What do you think?
Rate this book
Speaking Out for Animals: True Stories About People Who Rescue Animals
Kim Stallwood gathers together inspiring and powerful stories from many who are involved with animal advocacy at the most fundamental level―rescuing animals from torture, deprivation, or despair. These people are also advocates for a more compassionate relationship with animals or for the complete abolition of animal exploitation. Among those included Paul McCartney, Carla Lane, Anita Roddick, Jeffrey Masson, Maneka Gandhi, Steve Wise, Peter Singer, Sgt. Sherry Schlueter, and many others who have dedicated themselves to helping abused and neglected animals.
The stories of the rescuers and the rescued will offer comfort and inspiration to all those trying to care for those less fortunate than themselves and provide an eye-opening look at the horrific conditions under which many nonhuman animals are forced to live.
In addition, these stories offer ways for all people who may feel powerless to stop injustice and cruelty, wherever it may happen, to become actively involved in campaigning against violence and spreading compassion.
The stories of the rescuers and the rescued will offer comfort and inspiration to all those trying to care for those less fortunate than themselves and provide an eye-opening look at the horrific conditions under which many nonhuman animals are forced to live.
In addition, these stories offer ways for all people who may feel powerless to stop injustice and cruelty, wherever it may happen, to become actively involved in campaigning against violence and spreading compassion.
- GenresAnimalsNonfiction
256 pages, Paperback
First published May 31, 2001
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
March 20, 2011
Speaking Out for Animals is a collection of interviews and profiles from the sadly defunct magazine “The Animals’ Agenda.” It serves as both an inspiration to those already in the animal advocacy movement and an education for those who are not. As editor Kim Stallwood’s puts it in the Introduction:
Animal advocates come in all shapes and sizes, but the media’s portrayal of us does not reflect what I believe the vast majority of us are like: caring, compassionate, and thoughtful people who want passionately to make a difference fiord animals, people, and the environment. In contrast, animal activists are portrayed in popular culture as being either an emotional group of harmless eccentrics or dangerous fanatics who care more about animals than people.
Those simple stereotypes are demolished within the pages of this book, as we get to see animal protectors ranging from household name celebrities (Paul McCartney, Jane Goodall), to everyday individuals working for change.
McCartney, in these pages, gets to refute the contention made by a pro-vivisection lobbying group that he gave up his belief in animal rights after the death of his wife, Linda. The organization had penned a letter to USA Today in which they maintained Paul had expressed support for animal testing and turned against his and Linda’s former anti-vivisection campaigning. McCartney explains:
[W]hat I said in that interview was that in America, before any drug whatsoever can go on the market, there’s this statutory requirement for it to be tested on animals before humans. ... Obviously I would prefer this wasn’t so.
Animal activists will probably enjoy the interviews with high-profile voices on the animal protection front. Author Peter Singer reflects on the fledgling animal rights movement: “
We took our opponents, to some extent, by surprise [in the 1980s]. At first they laughed at us. They didn’t take us seriously. That allowed us to get a sympathetic hearing with the media and made it relatively easy to get a lot of attention. It’s now become harder. Our opponents have cleverly exploited this idea that the movement is full of terrorists or fanatical extremists. There’s a real danger of the movement getting painted into that corner.
Wayne Pacelle, then the vice president of the HSUS, reflects upon the changing nature of our movement, from its vivisection-focused early days to today’s measured approach to factory farming:
One of the major changes that has occurred since 1987 is the diminishing of the historical dominance of the vivisection issue in the animal protection movement. In the early to mid-1980s, vivisection was a major issue, in part because of the publicity generated by the Silver Spring monkeys and the Gennarelli case. ... At the same time, though, there’s been a fuller and broader examination of other issues. The animal agriculture issue, whish is ultimately the biggest of all animal issues in terms of units of animal suffering, has received greater attention.
We also see former flagship causes which eventually failed, such as the chapter on releasing Keiko the whale.
My favorite profiles were those of the unsung heroes, everyday people who happen to be involved in animal activism. The best story, IMO, profiled elderly couple Coby and Hans Siegenthaller, who escaped the Nazis and went on to become dedicated animal rescuers.
Of course, part of being an animal advocate is butting heads with the animal use contingent from time to time. Some of these stories took a humorous turn, such as in the case of Sally Mackler, fought prominently for a state ballot measure which outlawed bear baiting and the hounding of bears and cougars with dogs. Hunting interests sent out a flyer to all registered voters, warned voters that Mackler lived with many pets, avoided dairy products and had even protested the circus! Oh noes!! (The measure won.)
However, anti-animal sentiment doesn’t always take such a laughable guise. We read about Rick Bogle, a teacher who had been “ostracized, vilified, and forced to abandon his job by former friends and neighbors,” ostensibly after a parent raised a stink over the middle school teacher’s classroom policy of not stepping on spiders. And then there is Janet Halliburton, who worked to end cockfighting in Oklahoma and was pictured in the local newspaper holding a box of the sharp gaffs cockfighters tie to fighting roosters’ legs. Someone claiming to be a cockfighter called her home and announced that he too possessed knives and he really enjoyed using them. Thus began a campaign of intimidation and harassment from the folks who enjoy watching birds tear each other to ribbons.
Animal advocates come in all shapes and sizes, but the media’s portrayal of us does not reflect what I believe the vast majority of us are like: caring, compassionate, and thoughtful people who want passionately to make a difference fiord animals, people, and the environment. In contrast, animal activists are portrayed in popular culture as being either an emotional group of harmless eccentrics or dangerous fanatics who care more about animals than people.
Those simple stereotypes are demolished within the pages of this book, as we get to see animal protectors ranging from household name celebrities (Paul McCartney, Jane Goodall), to everyday individuals working for change.
McCartney, in these pages, gets to refute the contention made by a pro-vivisection lobbying group that he gave up his belief in animal rights after the death of his wife, Linda. The organization had penned a letter to USA Today in which they maintained Paul had expressed support for animal testing and turned against his and Linda’s former anti-vivisection campaigning. McCartney explains:
[W]hat I said in that interview was that in America, before any drug whatsoever can go on the market, there’s this statutory requirement for it to be tested on animals before humans. ... Obviously I would prefer this wasn’t so.
Animal activists will probably enjoy the interviews with high-profile voices on the animal protection front. Author Peter Singer reflects on the fledgling animal rights movement: “
We took our opponents, to some extent, by surprise [in the 1980s]. At first they laughed at us. They didn’t take us seriously. That allowed us to get a sympathetic hearing with the media and made it relatively easy to get a lot of attention. It’s now become harder. Our opponents have cleverly exploited this idea that the movement is full of terrorists or fanatical extremists. There’s a real danger of the movement getting painted into that corner.
Wayne Pacelle, then the vice president of the HSUS, reflects upon the changing nature of our movement, from its vivisection-focused early days to today’s measured approach to factory farming:
One of the major changes that has occurred since 1987 is the diminishing of the historical dominance of the vivisection issue in the animal protection movement. In the early to mid-1980s, vivisection was a major issue, in part because of the publicity generated by the Silver Spring monkeys and the Gennarelli case. ... At the same time, though, there’s been a fuller and broader examination of other issues. The animal agriculture issue, whish is ultimately the biggest of all animal issues in terms of units of animal suffering, has received greater attention.
We also see former flagship causes which eventually failed, such as the chapter on releasing Keiko the whale.
My favorite profiles were those of the unsung heroes, everyday people who happen to be involved in animal activism. The best story, IMO, profiled elderly couple Coby and Hans Siegenthaller, who escaped the Nazis and went on to become dedicated animal rescuers.
Of course, part of being an animal advocate is butting heads with the animal use contingent from time to time. Some of these stories took a humorous turn, such as in the case of Sally Mackler, fought prominently for a state ballot measure which outlawed bear baiting and the hounding of bears and cougars with dogs. Hunting interests sent out a flyer to all registered voters, warned voters that Mackler lived with many pets, avoided dairy products and had even protested the circus! Oh noes!! (The measure won.)
However, anti-animal sentiment doesn’t always take such a laughable guise. We read about Rick Bogle, a teacher who had been “ostracized, vilified, and forced to abandon his job by former friends and neighbors,” ostensibly after a parent raised a stink over the middle school teacher’s classroom policy of not stepping on spiders. And then there is Janet Halliburton, who worked to end cockfighting in Oklahoma and was pictured in the local newspaper holding a box of the sharp gaffs cockfighters tie to fighting roosters’ legs. Someone claiming to be a cockfighter called her home and announced that he too possessed knives and he really enjoyed using them. Thus began a campaign of intimidation and harassment from the folks who enjoy watching birds tear each other to ribbons.
January 12, 2026
AN EXCELLENT AND DIVERSE SELECTION OF INTERVIEWS WITH ACTIVISTS, ETC.
Kim W. Stallwood (born 1955) is a British animal rights advocate and author, who is the European director of the Animals and Society Institute; he was also executive editor of ‘The Animals' Agenda’ magazine from (1993–2002).
Jane Goodall wrote in her Foreword to this 2001 book, “huge numbers of people are brainwashed into accepting cruel practices because that is the way things are… Others… are inhibited by social pressure, do not want to be classified along with ‘crazy’ animal activists. That is why this collection of inspiring tales is so important. They are true tales about individuals who have dared to take positive action against cruelty to animals and won… They are stories from ‘The Animals’ Agenda’ magazine, which has, for more than two decades, discussed all aspects of animal rights… In the struggle against the powerful forces that make the exploitation of animals their business, nothing is more encouraging than reading about success.” (Pg. ix-x)
Kim Stallwood wrote in the Introduction, “[This book] shows how animal advocates dedicate themselves to creating a peaceful world for all beings that increasing numbers of people… envision. This book testifies that the activities of animal advocates are as diverse as the individuals themselves… The one common theme that is present in all of the pieces is compassion. I believe compassion for animals is one of the most important and vital human emotions that we can ever experience. It opens the door to a heightened sensitivity to all beings… because as we question how animals are so mistreated, we also inevitably ask how humans can be so unkind. Individual acts of animal cruelty and institutionalized exploitation… are a human---not an animal---problem.” (Pg. 4-5)
In the opening interview with Paul McCartney, the chapter notes, “In an interview with the BBC… [in] 1998, Paul McCartney said, ‘I’m finding out now that there is quite a lot of animal experimentation---some of it, I suppose, absolutely necessary when you come down to the final tests before people.’ … Jackie Calnan, president of Americans for Medical Progress, wrote, ‘In McCartney’s case, it took the death of his wife, Linda, from breast cancer to convince him to go beyond the glib words of animal rights activists and take a closer look at the vital role of animal research in medicine.’” (Pg. 14)
In an interview with Peter Singer, he states, “I hope [his book ‘The Great Ape Project’] will help us to build a bridge between us and other species. We’re asking that the community of equals, as we call it… for whom we accept the same ultimate, basic rights, should cease to be the species ‘homo sapiens’ and should become the great apes as a whole. If we were to accomplish that… that would be a historical expansion of that community of equals… We’re making a case for one rather narrowly defined group at the moment, but we don’t disguise the fact that cases may be made for other species as well.” (Pg. 35)
Singer says of the 20th anniversary of his book ‘Animal Liberation,’ “My goals were to bring about a situation where we give the same consideration to the interests of nonhuman animals as we give to our own…. Obviously that goal has not been accomplished at all. What has been accomplished is this: First, a movement now exists that didn’t really exist in 1975, so there is an organizational base from which to work for the accomplishment of those goals. Second, there have been some changes in the severity of our exploitation of animals in a wide variety of fields… there has been a move away from testing cosmetics on animals, and … there’s been quite a significant drop in the number of animals used in laboratory experiments… There’s also been a significant impact on the fur trade.” (Pg. 37)
He acknowledges, “We’ve been less successful in involving minorities in the movement. Obviously we ought to try more. At the same time we have to understand that they may have their own priorities. Because a lot of their problems have not been met, they would naturally see them as more urgent.” (Pg. 39)
Laura A. Moretti says of activist Rod Coronado, “Rod was hunted down like a beast on the run for his role in fur farm animal liberations---among other things… After spending time in prison, Rod opted for a nontestimony plea-bargain and return to the struggle. His action caused dissension, mudslinging, a sense of betrayal, and mutual disappointment within the animal rights community. For many in the animal liberation movement, Rod’s … trial would be the perfect place to expose our concerns, voice our values, speak loudly to an attentive public. It would be the ultimate political statement. For Rod, however, it was quite possibly a terminal loss of freedom---and so he opted for a … plea-bargain… And the fallout was nasty… he was accused of not living up to his convictions… Rod launched an undercover (and unprecedented) investigation of fur farm abuse… In an unprecedented action, Rod bought out the fur farm where he witnessed the mink killings, and then rehabilitated and released the remaining two bobcats, two lynx, and sixty mink in the Northwest wilderness. Again, dissension arose among the ranks regarding how Rod chose to rehabilitate those animals, feeding the freed predators live prey to teach them to hunt in the wild. Some labeled Rod a hypocrite, and… told him that, in the end, the animals would be ‘disappointed’ in him.” (Pg. 62-63)
Rod himself explains, “In 1991 there hadn’t been any fur farm liberations in the United States. We knew that if such raids were ever to come, one of the biggest arguments against them would be that the animals released from the cages would cruelly starve to death in nature. We needed to prove they could be successfully rehabilitated, and to increase their chances of survival, we had to do some short-term, temporary live-feeding. We could then return them into the wilderness where they were on their own. If that meant surviving great; if that mean starving to death, that’s nature, you know. A lot of animals starve in nature. Nature can be cruel… By returning these animals to the wild, we were putting the pieces together and allowing nature to take its course. We set the stage … by arguing that these animals DO belong in the wilderness.” (Pg. 63-64)
He admits, “I’m a vegan and don’t believe in supporting the animal food industry, but I also don’t enjoy supporting the plant food industry either, because of its dependency of chemicals, its support of biotechnology, its pollution runoff into waterways, [and] predator control. There are lots of reasons to be opposed to modern farming, not just factory farms.” (Pg. 65)
In an interview with The Body Shop owner Anita Roddick, she states, “The Body Shop is not a vegan company. We do use honey, milk, and lanolin, although we do make great and serious efforts to make sure that the lanolin comes from sheep that receive the highest standards of care. We have never used musk from deer or spermaceti oil from whales. Our soaps are 100 percent vegetable-based, as is all our glycerin. But we do use glycerin in our bath beads. Whether we should is a serious debate in the company. We are actively looking for an alternative that can do the same job. Our Product Information Manual lists facts about each of our products, including a full ingredient listing. It also gives information on products not suitable for vegans to ensure that their beliefs are not compromised when buying a product.” (Pg. 74-75)
Wayne Pacelle of the Humane Society of the United States [HSUS] acknowledged, “it’s fair to say that demonstrating is not a major tactic employed by HSUS… The rationale relates to our ability to work effectively in other arenas. I recognize the importance of demonstrations and direct action in our social movement, but it’s not what HSUS does best; and HSUS’s resources need to be deployed running initiatives, drafting legislation, speaking to college audiences, and so forth. Those are the areas where we use our talent pool to best advantage… I firmly believe there is a place for civil disobedience in our movement. I don’t think HSUS needs to contribute substantially to civil disobedience. We need not undermine it, but we need not contribute to it.” (Pg. 78-79)
Indian Mia MacDonald observes, “I think [animal rights are] very important. But it shouldn’t be separated from animal welfare. In America, because you’re so rich and you’re so bored, you invent debates, for instance the debate about abortion. It’s so nonsensical. We’re amazed that you people should be burning abortion clinics and killing abortion people. The debate is so irrelevant to the rest of the world. If you want to have an abortion, have it. If you don’t want to have it, don’t have it. Why do you make a thing out of it?... The right of a person to their own body is the first right, before anything else. So, the same way, now you’ve invented the debate between animal rights and animal welfare. How can we separate the two?” (Pg. 101)
Kirsten Rosenberg points out, “I’d love to have more men in the movement. There’s a lot of women in the movement---I love that they’re in the movement, don’t get me wrong---but I’d love to have more men in the movement because they’re more convincing to other men. It’s very difficult to get a woman to convince a man a lot of times if the guy has this macho problem. So get a guy with a macho problem that supports this to talk to another guy with a macho problem.” (Pg. 111)
This book has a much WIDER perspective of opinion than a lot of other books of this type. It will be of great interest to those studying animal welfare, and animal rights.
Kim W. Stallwood (born 1955) is a British animal rights advocate and author, who is the European director of the Animals and Society Institute; he was also executive editor of ‘The Animals' Agenda’ magazine from (1993–2002).
Jane Goodall wrote in her Foreword to this 2001 book, “huge numbers of people are brainwashed into accepting cruel practices because that is the way things are… Others… are inhibited by social pressure, do not want to be classified along with ‘crazy’ animal activists. That is why this collection of inspiring tales is so important. They are true tales about individuals who have dared to take positive action against cruelty to animals and won… They are stories from ‘The Animals’ Agenda’ magazine, which has, for more than two decades, discussed all aspects of animal rights… In the struggle against the powerful forces that make the exploitation of animals their business, nothing is more encouraging than reading about success.” (Pg. ix-x)
Kim Stallwood wrote in the Introduction, “[This book] shows how animal advocates dedicate themselves to creating a peaceful world for all beings that increasing numbers of people… envision. This book testifies that the activities of animal advocates are as diverse as the individuals themselves… The one common theme that is present in all of the pieces is compassion. I believe compassion for animals is one of the most important and vital human emotions that we can ever experience. It opens the door to a heightened sensitivity to all beings… because as we question how animals are so mistreated, we also inevitably ask how humans can be so unkind. Individual acts of animal cruelty and institutionalized exploitation… are a human---not an animal---problem.” (Pg. 4-5)
In the opening interview with Paul McCartney, the chapter notes, “In an interview with the BBC… [in] 1998, Paul McCartney said, ‘I’m finding out now that there is quite a lot of animal experimentation---some of it, I suppose, absolutely necessary when you come down to the final tests before people.’ … Jackie Calnan, president of Americans for Medical Progress, wrote, ‘In McCartney’s case, it took the death of his wife, Linda, from breast cancer to convince him to go beyond the glib words of animal rights activists and take a closer look at the vital role of animal research in medicine.’” (Pg. 14)
In an interview with Peter Singer, he states, “I hope [his book ‘The Great Ape Project’] will help us to build a bridge between us and other species. We’re asking that the community of equals, as we call it… for whom we accept the same ultimate, basic rights, should cease to be the species ‘homo sapiens’ and should become the great apes as a whole. If we were to accomplish that… that would be a historical expansion of that community of equals… We’re making a case for one rather narrowly defined group at the moment, but we don’t disguise the fact that cases may be made for other species as well.” (Pg. 35)
Singer says of the 20th anniversary of his book ‘Animal Liberation,’ “My goals were to bring about a situation where we give the same consideration to the interests of nonhuman animals as we give to our own…. Obviously that goal has not been accomplished at all. What has been accomplished is this: First, a movement now exists that didn’t really exist in 1975, so there is an organizational base from which to work for the accomplishment of those goals. Second, there have been some changes in the severity of our exploitation of animals in a wide variety of fields… there has been a move away from testing cosmetics on animals, and … there’s been quite a significant drop in the number of animals used in laboratory experiments… There’s also been a significant impact on the fur trade.” (Pg. 37)
He acknowledges, “We’ve been less successful in involving minorities in the movement. Obviously we ought to try more. At the same time we have to understand that they may have their own priorities. Because a lot of their problems have not been met, they would naturally see them as more urgent.” (Pg. 39)
Laura A. Moretti says of activist Rod Coronado, “Rod was hunted down like a beast on the run for his role in fur farm animal liberations---among other things… After spending time in prison, Rod opted for a nontestimony plea-bargain and return to the struggle. His action caused dissension, mudslinging, a sense of betrayal, and mutual disappointment within the animal rights community. For many in the animal liberation movement, Rod’s … trial would be the perfect place to expose our concerns, voice our values, speak loudly to an attentive public. It would be the ultimate political statement. For Rod, however, it was quite possibly a terminal loss of freedom---and so he opted for a … plea-bargain… And the fallout was nasty… he was accused of not living up to his convictions… Rod launched an undercover (and unprecedented) investigation of fur farm abuse… In an unprecedented action, Rod bought out the fur farm where he witnessed the mink killings, and then rehabilitated and released the remaining two bobcats, two lynx, and sixty mink in the Northwest wilderness. Again, dissension arose among the ranks regarding how Rod chose to rehabilitate those animals, feeding the freed predators live prey to teach them to hunt in the wild. Some labeled Rod a hypocrite, and… told him that, in the end, the animals would be ‘disappointed’ in him.” (Pg. 62-63)
Rod himself explains, “In 1991 there hadn’t been any fur farm liberations in the United States. We knew that if such raids were ever to come, one of the biggest arguments against them would be that the animals released from the cages would cruelly starve to death in nature. We needed to prove they could be successfully rehabilitated, and to increase their chances of survival, we had to do some short-term, temporary live-feeding. We could then return them into the wilderness where they were on their own. If that meant surviving great; if that mean starving to death, that’s nature, you know. A lot of animals starve in nature. Nature can be cruel… By returning these animals to the wild, we were putting the pieces together and allowing nature to take its course. We set the stage … by arguing that these animals DO belong in the wilderness.” (Pg. 63-64)
He admits, “I’m a vegan and don’t believe in supporting the animal food industry, but I also don’t enjoy supporting the plant food industry either, because of its dependency of chemicals, its support of biotechnology, its pollution runoff into waterways, [and] predator control. There are lots of reasons to be opposed to modern farming, not just factory farms.” (Pg. 65)
In an interview with The Body Shop owner Anita Roddick, she states, “The Body Shop is not a vegan company. We do use honey, milk, and lanolin, although we do make great and serious efforts to make sure that the lanolin comes from sheep that receive the highest standards of care. We have never used musk from deer or spermaceti oil from whales. Our soaps are 100 percent vegetable-based, as is all our glycerin. But we do use glycerin in our bath beads. Whether we should is a serious debate in the company. We are actively looking for an alternative that can do the same job. Our Product Information Manual lists facts about each of our products, including a full ingredient listing. It also gives information on products not suitable for vegans to ensure that their beliefs are not compromised when buying a product.” (Pg. 74-75)
Wayne Pacelle of the Humane Society of the United States [HSUS] acknowledged, “it’s fair to say that demonstrating is not a major tactic employed by HSUS… The rationale relates to our ability to work effectively in other arenas. I recognize the importance of demonstrations and direct action in our social movement, but it’s not what HSUS does best; and HSUS’s resources need to be deployed running initiatives, drafting legislation, speaking to college audiences, and so forth. Those are the areas where we use our talent pool to best advantage… I firmly believe there is a place for civil disobedience in our movement. I don’t think HSUS needs to contribute substantially to civil disobedience. We need not undermine it, but we need not contribute to it.” (Pg. 78-79)
Indian Mia MacDonald observes, “I think [animal rights are] very important. But it shouldn’t be separated from animal welfare. In America, because you’re so rich and you’re so bored, you invent debates, for instance the debate about abortion. It’s so nonsensical. We’re amazed that you people should be burning abortion clinics and killing abortion people. The debate is so irrelevant to the rest of the world. If you want to have an abortion, have it. If you don’t want to have it, don’t have it. Why do you make a thing out of it?... The right of a person to their own body is the first right, before anything else. So, the same way, now you’ve invented the debate between animal rights and animal welfare. How can we separate the two?” (Pg. 101)
Kirsten Rosenberg points out, “I’d love to have more men in the movement. There’s a lot of women in the movement---I love that they’re in the movement, don’t get me wrong---but I’d love to have more men in the movement because they’re more convincing to other men. It’s very difficult to get a woman to convince a man a lot of times if the guy has this macho problem. So get a guy with a macho problem that supports this to talk to another guy with a macho problem.” (Pg. 111)
This book has a much WIDER perspective of opinion than a lot of other books of this type. It will be of great interest to those studying animal welfare, and animal rights.
July 7, 2008
A collection of interviews with a wide assortment of people involved in animal rights & welfare. Includes Happy Endings stories and highlights of people who influenced the contributers. Very motivating, disturbing AND uplifting! So many attitudes are changing for the better, but there is SO much left to do...
August 26, 2009
I really liked the interview format of the first half of the book.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews