HAPPY ENDING FOR ELEPHANTS

Despite threats from the American Zoo Association, Winky and Wanda, the aging, arthritic elephants, "will spend their retirement in the foothills of California's Sierra Nevada mountains, away from the cramped, cold Detroit Zoo." Detroit Zoo director Ron Kagan finally reached an agreement with the AZA to send Winky and Wanda to California's Performing Animal Welfare Society sanctuary. But get this - "A break in the impasse came when a test indicated that Wanda either had the endotheliotropic herpes virus or had the antibodies to it. The disease would not be detrimental to her health but could be fatal to young elephants exposed to it." In other words, the AZA only caved because Wanda, the commmodity, was worthless to them. Or that may be their face-saving excuse - either way, it's an unfortunate mentality.

Meanwhile, in San Francisco, new rules could wind up eliminating elephant attractions at that city's zoo. "Elephants must receive hundreds of times more space to live at San Francisco's zoo or not be kept at the facility, city legislators said on Tuesday in legislation that could effectively bar pachyderms for good." Why? Because to get that much space, according to Zoo director Manuel Mollinedo,the zoo would need to raise $17 to $20 million for the new elephant area. And (though this is unspoken) during a period, and in a cultural environment, when the question "why do we need elephants in cages?" is becoming louder and stronger. Then again, there are plenty of reactionary bozos with too much money, so this will be interesting to watch develop.

THE FOLLIES OF BEEF

There's a great show going on at the Supreme Court, as that old "checkoff" program that riled up the pork producers a while back comes up again, now in terms of beef. The question is "whether the government can compel cattle ranchers to pay for an industry marketing program, famous for its 'Beef, It's What's for Dinner' advertisements. The Livestock Marketing Association said meatpackers and processors, who are not required to pay for the checkoff, were benefiting more from the marketing program than ranchers." At heart, this is just an industry-management issue, but it's turned into vaudeville here by the fact that the US government is in bed with the beef industry and wants to play that two ways at once.

For instance: "During oral arguments at the court, several justices expressed reservations whether the beef program was actually government speech protected by the First Amendment, since the commercials don't identify the USDA. Instead, the Cattlemen's Beef Board is listed as the sponsor." Whoops. USDA, Beef Board... who can keep track of which rubber stamp we're supposed to use on which day?

Further, "Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and several other court members appeared skeptical of claims the beef program was government speech, thus giving the cattle farmers no right to challenge it. She said government public health experts would not encourage people to eat lots of red meat." Heh. Well, that depends on which hat they're wearing at any given moment, now doesn't it?

But the most chuckles come from the wacky logic employed by the Bush administration's ( = beef campaign's) lawyer Edwin Kneedler. "The beef checkoff was no different than the government requiring cigarette companies to pay for advertisements that warn consumers about the health risks of smoking, Kneedler said. In both cases, there are some who disagreed with the government's message." Well, perfect analogy - except in this case we'd be putting out ads telling people about the health risks of eating red meat, now wouldn't we? And finally, after much discussion of who should pay for this based on who benefits... "The ultimate beneficiary of the advertising is the consumer," says Kneedler. GREAT! So pass the cost onto the consumer by jacking up the price of beef to a realistic level! I'm all for it, Edwin. Where do I sign?

I KNEW IT!!!

That pinnacle of off-the-beaten-track investigative journalism, The Onion, blows the lid off an issue many of us may have already suspected: World's Scientists Admit They Just Don't Like Mice. "Nearly 700 scientists representing 27 countries convened at the University of Zurich Monday to formally announce that their experimentation on mice has been motivated not by a desire to advance human knowledge, but out of sheer distaste for the furry little rodents."

It's a top-notch Onion piece, with gems like: "According to a 500-word statement, scientists hate mice for 'their beady little eyes,' 'their repulsive tails,' and 'the annoying little squeaking sounds they make.'" As Homer would say, "It's funny because it's true"... if by "true" we mean "truly hilarious."

WHAT'S BEHIND ILLEGAL ELEPHANT TRADE? ZOOS

"International wildlife experts called this week for bans on the trafficking of endangered Asian elephants, warning that demand from zoos and theme parks is driving the illegal trade from countries such as Thailand." There are some choice quotes here from Vivek Menon, executive director of the Wildlife Trust of India, who says that "elephant captive breeding programs in zoos do not work and do not have any conservation value. 'Western zoos claim their breeding programs will save the endangered Asian elephant, but nothing could be further from the truth,' Menon said. 'Captivity does not equal conservation. Research shows elephant captive breeding programs fail, and in the rare event a zoo elephant produces a calf, it cannot be released back into the wild.'" Finally, she says: "The best way for these zoos... to assist with the future conservation of this species is to support field conservation programs in Asia." Damn straight.

EPA SUES KOSHER MEATPACKER

"The Environmental Protection Agency has sued a kosher meatpacker, claiming it repeatedly exceeded pollutant limits at its plant in Postville. The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court, alleges that Agriprocessors Inc. repeatedly violated the federal Clean Water Act." The EPA's lawsuit follows PETA allegations that Agriprocessors' slaughtering practices are needlessly cruel, violating the law. Boy what a shocker that they care neither about the animals nor about us, huh?

UPDATE 12/10: USDA probes beef plant accused of abuse and Meatpacker Makes Changes After PETA Charge. But wait...

UPDATE 12/14: Judge changes opinion on alleged abuse at kosher plant "The animals killed at a kosher slaughterhouse in eastern Iowa were treated humanely and died quickly, Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Patty Judge said after a weekend tour of the processing plant. 'What I saw today ... was humane. It was quick and there was absolutely no problem with the way they were handled,' Judge said Sunday. Oh, what you saw today. Hmmm. How to put this? Oh, fortunately, the AP spells it out for us in their headline: Tour of kosher plant reveals company's view of events

WANT STRONG BONES? TRY TOFU

...but not for eating - for putting directly into your bones! "A material made from the vegetarian food tofu could help repair broken bones and teeth, UK scientists believe." The BBC goes on to explain that "the de-fatted soybean curd would act like polyfiller to fill in defects. It has the added advantage of encouraging new bone to grow as it biodegrades and releases natural anti-inflammatory agents" while in contrast: "Many existing materials used to fill bone are derived from animal sources, which the patient's immune system can react to and reject as foreign material." Hmmmmmm. Score another one for plant-based healing.

WANT RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS? TRY RED MEAT

"If you eat lots of red meat you may be doubling your chances of developing rheumatoid arthritis, say researchers from the University of Manchester, UK. Researchers compared 88 rheumatoid arthritis patients, drawn from a research sample of over 25,000 men and women between the ages of 45 and 70, with 176 controls. Participants in the study completed a seven-day food diary and were asked about their smoking habits. Results showed those eating the most red meat had twice the risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis. Patients consuming red meat as well as other types of meat had similar higher risk factors."

TRUE GREEN

Here's a good interview with Rex Bowlby, Author of "Plant Roots: 101 Reasons Why the Human Diet is Rooted Exclusively in Plants" with some witty (if canned) repartee: Bowlby says "Would Nature have left our very survival-food-to chance by placing our protein source in mobile animals ('Hey, come back here!'), another mammal's milk ('Let's see, we tried the hedgehog and the seal-only 4,498 species to go.'), and under a hen ('Hey Trog, what do you think of this chicken placenta?') ...OR in 260,000 varieties of immobile plants spread over the earth?" and another good catchphrase: "Vegetarians didn't choose their diet...it chose them!" Besides this, Mickey Z digs into some crucial issues of how the American left fails to grasp veganism as the ultimate leftist issue, and how blowhards like Michael Moore sell out the future of the planet in order to play to a supposed regular-Joe base.

MILK LOSES WEIGHT-LOSS

A PCRM press release points us to two stories "souring milk's image" - one pointing to an ovarian cancer link and the other debunking the "milk helps you lose weight" meme. The cancer link is no surprise (even though the study's authors judiciously declaim any links to other cancers... riiiiight), but the weight thing is significant if only because weight gain and loss seems to be the only thing the mainstream media cares about in relation to nutrition. In a study with five times as many people as the previous "milk helps you lose weight" study, "there was no significant difference between the high-dairy [4 servings a day] and low-dairy [1 serving a day] groups, says Jean Harvey-Berino, chairman of the department of nutrition and food sciences at the University of Vermont in Burlington."

GOOD NEWS BEARS

The New Jersey bear hunt that was set to begin on Monday has been canceled by the state's Supreme Court, which said no hunt could take place until the state adopts a comprehensive bear management policy. This means looking seriously at using contraceptives, a big no-no for both "red-staters" and hunters, who desperately need to maintain the illusion that killing is the only viable alternative. We'll see where this goes, though.

LOBSTER KILLING NO JESTING MATTER

Karen Dawn of DawnWatch.com sent this out as an e-mail back in August, which I just got today, so I'm putting it up here for anyone else who didn't know about it: "Infinite Jest" author/prodigy David Foster Wallace was asked to cover the Maine Lobster Festival for Gourmet Magazine, and turned in a piece that winds up slamming lobster-eating, and meat-eating in general, by examining and exposing the public's lame rationalizations about animal suffering. The issue of Gourmet isn't online, but Karen Dawn has scanned pages available here. Well worth a read.

DOES "SAFE HUNTING" EXIST?

I'm not gonna have time right now to round up all the accidental and "accidental" shootings and killings of people by hunters. Here's just one from a couple days back, a New York man shot apparently by members of his own party, to stand in as exemplar. But there is an interesting nugget buried in an article called "Shotguns do not ensure safe hunting:" After citing the study that supports the headline, it continues to say that incidents of hunters shooting people are on the rise: "The total number of deer-season shooting incidents in 2003 that injured people rose to 25; three were fatal. That's up from 15 in 2002 and 14 in 2001. The highest previous total was in 1998 when 32 deer hunters were shot, five fatally."

SO LONG AND THANKS FOR ALL THE LIFESAVING

Two of the "hero" dolphins in New Zealand that saved four people from a great white shark have been thanked for their efforts by being butchered by poachers. "Shocked lifeguards found them floating in a river with their tails hacked off. It is thought they drowned after becoming trapped in illegal fishing nets and were then cut loose." Come on, the poachers probably didn't know these particular dolphins were special, give 'em a break!

EATING TURKEY HAZARDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH

At least it is if you eat it alongside your troubled cousin. In the article "Dispute over turkey blamed for stabbings," we find that Frank Palacios of Massachusetts was picking at the turkey with his fingers instead of slicing off pieces with a knife, and was reprimanded for doing so by his cousin and uncle. After being asked to leave and refusing to do so, Palacios "allegedly responded by stabbing them with a carving knife." It's true that family tensions at Thanksgiving dinner don't usually get this heated, and yes, this is an extreme occurrence. But just as with the hunter killing the six other hunters last week, the notable thing is that the violence arose from a dispute over, and was done with, the very implement intended for doing (ritual) violence to an animal. It's hard to imagine a vegan potluck ending this way.

GLOBAL HEALTH? WE GIVE IT THE BIRD

Well, now that America has celebrated its dominance over nature and indigenous peoples with the annual bird-killing ritual, I have to say I did see about three times as many of those "what about vegetarians?" stories as usual. There will probably be even more of them next year once the reality of this has set in: "Bird Flu Pandemic inevitable, 7 million people could die," says the WHO. I know, they keep sounding the alarm about this, louder and louder, and I keep relaying the message, yet I'm sure that as of Thursday fewer than one in a dozen Americans had any idea there was such a thing currently ravaging the Pacific Rim, much less that the World Health Organization believes a pandemic is inevitable. We'll see if that's any different by next Thanksgiving, and how much we have to be thankful for at that point.

UPDATE 11/29: Sorry, "7 million people"? More like 100 million, according to today's stories.

SENSELESS MAYHEM IN WISCONSIN WOODS

That's the hed on this editorial on Sunday's weird hunter-on-hunter serial-killing (which I would've blogged here except I thought I already had - I had actually blogged it at MeFi, where most of what I have to say about it can be read). And of course the interesting thing is that the phrase describes perfectly what's normally practiced there and elsewhere during "the season." But I'll admit this incident remains very curious, especially now that the shooter is claiming he was tauntingly shot at first. As this piece says,

[W]hile it is shameful, we don't find it hard to believe that a group of hunters - or others - are capable of spewing a few racial or ethnic slurs in a confrontational situation.

It is harder to believe that a state hunter would fire in the direction of someone - even as warning shot - given the long-ingrained emphasis on hunting safety and the credo that a gun is not to be pointed at anyone. Common sense would dictate as well that you don't do such a thing when the person you are firing at is armed.

Still, it's not beyond the realm of possibility.

Nope, it sure ain't - not when you're talking about people for whom senseless mayhem in Wisconsin woods is their idea of fine family entertainment.

ALTERNA-T-DAY

This is part of a growing journalistic trend which, predictably, the Inquirer missed on Sunday despite devoting four separate stories to changes in Thanksgiving traditions: The Alternative (Read: Vegan) Thanksgiving Story. Not that the story hasn't already been done to death, but as vegetarians and vegans continue to make their presence known and deal with the issues of "turkey day," there will only be more articles like this.

Ginnie Maurer would travel hours to spend Thanksgiving with friends, even though, as a vegan, "having a turkey as a centerpiece was hard to bear." Like many vegetarians, Maurer used to make a meal of side dishes, and she simply swallowed a lot of the ribbing that came her way from some of her dinner companions. She finally gave up after what hosts billed as a "part vegetarian" feast ended up being a dinner where the "veggies" guests were seated on one side of the table and the "carnes," or carnivores, on the other.

This article also gets two sets of bonus points: One for not misspelling "Tofurky," and one for including "Nutrition expert Suzanne Havala Hobbs" as a source. She knows her stuff... ing.

McDONALD'S LOSES ANOTHER CEO TO MEAT-RELATED ILLNESS

No surprise, but USA Today reports that "McDonald's has taken yet another body blow to its battered but resilient executive suite. The fast-food giant's cancer-plagued CEO stepped down Monday, less than one year after the previous CEO was killed by a heart attack."

VEGANISM INSPIRES FASHION

That's the hed on yesterday's Inquirer "trend" piece on the growing number of fashion lines that are incorporating vegan options. "Dozens of merchants now offer wares that are labeled cruelty-free; the Web site Vegan Essentials offers hemp shoes and clothes. And Stella McCartney, long an activist for animal rights, has added shoes stamped 'suitable for vegetarians' to her collection. Her fabric-and-Lucite pumps are available at Nordstrom." It continues: "Vegan products are finding takers not only among the roughly six million Americans who call themselves vegetarians, but also among shoppers attracted to prices that are often 60 percent to 75 percent lower than leather. A spike in demand prompted Earth Shoes to introduce 15 vegan styles this year." That's all great, but I'm not mentioning it as some seismic development, only as a reminder that as options and alternatives increase, the stranglehold that animal-based products has had over our culture will continue to slip. And fewer outlets for, say, leather means higher prices for slaughterers who otherwise have to pay someone to get rid of the stuff. Baby steps...

FOX HUNTING BANNED

As all the stories stress, this is not the end, but it's certainly the beginning of the end. "The Speaker of the Commons, Michael Martin, last night invoked the Parliament Act, overriding the opposition of the House of Lords and bringing to an end almost 700 years of foxhunting in England and Wales. Within hours, the Queen gave her royal assent and the total ban on hunting with dogs will be enforced from February 18 next year." While pro-hunt thugs will continue to demonstrate, challenge in court, and generally make asses of themselves, the most they'll gain is a temporary reprieve in the form of a "compromise" for a couple years. The tide has turned, and at least on this one extreme example of animal cruelty, people have opened their eyes are are unlikely to simply close them again. The Tory leader oh-so-eloquently called for his fellow-thugs to "Cry havoc and let loose the dogs of war." Typical - even when they're picking fights, they let the dogs do all the work.