame for implementation, audits to make sure that the standards are being adhered to, and penalties for suppliers that fail audits.

As an aside, I'm very sorry that you are unhappy with PETA's letter to Safeway Canada and with PETA's use of a video that does not depict Safeway suppliers exclusively. I reviewed PETA's letter to Safeway Canada and feel that it was based on facts and legitimate concerns. I discussed your concerns regarding the video with Mr. Friedrich (whom you will have the chance to meet this week, I hope on very good terms), and he says that the video depicts conditions that PETA wants Safeway to address and is never presented as coming from Safeway suppliers, exempting Seaboard and the duck footage from Viva-USA, which do come from Safeway's suppliers. That seems fair to me, although I'm open to further discussion on either of these topics, if you wish.

As I mentioned, PETA always does what it says it will do. This may unsettle corporations when PETA says it will go after them and then does, but you will not find an instance in which PETA promised to (or not to) do something and then reneged. PETA has also always given corporations ample warning—more than ample warning, to be honest?before launching any sort of campaign and has never asked for things that are unreasonable.

In this case, all PETA is asking for is that Safeway agree to what the big corporate fast-food restaurants have already agreed to. I think you will be impressed if you look at how that's gone, with PETA praising Wendy's at Wendy's May 1 meeting (let me know if you would like to see PETA's statement) and promoting Burger King's veggie burger, among other things.

I do want to reiterate that PETA has been impressed by Safeway's strong stand on animal testing as well as by your commitment to providing healthful vegan and vegetarian foods. We would be very happy to be able to say that Safeway is the leader among grocery chains on the animal welfare front.

Let me close by again thanking you for your call. I think that we can end this campaign quickly and amicably. We are not unreasonable people. If we haven't worked this out beforehand, I would encourage you to take a moment on Thursday to talk with Bruce Friedrich. Actually, he'll be in the Bay Area all next week, so please feel free to call him if you would like to arrange to meet with him before the annual meeting.

Sincerely,

Steven J. Gross, Ph.D.
Consultant

cc: Karen Brown, FMI
Bruce Friedrich, PETA
Terrie Dort, NCCR