Skip to content

Make Bear Hunters Fight Other Terrorists

Photo by Terry Spivey

Photo by Terry Spivey

What follows is on open letter to New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

Gov. Christie,

On Tuesday, you once again voiced support for your bloodstained state’s annual bear hunt, declaring on Eric Scott’s WKXW (New Jersey 101.5) show Ask the Governor that “bears are everywhere” and “this is a really bad problem.”

Not surprisingly, you echoed the bogus and insulting claim that the state-sanctioned slaughter is “based on science” and gave your henchman, state Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Bob Martin, a pat on the back, saying he’s “done a great job administering it.”

At the beginning of this week, more than 8,000 bloodlust-full subhumans had secured permits to slaughter bears in your state. That’s more than twice the number of bears than are estimated to make their homes in New Jersey.

The DEP hopes to oversee the slaughter of some 700 bears this year — about 20 percent of the population. Reducing New Jersey’s human population by the same percentage, it’s worth pointing out, would mean killing approximately 1.8 million people.

But that’s entirely different, you would say with great bluster. We need to protect humans from the dangerous beasts who dare to wander out of our nightmares and onto our streets.

What your state’s annual bear massacre proves is that bears and other species are in desperate need of protection from violent thugs and the greedy opportunists, like you, who bend over for them.

How many humans in your state have been killed by bears? One. Since Monday, 366 bears have been murdered in New Jersey. Congratulations, you’re more than halfway to your desired body count for the year.

Morality, of course, can’t be measured in numbers. Your ridiculous claim that the bear hunt is a science-based necessity betrays the astonishing arrogance with which monstrous people like you operate.

If there is a problem, it’s man’s callous disregard for other species. For you, this is about power, just as it is for the knuckle-dragging, lead-filled-phallus-carrying sadists who right now are searching the New Jersey woods for potential victims.

All the bears want — and what they absolutely deserve — is to be left alone to live their lives free from fear and harm. And you deny them that to cater to the bloodthirsty desires of murderous psychopaths.

Why not send the 8,200 bear-hunt-permit-holding Neanderthals overseas to tangle with ISIS? Let one group of barbarians hunt the other. The world would be a much better place without any of them.

The above was sent to New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Bob Martin, and WKXW’s (New Jersey 101.5) vice president of news and digital operations, Eric Scott.

The Dairy Industry’s “Udder Truth” is Utter Nonsense

While no one’s life is adversely affected by what’s depicted or not depicted on Starbucks’ cups, countless lives are destroyed so that the indifferent masses can add milk to coffee.

Starbucks is just one company whose bottom lines can be measured in stolen lives.

The dairy industry, needless to say, works very hard to portray the victims as willing — even enthusiastic — participants in their own brutal exploitation.

A recently produced video series unimaginatively and insultingly called “The Udder Truth” is a prime example of the propaganda the industry disseminates to make consumers feel good about supporting cruelty.

In the video embedded above, Annie Link, the owner of Dairy Discovery, which offers tours of the Alto, Michigan-based Swiss Lane Dairy Farms, makes the following statements.

“We do everything we can to make sure these cows are comfortable, well cared for. The better care we take of them, the better they’re going to perform for us.”

 “The more relaxed that a cow is, the more comfortable they are, the more milk they’re going to give. We have a great partnership with these cows.”

“The cows actually like to get milked. I mean, they can’t wait for their turn to go in and get milked.”

The “Udder Truth” video series was produced by Dairy Management Inc., an organization that exists “to help increase sales and demand for dairy products.” Dairy Management Inc. is funded by farmers through a federally mandated assessment (a so-called “checkoff” program), administered by the National Dairy Promotion and Research Board — whose members are appointed by the U.S. secretary of agriculture — and overseen by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

In addition to the video series, the “Udder Truth” propaganda campaign, which is presented by the Dairy Management Inc.-maintained website, involves a partnership with The Onion and the satirical news site’s spin-off,, each of which has created industry-sponsored content.

The truth, obviously, is nowhere to be found in any part of this shameful marketing campaign. The unavoidable truth is that cruelty is the very foundation of the dairy industry. Calves are taken from their mothers as soon as they’re born so that their mothers’ milk can be sold for human consumption. Most male calves are destined for dinner plates, while female calves are raised to be repeatedly impregnated and used as milk machines until they are “spent” and can no longer produce, at which point they, too, are turned into food for indifferent humans.

Just ask Annie Link.

In an email response to a handful of questions I asked her during a brief telephone conversation, Link explained that 2044 calves will have been born at Swiss Lane Farms in 2015, that “all heifers are raised here and will be our future herd,” and that “we raise the bull calves that we have enough barn space for (on average 40/month) and sell them to local beef farmers as feeder calves (about 350-500 lbs.). We have a few that we raise and use as bulls for breeding. Other bull calves are sold to a beef farmer or sold at the local livestock auction.”

Cows who leave Swiss Lane Dairy Farms are sold to other dairy farms or to beef producers.

How often a cow is impregnated at Swiss Lane Dairy Farms is determined on an individual basis, Link said, explaining that “they are bred when they are in heat. Their cycle is 21 days but we do not breed them until 70 days after they have a calf and will not breed them again if they are not pregnant after five breedings. On average the cows are having a calf every 13.5 months.”

Not a single cow who is born into the living hell that is the dairy industry has any choice at all. Each is bred into a stolen life that will end with a knife across the throat.

We, on the other hand, can choose to protest on their behalf.

Meet “Kid Schadenfreude,” a 4-Year-Old Animal-Attack Connoisseur

Photo by Jan Kronsell

Photo by Jan Kronsell

Yesterday, I ran into a friend whom I hadn’t seen in several years. It came up in conversation that her 4-year-old son is a budding connoisseur of successful animal-on-human attacks. Naturally, I proposed that my friend, whom we’ll call “Lady Gogo,” read my latest blog post to her son and record his reaction.

My most recently published commentary is about a dunce in Orange, Texas, who scoffed at warnings that an alligator had been seen in the area, defiantly said, “Fuck that alligator,” and jumped into a bayou, never to been seen alive again.

I later read that the alligator who killed the dunce was mercilessly executed by a vengeful asshole who believes animals should live by our rules. That subhuman thug, not surprisingly, was essentially given a pat on the back by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.

What follows is a transcript of the conversation Lady Gogo had with her son, whom we’ll call “Kid Schadenfreude.”

Lady Gogo: So what happened was, the guy said, “I don’t care … I don’t like alligators,” and he jumped into the water, and then almost immediately he yelled for help. But then he was never seen again. What do you think of that?

Kid Schadenfreude: Hmm. I like it. Is there another story that he had?  

Lady Gogo: That’s it. What do you think about that?

Kid Schadenfreude: I like it. 

Lady Gogo: What do you like about it?

Kid Schadenfreude: I just do. Mama, why is there always blood in the water

Lady Gogo: Because some people are always killing animals’ environments. What do you think about that?

Kid Schadenfreude: Hmm. Sad. But [animals] killing people is happy! … Mama I would like a story about a person getting squeezed by an anaconda. I’m really interested in snakes … And a black mamba. A black mamba please. Mama? Mama I would like to meet that man …

Lady Gogo later told her son that the alligator in Texas had been killed, despite having been “an animal in its natural habitat, doing its natural thing.”

Kid Schadenfreude described the alligator’s senseless death as “sad.”

Alligator 1, Reckless Dude 0

Photo by Jan Kronsell

Photo by Jan Kronsell

I have an idea for a short comedic film about a guy being killed by an alligator. As the film begins, we meet a reckless young man who’s preparing to go for a swim in a Texas bayou.

Scoffing at posted and verbal warnings that alligators had recently been spotted in the area, he disrobes and dives in. Seconds later, he’s dragged beneath the water’s murky surface, never to be seen again, his female companion screaming like the star of some formulaic horror flick.

As the credits roll, we learn that the film is based on actual events. 

According to CNN, this very scene played out in Texas on Friday.

In the CNN report, Rodney Price, a local justice of the peace, was quoted as saying, “He removed his shirt, removed his billfold … someone shouted a warning and he said ‘blank the alligators’ and jumped in to the water and almost immediately yelled for help.”

If not a short film, this incident at very least calls for one of those cheesy reenactment videos.

Exploitation on Display in New York Art Gallery

Jannis Kounellis. Photo by Gabuchan

Jannis Kounellis. Photo by Gabuchan

In recreating Jannis Kounellis’ 1969 “art” installation Untitled (12 Horses), New York art dealer and gallery owner Gavin Brown is celebrating that which is most ugly about our culture. The sickening exhibit, on view through tomorrow at Gavin Brown’s Enterprise, is nothing more than 12 horses tethered to the gallery’s walls.

“I’ve always wanted to show this piece,” Brown was quoted by ARTnews as saying.

The New York Times Roberta Smith suggests that the horses’ “accommodation in a space that is recognizably an art gallery foments an especially concentrated encounter with the brute power of art and its ability to transform space.”

That’s a whole lot of pretentious — and insulting — nonsense.

In an August 2004 interview with the Greek Left ReviewKounellis likened Untitled (12 Horses) to “a theatrical performance,” and said, “This was the significance of my action, which is defined by freedom.”

Whose freedom?

Kounellis’ exploitation of horses in 1969 marked the move of the Galleria l’Attico into a new space in Rome.

“Now that storied hallmark of Arte Povera is being used to say goodbye,” ARTnews explained.

Brown plans to move his gallery, in September, from the West Village to Harlem.

None of this, of course, matters to the exploited animals.

The horses tethered to the walls of Brown’s gallery space are not willing performers, of course. They are victims.

“The horses were tied to the wall of the gallery in order to make a connection between the living element and the idea of solid foundations,” Kounellis told the Greek Left Review in 2004.

Being tethered to a wall, unable to do anything but stand there and be looked at as an object, is not living. What Brown’s exploitation of horses does is reinforce and celebrate the arrogant notion that man is entitled to hold dominion over other species. Putting a frame around exploitation and calling it “art” does not eliminate the cruelty that, in this case, is the medium.

Contact Gavin Brown at 212-627-5258 and tell him that exploitation is not art.

Related commentaries:
Slaughtered Deer on Display in Syracuse “Art” Exhibit
Performance Artist Frames Animal-Testing Protest

“Gopher Fest,” Killing Contests, and the Defiant Culture of Savagery

Photo by Leonardo Weiss

Photo by Leonardo Weiss

Like “Squirrel Slam,” an annual killing contest in Holley, New York, in which participants slaughter as many squirrels as they can for the chance to win guns and cash, “Gopher Fest” encourages the same kind of savage behavior among residents of Lima, Montana. Each is billed as a fundraiser — the former for the local fire department, the latter to support the upkeep of the local swimming pool. “Gopher Fest,” named after its target species, includes a gun raffle and barbecue.

In a column published yesterday in the Lake County Leader (Polson, Montana), Kylie Richter explains, callously, that “Gopher Fest” took place earlier this month on properties whose owners welcomed the massacre. Richter supports her claim that “hunting is a Montana culture” by pointing out that a “few years back, a reporter from Bozeman wrote an article about how terrible it was that people were shooting these rodents in mass quantities. Apparently, the next year, Gopherfest almost doubled in size.”

If that’s true — and let’s assume that it is — it’s because violent knuckle-draggers are predictably defiant in the face of rational scrutiny. They use the word “culture” because it allows them to play the victims and to cast their critics as antagonists. The real victims, of course, are, to their killers, nameless, faceless interlopers — “furry nuisances,” as Richter describes the gophers targeted in Lima and elsewhere.

The smug refusal of the Neanderthals among us to recognize their evil hypocrisy is an ugly and destructive posture. That they frame killing contests as fundraisers through which their communities are enhanced is obnoxious. Town officials in Holley have declined offers to help raise money through nonviolent means. That’s because they won’t be told that their “culture” is backward and vicious.

This year in Lima, according to Richter, more than 100 psychopaths showed up on June 6 to kill as many gophers as they could. Each paid a $10 entry fee. Those 100 lowlifes could just have easily donated to the community-pool fund without killing any animals. And it’s worth pointing out that the town could raise $1,000 for upkeep of the community pool by asking each member of the community, which numbered 226 in 2013, for an annual $4 contribution.

But that’s all beside the point, which is that killing contests are about killing, and not about making their host communities better places to live. Certainly not for the nonhuman residents who call those areas home.

Contact information for the Town of Lima’s mayor and councilmen can be found here

Related commentaries:
“Squirrel Slam”: The Holleycaust Continues
Protest Song Condemns “Squirrel Slam,” Supports Animal-Rights Group
Holley “Squirrel Slam” is a Neanderthal Custom of Evangelical Barbarism

Hunter Population Numbers One Fewer

Photo by Albert Kok

Photo by Albert Kok

Once in a while, in addition to giving us reason to celebrate, news of a fatal hunting incident can provide a decent grammar lesson.

First, the news.

According to the Associated Press, an inebriated dimwit in Florida, while taking a break from killing fish, checked to see if his handgun was loaded by putting the thing to his largely empty noggin and pulling the trigger. A fatal head wound revealed the answer.

I learned about the incident when my good friend Monty Gelstein called to suggest a headline.

“Hunter Population Numbers One Less After Fisherman Blows Head Off,” Monty shouted, gleefully, into the receiver.

“One fewer,” I said.

“What’s the goddamned difference, dude?” he asked.

It was a rhetorical question, as far as Monty was concerned. I, on the other hand, felt compelled to refer him to Paul Brians’ excellent website and bookCommon Errors in English Usage.

“You’re such an annoying geek,” Monty said. “You should be dancing, not quibbling about grammar, of all things.”

“I’ll dance when all the hunters are gone,” I told him.

I found the AP story on the WPTV website and immediately took issue with the report’s description of the incident as being an “accident.”

“Can’t you just enjoy the moment — and the fact that at very least the deceased will never again kill another animal?” Monty asked.

Mentally unbalanced as he is, Monty had a point. And so I danced …

Montana Officials Kill, Blow Up Orphaned Moose

Photo by Veronika Ronkos

Photo by Veronika Ronkos

If you don’t think hunting agencies are the enemies of wildlife, you don’t know much about hunting agencies.” — Joe Miele, president, Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting

That comment was posted to the Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting Facebook page last week, along with a link to a sickening news story published by The Dodo about an orphaned moose calf whom Montana wildlife officials killed because that’s what they do. After the newborn moose was put to death, members of the U.S. Forest Service used explosives to get rid of the calf’s lifeless body and those of the animal’s deceased mother and a sibling.

According to a report in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle, U.S. Forest Service staff “used explosives to get rid of the carcasses of all three moose, spreading the proteins that might attract predators like grizzly bears to the campground.”

A camper from Bozeman, Montana, named Josh Hohm had encountered the orphaned calf and alerted local authorities, whom he figured would help, not slaughter, the young animal.

Andrea Jones, a spokesperson for the Montana wildlife gestapo, told various media outlets that her agency had no choice but to destroy the calf in order to prevent the possible spread of chronic wasting disease. Plus, Jones offered matter-of-factly, the newborn moose probably wouldn’t have survived anyway.

Only a useless fool could possibly believe that Jones and her jackbooted colleagues care about the well-being of wildlife in Montana. Their objective is to provide a user-friendly experience for humans, particularly those who delight in killing animals. Indeed, as far as the Montana wildlife gestapo is concerned, animals and their habitats exist for human use.

The bastards believe they know what’s best for other species and ours. And they’ll stick to their insulting story that what was best for the orphaned calf was to be put to death. Blowing the bodies of three dead moose to smithereens was, in state officials’ eyes, in the best interests of humans who might want to use campgrounds, like the one in which Hohm encountered the calf, without having to share the space with animals who might call the area home.

This is so-called “wildlife management” in action. This is a snapshot of the taxpayer-supported war on animals that rages on, as a policy and a business, from state to state. This is what a newborn moose got for losing her mother.

Tell Connecticut Gov. Malloy to Veto Sunday Bowhunting Bill

Loathsome members of the Connecticut Senate have approved HB 6034, which would allow bowhunters on certain state-identified private properties to slaughter deer on Sundays. The bill, which the state House approved on May 27, is now headed to Gov. Dannel Malloy’s desk. Please call the governor at 800-406-1527 and tell him to veto the odious legislation, about which I wrote on Tuesday.

Connecticut Bill Would Allow Bowhunting on Sundays

Photo by David Baron

Photo by David Baron

A heinous piece of legislation is pending in the Connecticut Senate that would lift the state’s longstanding Sunday hunting ban and give the barbarians among us additional opportunities to kill. Specifically, HB 6034 would allow bowhunters to slaughter deer on private property in Department of Energy and Environmental Protection-identified “management zones.”

“Wildlife management” is, of course, a euphemism for “sanctioned slaughter.” On May 27, HB 6034, championed by 22 heartless and sycophantic sponsors doing the bidding of a ruthless industry, passed a Connecticut House vote by an insulting 113-32 margin.

Should the House-approved bill pass a Senate vote before the regular session of the General Assembly concludes on Wednesday, it would move to the desk of Gov. Dannel Malloy, who should know there is nothing right about supporting more merciless brutality than is already inflicted on animals by state-enabled, bloodlust-full savages for whom killing is a sport.

He should oppose recreational cruelty and reject the dangerous belief that man is entitled to “manage” other species. He should refuse to jeopardize more animals’ lives just so the state can open for bloody business on Sundays. He should say no to more atrocities against wildlife and join the fight to stop the war on animals.

The text of HB 6034 can be found here, and the Connecticut Office of Legislative Research’s analysis can be found here. At the time of this writing, the Connecticut Senate had not voted on HB 6034. Connecticut residents should contact their state senators and tell them in no uncertain terms to vote against this loathsome piece of legislation. Connecticut Senate members’ contact information can be found here. Should the Connecticut Senate pass HB 6034 before its regular session ends on Wednesday, the legislation will be placed on Gov. Dannel Malloy’s desk. The governor’s contact information can be found here. Tell him, if the legislation is before him, to veto HB 6034.