There seems to be some sort of multi-way dispute taking place between the extreme animal-rights activists, the really extreme animal-rights activists, and those who are actually taking care of animals. In much the same way as the vegan/vegetarian dispute over arificial meat, the animal lovers are carrying on the fine tradition of progressives letting the perfect be the enemy of the good by turning on one another for docrinal incorrectness before they can accomplish anything.

Plus there’s the two dead chimps and a body chained to a laboratory door, but that’s the least of things.

As near as I can figure out, Dr. Sally Boysen, an experimental psychologist at Ohio State University, ran a chimpanzee experimental colony for over 20 years, publishing highly-regarded research on our closest primate relative. Last year, she ran out of funding, and the University - which seems to have had some sort of hostility to the program anyway, though I’m not sure why - arranged to ship 9 chimps to a Texas “sanctuary” that provides homes for ex-research animals but which does not use them for research or commercial purposes or public exhibits, and therefore technically falls outside the local regulations for such facilities.

The transfer was not without controversy: Dr. Boysen chained herself to her own laboratory door to protest the university’s shutting down her lab, and at the same time PETA - the Pee Wee Hermans of animal welfare - sued the Texas sanctuary, alleging among other things that it was in violation of animal housing regulations. When it was pointed out that that facility was not subject to such regulations, PETA filed an amended complaint alleging that the facility had inadequate housing conditions and was negligent in handling the animals. One chimp died after being sedated for transfer; another died from heart disease (common among caged chimps but not in the wild) shortly after being transferred. PETA also claimed that the University’s supervising veterinarian was negligent for not personally accompanying the animals in transfer, and demanded that he be fired.

In the aftermath, the GReat Ape Standing & Personhood (”GRASP”) project is criticizing PETA, both for turning its guns on an animal welfare facility (PETA itself “liberates” animals from research but has euthanized many of them, claiming they cannot be cared for; other animal sanctuaries refuse to euthanize any animals) and because its absurd legal strategy - naming the chimpanzees themselves as plaintiffs in the lawsuit - almost guarantees their failure while likely setting back GRASP’s own goal of eventually establishing actual legal personhood for apes (by carefully laying the legal groundwork first).

So: PETA is suing the facility that is caring for these ex-research chimps, potentially bankrupting it, while simultaneously operating “animal-rescue” facilities in which the animals are actually killed; GRASP is angry at PETA for being thoughtless and reckless, essentially for asking a court to recognize what GRASP contends should be recognized in court; everybody is angry at the University, which apparently is angry at its own researcher, who is angry at everybody else right back; the sanctuary facility just wants to be left alone to care for the animals; the process of caring for the animals has killed two of them already.

I’m still somewhat on the fence about ape personhood (thoughly leaning toward the “No” side), but as for the animal-rights movement in general, this scene is to me exemplary of how it manages all its activities, both practical and intellectual. I’d say these people deserve each other.