Hunting
Because Calves Apparently Aren't as Cute or Worthy as Seals
Published May 28, 2009 @ 10:16AM PT
As I was walking with my dog friends this morning, just after publishing the morning's post on Governor General Jean, her public gnawing on a seal heart, and her remarks on eating veal calves and lambs, my line of thinking started going in another direction. And it started with this: Well, at least she's consistent in her view of animals. And that's more than I can say for a number of the people who oppose the annual seal hunt.
Michaelle Jean made a food choice and remarks regarding seals that sparked outrage. But for her latest remarks, there will be no widespread outrage. The general public will not care that Jean casually eats the bodies of calves and lambs or that she casually remarked on it--even though the dairy/veal industry is every bit as cruel and unnecessary as Canada's annual seal hunt, even though the number of domesticated, confined animals being killed barbarically far outnumbers the seals being killed, even though dairy/veal calves and other animals (including the mother dairy cows, animals raised primarily for flesh, and egg-laying hens) suffer as much as, or in many cases fare more than, the seals. And again, all this is as unnecessary as the seal hunt. People don't need the flesh and skin of calves and lambs to survive anymore than they need the flesh and skin of seals.
There have undoubtedly been people expressing fury and disgust over Michaelle Jean's actions and statements in the last week while absentmindedly snacking on cheese and flesh and eggs imbued with far more cruelty than even the eating of a seal's heart. Likely few of them will pause when they read her new remarks on calves and lambs or would pause if they saw her putting a piece of bloody calf (or piece of cheese for which that calf was killed) in her mouth. I hope at least some of them will stop and consider the irony.
Governor General Jean Likes Veal and Lamb as Much as Seal Heart
Published May 28, 2009 @ 06:41AM PT
Many of you have probably heard by now about Michaelle Jean's public seal-eating stunt earlier this week. The Canadian Governor General, the Queen of England's representative to Canada, helped cut open and gut a slaughtered seal and ate a piece of the animal's heart, all in front of television cameras. And to be clear, she apparently asked if she could try the heart. This comes, of course, on the heels of the EU's ban on the import of seal products because of the horrid, despicable nature of the commercial seal hunt in Canada. But Jean wants to show solidarity with oh-so-oppressed seal hunters. And she is certainly not offering any apologies for it.
Women, Girls, and the So-Called Achievement of Killing
Published May 23, 2009 @ 12:25PM PT
Two months ago, I got angry--really angry--about something happening over at Feministing and wrote this post: "Killing 'Without Qualms' Does Not a Feminist Hero Make." It's an angry post, yes, but it's an angry post with a point that needed to be made.
And essentially everything I wrote there applies also to this infuriating, nauseating killing (and the article that seems to be glorifying it): "Woman hunter kills elephant with bow and arrow: Female hunter Teressa Groenewald-Hagerman has become the first woman in the world to shoot an elephant dead with a bow and arrow." It happened two years ago, so why two UK newspapers paid such attention to it a few weeks ago isn't entirely clear, but the articles and information are out there, so let's discuss, shall we?
Worst Case for Wolves--And How You May Be Playing a Part
Published May 04, 2009 @ 12:24PM PT
From the NRDC Switchboard today:
The piece that struck me the most was one in which the US Fish and Wildlife Service accuses NRDC of lying about the possible consequences of delisting wolves in the region. To be fair, the Service's wolf recovery coordinator, Ed Bangs, didn't actually use the word "lying" to describe our claims - I believe his words were "flat out spinning a bunch of horse pucky," but you get the point.
You see, there are currently somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,600 wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains. The US Fish and Wildlife Service will tell you that upon delisting the states have committed to maintaining around a thousand of those wolves (a number, by the way, that we believe is inadequate to ensure longterm survival). We, on the other hand, would tell you that rather than being protected by the state plans those same thousand wolves are actually in danger of being exterminated. Now read on.
Yes, read on. But while we're expressing our outrage at the citizens itching to pull the triggers and the politicians who are allowing it, let's not forget, friends--why is everyone so eager to shoot and kill wolves? For the benefit of ranchers--and by extension, the benefit of those who eat and wear animals and what comes from them. The killing of wildlife, the further endangerment of endangered species, the destruction and pollution of habitat, the eating and wearing of animals (from the flesh of a cow to the wool of a sheep): it is all connected.
4 Days to Save Wolves
Published April 30, 2009 @ 09:29AM PT
Four days. Idaho's eager-to-kill governor and others could be heading out with their guns to start killing wolves in just 4 days. Please join Defenders of Wildlife in demanding (OK, Defenders says "urge"; I'm the one saying "demand") that Obama reverse course. Even if you don't agree with me that animals shouldn't be hunted period, the wolves as a species need the Endangered Species protections that they are set to lose. The recent decision made by Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, great friend to ranchers and hunters, to delist the wolves was the wrong one, made for the wrong reasons, and it calls for the same approach that was widely criticized when the Bush administration went in that direction.
I know I've asked you to sign a couple other petitions already this week, but I'm going to ask you to read and sign this one too, right away. Some of you have signed already (this petition has been featured in the sidebar the last couple weeks), but those who haven't, please do. (Also, please remember that if you signed a pledge created by a Change.org member sometime in recent weeks, committing to take action, but did not actually follow the provided links to the Defenders of Wildlife petition and sign, you have not sent your message. So make sure to sign the petition as well.)
Related earlier posts:
Hey, Obama. Don't Be Another Bush for the Wolves
Salazar Continuing with Bush Admin Plan to Delist the Wolves
See also "Isle Royale Wolves’ Inbreeding Spells Caution for Northern Rockies Wolves" from the NRDC Switchboard.
In Memory of April and Friend, Hunting Dogs
Published April 19, 2009 @ 06:56AM PT
What I'm about to share with you is a personal story (and a long one). And it's not an easy story to read, so consider that as you proceed. If it irks you when I get personal on this blog or if you can't bring yourself to read about something pretty terrible, feel free to pass this post by; I would completely understand.
A year ago today, on a busy, dark interstate, I experienced one of the more traumatic events of my life, and I wrote about it in detail the day after it happened. The fact that I couldn't save the first dog that night--and the fact that I then lost the second one, whom my then-partner and I had decided to call April when we thought we'd be able to get her back after rushing her to the emergency clinic--is undoubtedly one of the reasons I was so adamant about protecting Mabel the pit bull when she showed up outside our house almost exactly a month from the night we found April and her companion. There was no way I was going to let another dog who'd been neglected and abused by human "caregivers," but who'd found her way to me, die on the street or go to a cold shelter from which she might not escape. I couldn't bear it. I couldn't save the first two. But I could save this one.
I recognize that if we had been able to get April back, we wouldn't have been able to take Mabel too, with our number of needy animals already at 6 in a tiny house, and given that all area no-kill shelters and foster homes at the time were full and considering Mabel's condition, Mabel's life would have been over at age 1 1/2. But I am still mourning April nevertheless, and I am still mourning her companion, and today, I am remembering that night, vividly, and wishing I weren't. I am remembering it mostly with deep sadness but with some lingering anger too--anger at whoever numbered and neglected loyal beings he was supposed to care for, anger at the people in general who treat these dogs like hunting equipment, anger at the people inside the countless cars that drove by, and anger at an inflexible system that whisked her away. The following is from last year, unedited.
Cows Are Not Corn. Stop Saying "Harvest."
Published April 16, 2009 @ 02:44PM PT
The word is kill.
We harvest wheat from fields. We harvest vegetables from the garden.
We kill animals, unnecessarily, in torturous ways, and usually when they're just adolescents. The killing of our fellow sentient animals for food, for sport, for the "protection" of livestock, and more--the actual act, as well as the (lack of) reasoning for it--has far more in common with the ways humans senselessly kill each other than it does with the way humans collect crops. Euphemisms used to distance ourselves from the killing do not change what it is.
Until someone can prove to me that a chicken has more in common with a stalk of wheat than with a child, that the bloody, violent killing of a struggling cow has more in common with the collection of corn than it does with one disturbed human slitting the throat of another and hanging her up to bleed--until someone can look into the face, into the soulful eyes, of a pig and explain how that pig has more in common with spinach than he does with me or the family dog--stop saying "harvest."
