Spring Legislative Update

Posted on by Joan OBrien in In the News

Thank you to everyone who took action on legislation this winter by contacting lawmakers, attending hearings, or submitting online testimony.

If only legislative outcomes were determined by a majority vote from the public, animals would win every time. But unfortunately it is typically a powerful few who determine the outcome for animals.

Below is the status report for bills we actively supported or opposed.

House Bill 152 – Prohibiting the sale and use of adhesive-based rodent traps

The House of Representatives voted 190–140 to “Indefinitely Postpone” this bill. A vote of Indefinitely Postpone ensures that the bill cannot be re-introduced the following year.

Prior to the House vote, the Environment and Agriculture Committee voted 9-5 to kill the bill (Inexpedient to Legislate).

Majority Report: Rep. Judy Aron for the Majority of Environment and Agriculture. Rodents and rodent infestation are a problem. Rodents carry diseases like the black plague. In the interest of public health, the majority of the committee sides with the health of human beings over rodents. Testimony demonstrated that glue traps are an effective way to monitor and capture rodents. Glue traps/glue boards are an effective non chemical (non poisonous) means to control rodents in places where food is stored and prepared, and in facilities where there are children and senior citizens. They are an important part of an integrated pest management plan. Eliminating their use would be very problematic for those places. Glue boards are also used to control pests like cockroaches and other insects, and while this bill bans them for use for rodents, how can you enforce one use over another? Additionally, you cannot control where people purchase these glue traps. It would be simple for people to buy them over the internet or go to a neighboring state to purchase them. Furthermore, any way that you kill a rodent can be considered cruel. Snap traps are cruel if they do not snap the rodent in the correct way. Cats killing rodents can also be considered cruel, so is drowning rodents in a bucket of water. Sealing openings and using other exclusionary techniques do not always work, as rodents will in time find new entrances, and rodent contraception takes a long time to be effective. The majority of the committee believes that non target species would not get ensnared in glue traps if the product is used as directed on the package by the consumer and that more public education is needed. Overall, the majority felt that people who do not wish to use these products are free not to use them, but we cannot deny everyone else the ability to use an effective non chemical means of controlling rodents if they feel that works best for their rodent problem.

Minority Report: Nicholas Germana for the Minority of Environment and Agriculture. Adhesive traps, or glue traps, are a very old, very basic, very primitive form of pest control. Animals (not just rodents) who are caught in these traps suffer agonizing deaths. The minority of the committee recognizes the importance of being able to effectively manage rodent populations; fortunately, there are a wide variety of affordable, non-chemical pest control options on the market. This bill keeps coming back to the legislature because there is a demand among our constituents to stop this practice – online testimony was nearly 30:1 in favor of this bill (295 to 10). The minority of the committee believes that time is now.

House Bill 201 – Prohibiting the removal of claws from cats

The House of Representatives voted 191-177 to kill this bill (Inexpedient to Legislate).

Prior to the House vote, the Environment and Agriculture Committee voted 9-7 to kill the bill (Inexpedient to Legislate).

Majority Report: Rep. Judy Aron for the Majority of Environment and Agriculture. This bill is a solution in search of a problem. The majority of the committee voted Inexpedient to Legislate because there is no real need to ban this procedure or codify harsh penalties to veterinarians. We do not have statistics that demonstrate that NH has a problem with our veterinarians performing cat declawing procedures for non medical reasons. In fact, we heard testimony from NH veterinarians that the overwhelming majority of NH veterinarians already discourage or do not offer cat declawing procedures and instead work with cat owners to use behavior modification and other techniques to prevent the cat from scratching family members or destroying property. When those techniques fail, and the veterinarian determines that declawing is the only remaining solution (aside from rehoming or euthanasia) then that should remain a choice between the cat owner and the veterinarian. If an owner has tried all methods available to cease chronic scratching and if declawing was made illegal, their options would be to: abandon the cat, rehome it to an unsuspecting home, or surrender it to a shelter, or they might even take their cat to a state where cat declawing is not banned. The committee heard in testimony that cat declaw procedures are only done by NH veterinarians when medically necessary for the cat, or for instances when cat owners have medical conditions that could be life threatening if they are scratched by their cats (i.e. on blood thinners, etc.), or if it is an absolute last resort to chronic cat scratching behaviors. We also heard that modern techniques, such as laser surgery yield better and much safer results than techniques used in the past, and that declawed cats can and do live long, healthy, and happy lives. Most importantly, the majority felt very strongly that we as a legislature should not go down the road of removing autonomy from NH veterinarians and dictating to them what procedures they can and cannot offer. Our licensed veterinarians have the knowledge, experience, and wisdom to work with their clients to determine what procedures are the right ones for their pets and the legislature should not interfere with that relationship. We also understand that certain animal activist organizations are flooding state legislatures across the country with these types of bills and once they get one procedure banned they continue to try to ban others, and they use these campaigns to fundraise. For all these reasons, and more, the majority in the committee voted to Inexpedient to Legislate this bill.

Minority Report: Rep. Nicholas Germana for the Minority of Environment and Agriculture. While reliable statistics are not available, the committee heard testimony, even from opponents of the bill, that this procedure is performed in New Hampshire. The committee heard a great deal of testimony from veterinary professionals and members of the public about the profound adverse effects that cats can suffer as a result of this procedure. The minority of the committee concludes that unnecessary declawing is inhumane and, however infrequently it might occur, should not be permitted in New Hampshire.

House Bill 251 – Allowing the ownership of certain squirrels and raccoons

The House of Representatives voted 226–115 to “Lay on Table.” Laying a bill on the table postpones voting indefinitely, avoiding debate and the need for lawmakers to choose a side.

Prior to the House vote, the Environment and Agriculture Committee voted 12–2 to kill the bill (Inexpedient to Legislate).

Committee Report: Rep. Kevin Scully for Environment and Agriculture. The committee is sympathetic to the intent of this bill, an attempt to save squirrels and raccoons that can’t be returned to the wild, after being rehabilitated by the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department, by allowing them to be kept as pets. The committee listened to all testimony and felt the experts from our Fish and Game Department made a compelling argument that these animals, despite any injuries, remain wild. The bill also sought to allow people who move into our state to be allowed to keep their pet gray squirrel or pet raccoon if they are coming from a state that allows such pets. We saw that the Fish and Game statute RSA 207:14 allows for a permitting process for people bringing wildlife into NH, so it is possible for people coming into the state with their wild animal to apply for a permit. We also heard testimony that gray squirrels and raccoons pose a heightened risk, particularly since there is no trustworthy rabies vaccine regimen has been developed for this species of wildlife.

House Bill 401 – Relative to animal testing funded by New Hampshire state fund

The Environment and Agriculture Committee was unanimous (14-0) in voting this bill Inexpedient to Legislate.

Committee Report: Rep. Lisa Freeman for Environment and Agriculture. Essentially, this bill presents as a solution looking for a problem. New Hampshire, currently, has to our knowledge, only one in-state cosmetics company and it has voluntarily committed not to perform testing on animals. They are a private business and do not receive state funds. Further, there was no tangible evidence that our state funds any type of animal testing anywhere in our state in relation to this bill. Finally, in-state colleges and universities must comply with federal Animal Welfare Act legislation and standards pertaining to any animal testing or research. The committee unanimously agreed that we do not believe that there is the type of animal testing occurring in New Hampshire that this bill is concerned about, nor are any state funds are being used to support said testing. Lastly, we were concerned about the repeated testimony from supporters that they wanted to put this legislation in place and be able to expand on it in the future. For those reasons, we unanimously rejected this legislation.

House Bill 589 – Defining and prohibiting wanton animal waste and prohibiting certain wildlife hunting contests

The House of Representatives voted this bill Inexpedient to Legislate by a voice vote. 

Prior to the House vote, the Fish and Game and Marine Resources Committee voted 12–3 to kill the bill (Inexpedient to Legislate).

Majority Report: Rep. Paul Tudor for the Majority of Fish and Game and Marine Resources. This bill does two things, first it makes it illegal to intentionally leave a wounded or killed animal in the field or forest without making a reasonable effort to retrieve the animal. Second, it prohibits wildlife killing contests. During testimony we heard from fish and game that this was not really a problem in New Hampshire and that they were planning on dealing with it with rules. It was the position of the majority that rules were the best place to deal with these issues.

Minority Report: Rep. Loren Foxx for the Minority of Fish and Game and Marine Resources. The minority believes that wanton waste and killing contests are not acceptable hunting practices as outlined in the pillars of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, which states that “wildlife must only be killed for a legitimate, non-frivolous purpose.” It is essential that we address these issues for the well-being and conservation of New Hampshire’s outdoors. We agree with this important legislation, which mandates that Fish and Game address the issues though their rule making process.

House Bill 593 – Relative to loss of consortium involving pets

The House Judiciary Committee was unanimous (11-0) in voting this bill Inexpedient to Legislate.

Committee Report: Rep. Donald McFarlane for Judiciary. This bill seeks to expand the definition of “loss of consortium” to include pets, allowing pet owners to claim damages for the loss or impairment of companionship with their animals. Whereas the committee acknowledges the deep emotional bonds between individuals and their pets, several concerns have led to the recommendation that this bill is inexpedient to legislate. The bill fails sufficiently to define pet, and fails to clarify which relations, by ownership or otherwise, of the pet would be able to claim loss of consortium. The bill would limit owners in what they can do with their own animals, in ways which are clearly undesirable. The bill would expand potential liabilities in the case of veterinary care, leading to higher costs for veterinary care, pet grooming and other pet-related services. Traditionally, animals are classified as property under the law. Altering this classification to recognize pets similarly to human relationships could have far-reaching legal implications, potentially affecting areas such as property rights, liability, and insurance. Expanding loss of consortium claims to include pets may lead to increased litigation. This could inadvertently impact pet owners, service providers, and the legal system, creating burdens that outweigh the intended benefits of the bill. Current laws already provide avenues for pet owners to seek compensation in cases of intentional or negligent harm to their animals. To the extent that there is a need to increase the provisions for such damages, this bill is not the appropriate mechanism to achieve that end. Given all of these considerations, the committee believes that the potential negative consequences of enacting this bill outweigh the benefits.

Overall, it has been a frustrating legislative session for those seeking better protections for animals. However, we must celebrate the fact that issues such as cat declawing and glue traps even came before lawmakers and had as much support as they did.

NHARL Protests Reptile Expo

Posted on by NHARL in In the News

While much of Manchester was enjoying the St. Patrick’s Day parade on March 30, 2025, just blocks away at the DoubleTree Hotel, countless snakes, turtles, and geckos were being sold at the Reptile Expo — many of them packed into plastic deli containers and handed over to buyers with little or no knowledge of how to care for them.

NHARL held a peaceful protest outside the event to expose the hidden cruelty of the pet reptile trade. Holding signs reading “Animals Are Not Merchandise” and “Skip the Reptile Expo,” we urged attendees to reconsider the ethics of keeping wild animals in captivity.

We stood on the corner of Elm and Pleasant St., where the parade ended, so our signs were seen by everyone in the parade! 

The cruelty of reptile shows

Reptile shows exploit reptiles and amphibians for profit, disregarding animal welfare, public health, and conservation concerns.

These expos pack convention centers with vendors who confine snakes, lizards, tortoises, frogs, and other animals in tiny containers — treating them as products rather than living beings.

Beyond the immediate stress and suffering animals endure at the show, reptile expos fuel the harmful captive reptile trade, leading to widespread animal neglect and ecological harm.

Rewards to Raise Awareness

At our Let’s Talk Turtles! event in March, wildlife biologist Josh Megyesy explained that the illegal pet trade poses a serious threat to New Hampshire’s turtle populations, with endangered species commanding especially high prices.

We put the reptile dealers on alert by handing out close to 200 of these postcards to individuals and groups headed to the Reptile Expo. A generous NHARL member is funding the rewards. 

Uninformed Buyers, Unintended Cruelty

A big concern with reptile shows is how how easily reptiles are sold to people with little understanding of their complex needs.

When we asked a young boy where the crested gecko he had just purchased came from, he said, “I have no idea.” 

We saw people walking out with snakes tucked inside their sweatshirts — not even in containers.

Two men carrying a tortoise to their car admitted it was an impulse buy.

Animals are not products — they are sentient beings who have a right not to be taken from their natural home and held captive.

A Behind-the-Scenes Report

From a friend of NHARL:

I used to work these [reptile expos] 15 years ago and will tell you first hand that the reptile trade is AWFUL. So sad.

  • Tons of wild caught that don’t make it in transport. When they do make it, good luck getting them to eat.

  • Captive bred has their own issues. Breeding for looks and ignoring health issues associated with it. For example, when I was doing animal shows, ball python morphs were super popular. The spider morph will literally wobble and spin around, but ppl [people] bred for looks and didn’t care.

  • Wild or captive – selling baby snakes that haven’t even had their first meal yet.

  • Selling animals to anyone as long as they pay. Sure there are great people who love the animals, but the bad outweighs the good. Two great examples:

    1. Monocled Cobras, gaboon vipers, rattlesnakes, etc. in a plastic takeaway container, wrapped in duct tape for “security.” $75
    2. Vegetarian lizards being fed meat so they’re bigger for more money.

  • Tons of animals not even making it to the show. Seen tons of this, and the animals are just tossed.

  • Exotics being traded under the tables. I’ve seen skunks, toucans, opossums, monkeys, tons of crocodilians, etc.

  • People wanting to “look cool” by owning reptiles without educating themselves or even purchasing for kids who will neglect the animal.

  • I’m not gonna speak for all, but most will sell even if you have no set up or any idea what they’re doing.

  • …I worked at an exotic vet clinic for over ten years and reptiles are always treated the worst. Their husbandry is so specific and expensive, they’re crammed into tiny enclosures, since reptiles don’t ask for food etc., more than not, they’re thin, malnourished, sick. They’re also good at hiding illnesses. Impaction, rot, bone disease, etc.

Long story short, there is absolutely no reason for the ordinary person to “keep” reptiles in cages. Definitely not any reason that benefits them, unless it’s conservation efforts, or a rescue situation.
And this is not that.

I think people think they’re “rescuing” an animal by purchasing it. But your purchase directly funds their practices. They will replace the one you buy with another deli cup they have waiting in line under their table. Trust me.

Imagine spending your entire life alone in a tank — unable to fully stretch your limbs, go for a walk, or engage in other natural behaviors.

Full House for let’s Talk Turtles!

Posted on by NHARL in In the News

Turtles look tough, but they are in trouble. So in 2024, we launched the Turtle Brigade — a dedicated team on a mission to protect New Hampshire turtles from dangerous, human-made threats like busy roads.

On March 1, 2025 we welcomed wildlife biologist Josh Megyesy for a talk about turtle conservation in the Granite State followed by a discussion of the Turtle Brigade’s Spring 2025 turtle-saving plans!

Josh Megyesy delivered an outstanding presentation on New Hampshire’s turtles.

We were thrilled to also have special guests Dallas Huggins and Drew Stevens from NH Turtle Rescue joining us! The NH Turtle Rescue is the only facility in the state directly working on local turtle rehabilitation, conservation, and research.

Drew and Dallas with ambassador box turtle Auggie

Sponsor a Turtle Crossing

For a small donation, you can sponsor a turtle crossing and have it named in your honor — an enduring way to help protect NH’s turtles.

A turtle crossing consists of two metal signs, on opposite sides of the road, at the start and end of a known turtle crossing zone.

Some Takeaways from Josh’s Talk

Threats to NH Turtles & Conservation Strategies:

  • Habitat loss and road mortality significantly impact turtle populations. Turtles often nest in residential areas, because that’s where they can still find open, flat spaces. The journey to these locations may involve crossing roads and other perils. When a turtle habitat is surrounded by human development, turtles can no longer come and go, making it impossible to sustain a diverse, healthy population.
  • The illegal pet trade is a serious issue. The illegal wildlife trade is the fifth-largest contraband trade, just behind narcotics. Some NH turtles, like the wood turtle, are highly prized. A single adult wood turtle can sell for up to $900 due to demand, primarily from China. Enforcing wildlife protection laws is challenging, and weak penalties mean offenders often continue breaking the law.

How You Can Help:

  • Report turtle sightings. Go to Reporting NH Reptile and Amphibian Sightings or contact Josh at Joshua.Megyesy@wildlife.nh.gov.
  • Advocate for land conservation. Large preserved areas reduce threats like habitat fragmentation, human interaction, and predation from animals like raccoons.
  • Get involved with your town’s conservation commission or planning board to ensure turtles and other wildlife are considered in development projects.
  • Support better wetland crossings in road construction and seasonal timing for land management to minimize turtle risks.
  • Create or enhance nesting habitats. Many turtles lay eggs in residential areas or roadsides, increasing their risk. If you own land, consider adding a sand mound (as shown during the presentation) to provide safe nesting spots.
  • Take advantage of conservation programs. The NRCS Initiative offers incentives to landowners for habitat improvements and best management practices (BMPs).

Special thanks to Lynn Kavanagh of You’ll Eat It and Like It who baked and delivered the delicious vegan berry tarts, muffins, and breads, and to the Hilton Garden Inn Manchester for donating the use of the room!

Concord Monitor Highlights Testimony from NHARL Board Member

Posted on by Joan OBrien in In the News
A reporter for the Concord Monitor opened her article about House Bill 201 to ban cat declawing in New Hampshire by quoting board member Michelle Fransen-Conroy’s powerful testimony.

The reporter writes:

“Michelle Conroy can’t forget the heart-wrenching scenes from when she worked at a local animal hospital. There, during the 1990s, she witnessed young cats suffering in the aftermath of declawing procedures.”

‘They would be banging their hands trying to get the bandages off and the cage would be full of blood,’ said Conroy, a Concord resident, at the legislature on Tuesday. ‘They would just be wailing. It was an awful sight.’

The declawed cats would need to have their paws re-bandaged as the healing process slowed down.

After her testimony, Conroy urged the legislature to pass House Bill 201, a proposed ban on the procedure that removes the last bone on each toe of a cat’s paw.”

Board member Michelle Fransen-Conroy testifies about witnessing cats thrash about in pain upon awakening from declaw surgery
Photo credit: Kobby Dagan

Shining a Light (Literally) on Animal Abuse

Posted on by Joan OBrien in In the News

For the fourth year (sigh), NHARL had vegan boots on the ground at the SNHU Arena in Manchester to protest the Professional Bull Riders (PBR) tour.

Despite snow and frigid temperatures, the League led two impactful demonstrations before each scheduled show, Friday, Dec. 20, and Saturday, Dec. 21, 2024.

New this year, we projected an anti-bull riding message onto the SNHU arena during the Friday night show.

Arena management was not pleased and called in the Manchester Police.

See our press coverage on Manchester Ink for details!

On Saturday night, we left the projector home and brought back the video of bulls getting hurt at PBR events, which played on a loop as eventgoers walked past.

While most ticketholders were not visibly receptive to the message that bull riding is animal abuse, we succeeded in handing out 100 flyers (shown below), reinforcing the fact the bull riding isn’t fun for everyone.

Gentle Thanksgiving 2024 a Success!

Posted on by Joan OBrien in In the News

On November 16, 2024, NHARL hosted our 4th sold-out catered Gentle Thanksgiving event at the NH Audubon McLane Center in Concord!

The Guests!

It was inspiring to see familiar faces and new ones, all united by the shared purpose of protecting the rights of animals.

The Food!

Our good friends at The Green Beautiful Vegan Cafe served up another scrumptious, animal-free Thanksgiving feast — topped off with complimentary coffee and cookies! 

Raffle Prizes!

Twelve lucky guests went home with one of our fabulous raffle prizes!

Thank you to our generous raffle donors:

  • Farmhouse Fresh
  • MegaFood
  • Trader Joe’s (Bedford)
  • Granite State Naturals
  • Nicole Roma – Arbonne
  • A Market (Manchester)
  • 900 Degrees Neopolitan Pizzeria (Manchester)
  • Chunky’s Cinema and Pub (Manchester)

Our thanks to Whole Foods and Trader Joe’s for donating the flowers and floral arrangements!

We also thank everyone who brought a contribution for the Vegan Food Drive. The bounty will be delivered to St. Paul’s Episcopal Church Food Pantry in Concord, where our donated food was greatly appreciated last year.

The Donuts!

No NHARL event is ever complete without our official dessert — the donut! This delicious batch was donated by Lovebirds Donuts, with locations in Kittery, ME and Portsmouth, NH.

The Speaker!

Bella O’Connor, a legal fellow with the PETA Foundation’s Legal Team, delivered a captivating and insightful presentation on the evolving legal landscape for animal protection. She highlighted promising strategies and pathways with the potential to drive meaningful change in the fight for animal rights.

Thank you to everyone who attended the event!

Try to find a turkey to hug this holiday season…

© The Gentle Barn

“Dairy Is Scary” at Amherst Trick-Or-Treat

Posted on by NHARL in In the News

Amherst, NH is known for its Halloween celebrations, attracting thousands of trick-or-treaters from in town and surrounding communities.

NHARL took advantage of the crowd — and cover of darkness! — by renting a space at Doors on the Green and delivering an unequivocal “Dairy Is Scary” message to kids and adults alike.

Our old barn door had a window, through which we looped the following 1-minute video of sad scenes on dairy farms.

Many people stopped to watch…

Plant-Based Milk Chocolate to the Rescue!

About 1,000 trick-or-treaters stopped at our door, receiving either a plant-based Reese’s peanut butter cup or plant-based Hershey’s bar — with an important message securely attached!

Visitors were delighted to learn that Reese’s and Hershey’s have plant-based versions, with many parents thanking us for providing a dairy-free option for their lactose-intolerant children. (The web address on the card goes to MILK a Short Film from a Mother’s Perspective.)

Happily, we also got a few fist pumps from vegans and aspiring vegans.

Overall, Halloween in Amherst proved to be a highly effective and efficient way to share a message of compassion for animals with a broad audience.

We’re already looking forward to returning next year!

Thanksgiving Potluck and Annual Meeting a Success!

Posted on by NHARL in In the News

Our 2024 Annual Meeting and Thanksgiving Potluck was a delightful celebration, bringing together familiar and new faces in a relaxed atmosphere.

Our thanks to FrizzHome Gardens for donating the fall flowers!

“Say Cheese!”

The star of the hors d’oeuvres section was an assortment of cheeses, dips, and Tzatziki from Treeline Cheesemakers!

Accomplishments in 2024

President Joan O’Brien recapped the year, highlighting a few standout events, new programs, and impactful campaigns. This was followed by Q & A.

Door Prizes!

Guests had a chance to win one of four fantastic door prizes:

  • Shaw’s gift card
  • Chocolate and Coffee Lovers Gift Bag
  • NHARL Tote (you can purchase your own NHARL logo wear on our web site)
  • Thanksgiving/Fall Apron and Dish Towel Set

Congrats to our winners!

Amelia draws ticket

Thank you!

Thank you to everyone who attended the event and for your delicious contributions to the potluck!

© The Gentle Barn
© The Gentle Barn

Exposing the Nightmare of Gestation Crates at the Howl-O-Ween 5K

Posted on by NHARL in In the News

On October 19, 2024, the New Hampshire Animal Rights League once again took part in the Animal Rescue League of NH’s annual Howl-O-Ween 5K, this time exposing the horror of gestation crates.

Dressed as a Mother Pig, Bella the Dog rode in a fabricated gestation crate. (Bella also walked some of the 5K but preferred being pulled.)

The Howl-O-Ween 5K attracts a jubilant crowd of fit people and pampered pooches “living their best life.”

Meanwhile, millions of equally smart and friendly pigs are “living their worst life,” confined on industrial farms for their short, sad lives.

Life in a Crate

Mother pigs whose offspring become the bacon, ham, and pork sold in grocery stores and restaurants, live their entire lives in crates, only going outside once, on the way to the slaughterhouse.

Step 1: Gestation Crate Artificially inseminated mother pigs are kept in gestation crates 24/7 for about 4 months, until they give birth.

Step 2: Farrowing Crate When mother pigs go into labor, they are moved to farrowing crates where they can nurse.

After piglets are weaned at 3-4 weeks, mothers are put back in gestation crates and are re-inseminated.

Step 3: Slaughterhouse Mother pigs typically have 2 to 3 litters before their reproductive efficiency declines and they are sent to slaughter to become sausage, hot dogs, and pepperoni.

NHARL was the 2nd place fundraiser!

Continuing a new tradition, Team NHARL once again did the 5K to raise money for the Animal Rescue League. Thanks to your donations we earned 2nd place in the list of Top Team Fundraisers, raising $875 for the shelter! 

Team Captain Liz was joined by Bill, Jenni, Paul, Miladia, Joan, and Bella the Dog.

Bella and Liz

Candy and Conversation

Cruelty-free Halloween candy options were in abundance, including delicious dairy-free chocolate peanut butter cups and coconut bars from UNREAL. Grab an UNREAL Halloween variety pack at major retailers for your own trick-or-treaters!

Pig Quiz

We drew people to our booth by asking if they wanted to take a quiz about pigs, which opened the door for a conversation about the inherent cruelty of raising pigs for food.

Thank you!

Thank you to those who donated to the NHARL team and to everyone who stopped by our table!

Have a happy and cruelty-free Halloween!

“I’m so glad I’m a dog and not a pig.”