PETA's eagle argument should fly away

Credit: Vasha Hunt/Opelika-Auburn News

Spirit flies before the first half of the Auburn Tigers' season-opening football game against the Utah State Aggies on Saturday, Sept. 3, in Jordan-Hare Stadium in Auburn.

By: Opelika-Auburn News Editorial Board
Published: September 18, 2011

PETA should thank Auburn University.

It should thank the university for serving as home to the Southeastern Raptor Center, where an estimated 200 wounded or orphaned birds of prey are brought for rehabilitation annually and, if health permits, released back into the wild.

It should thank the university for allowing the Raptor Center to educate thousands about such birds, moving many of them to further appreciate their beauty and necessity in the ecosystem. An educated public helps foster a more caring, generous attitude toward such animals.

PETA should thank Auburn for being home to one of the nation’s finest veterinary schools. The university is renowned for its hospital care toward animals, large or small, and for teaching others how to care for their pets and make them feel loved.

But instead, a member of the organization chose to throw darts through a letter to the Montgomery Advertiser simply because a highly improbable incident drew national attention.

Before last Saturday’s Auburn-Mississippi State football game at Jordan-Hare Stadium, Spirit, the Raptor Center’s bald eagle and a symbol of our nation, made a detour never before taken during the 11-year history of pre-game flights. The eagle glided into a luxury box glass window, was briefly stunned, recovered and resumed the flight.

If PETA was so concerned about Spirit’s safety, why did it wait until the bird glided into the window to make noise in the media?

If these flights were deemed so unsafe, why didn’t PETA cry foul long ago? Oh, the incident drew national headlines — and maybe the PETA letter simply piggy-backed on that news in an attempt to draw attention to the organization.

PETA does a wonderful job policing true animal cruelty, where neglect and physical cruelty to animals should be battled. There are crimes committed against animals out there, and we encourage PETA to continue the fight against such activities.

In Spirit’s case, we have a symbolic, well-cared-for bird whom thousands adore and only want to love and cherish — and he simply glided into a window. Somehow here, we see a large difference between a minor accident and animal cruelty.

oanow.com

PETA activists visit Vancouver with anti-sport fishing message

By Stephen Thomson, September 23, 2011

A pair of animal-rights activists from the U.S. spoke out against recreational fishing during a visit to Vancouver.
Hayden Hamilton, a campaigner with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, said her group is urging families to show compassion by leaving fish in the water.
“Nobody wants to set a bad example for their kids but when they take their kids fishing they’re really sending them a very dangerous message: that it’s fun to torment and abuse animals,” she told the Straight in an interview.
Hayden described fish as sensitive and intelligent but said they don’t get the same kind of sympathy as household animals like dogs and cats.
“Parents would never dream of spending a weekend trying to hook the family dog, but hooking a fish through the mouth and dragging him through the water is just as cruel as hooking the family dog and dragging him behind your car,” she said.
Hayden and another PETA member were sharing their message with people walking along a path next to Coal Harbour today (September 23). They handed out leaflets that read: “Don’t let your kids become hookers”.
“We’re here to let parents and children know that it’s wrong to abuse animals,” she said.
The visit to Vancouver and stops in Washington State earlier this week were in lead up to “Fish Amnesty Day” on Saturday, according to PETA.

STRAIGHT.COM

PETA attacks shark attack victim, says "Payback is Hell"

SARASOTA --
Following an apparent shark attack in the Bay area this weekend, the animal rights organization PETA has announced plans to run an outdoor advertising campaign attacking a recent Bay area shark attack victim.
The organization plans to promote an ad that shows a human "drumstick" hanging out of a shark's mouth, next to the words "Payback Is
 Hell. Go Vegan."

• JUMP TO: Friend's frantic 911 call released, detailing friends' reaction

The organization will put the ad on benches and billboards near Anna Maria Island, they said will promote their claim that "the deadliest killers in the water aren't sharks -- they're humans."

"Humans hook, spear, maim, and kill fish for 'sport' every day," says PETA Executive Vice President Tracy Reiman. "The most dangerous predator of all is the one holding the fishing rod or standing at the 'all you can eat' seafood buffet."

The organization said fish are aware of their surroundings, have complex nervous systems, and feel pain.
In a Skype interview, Campaign Director Ashley Byrne said, "We are very glad that Mr. Wickersham is going to be ok, but we do hope that this painful and frightening experience makes him think about the pain and fear that he’s causing to fish -- and other fisherman are causing to fish.”
The campaign comes after Longboat Key resident Charles Wickersham, 21, was bitten by an apparent shark while he was spearfishing several miles off the coast of Anna Maria Island.

Wickersham remains in intensive care after the apparent shark attack.

Wickersham and a group of friends were fishing out in the Gulf Saturday when Wickersham yelled something bit him on his left thigh.

Friends took Wickersham, or CJ, as he is known, to shore. Manatee Co. EMS met the boat in the Rod and Reel Pier area of Anna Maria Island around 3 p.m. Saturday

Bay News 9

Fury over rabbit fur ban

FARMERS and fashion industry figures are up in arms over a ban on rabbit fur.

This follows the banning of a rabbit-fur design during Melbourne's Spring Fashion Week.

The decision, made by Melbourne Lord Mayor Robert Doyle and his council, prevented the bodice - made from pest rabbits - appearing on the catwalk on Saturday after threats of protests from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

The decision left Mallee RMIT student designer Molly Herben stunned. She said the decision to ban her design was an "injustice".

Her fur outfit used rabbits culled in a Government-backed eradication property near her home town of Yaapeet, and took four months to create. Victorian Farmers Federation Land Management chairman Gerald Leach said the ban was an "insult" to Ms Herben.

"She was making a resource out of a pest that was going to be killed anyway, Mr Leach said.

"It's really disappointing the organisers of the fashion show are so far removed from reality to let PETA get away with this.

"Perhaps we need to get the Lord Mayor up here into the country so he can understand what a problem this pest is."

Mallee farmer Jason Scott, who has a property near Ouyen, said rabbits had stripped thousands of dollars of value from crops in the region.

"It's a pretty small-minded, short-sighted decision," he said.

"This isn't a native animal, this is a pest," Mr Scott said.

"Farmers need to control the numbers and if someone can value-add with the pelts, a make a living, it should be encouraged."

Fashion blogger Nadia Napreychikov, from Melbourne label DI$COUNT, where Ms Herben has been an intern, said the decision was "appalling".

"For so many reasons this decision is appalling and a complete compromise on creative freedom and art," Ms Napreychikov said.

"She is using fur from a pest that is legal to kill, that kills farming industry.

"These animals were not killed for her work."

Ms Herben scrambled to replace outfits for Saturday's Emerging Designers show.

These were made of leather and put together with the help of other RMIT students.

Friends wore rabbit ears at Saturday's show in support of Ms Herben while supporters have written to Mr Doyle criticising the decision.

"I was humbled by the response from the general public," Ms Herben, 22, said.

"It was wonderful to hear that those who did not know me personally felt strong enough about the issue to stand up and have an opinion."

The council's decision came after PETA activists stormed a fashion week runway last week, brandishing anti-fur placards for five minutes before leaving the stage.

Cr Doyle told the media last week: "We had to think very hard about this (ban) because, although these young designers have put in an awful lot of work, we couldn't risk something happening,"

When quizzed further about the decision, a City of Melbourne spokeswoman said security at the Saturday event would be "adequate" but: "Our designers have worked extremely hard on their collections and we don't want their big moment overshadowed by protesters."

Ironically, Saturday's night show was promoted as "bold, uncensored collections".

RMIT publicly supported the decision but it is understood members of the school's fashion department were privately fuming.

Another designer, Melbourne-based Jack Loder, was forced to withdraw some of his dresses, which featured impala fur and feather trim.

Under Victorian law, wild rabbits are defined as an established pest and land owners must "take all reasonable steps to prevent the spread of, and as far as possible eradicate, established pest animals".

Molly's father, Ian Herben, who was among a 60-strong contingent from Yaapeet at the show, said his daughter was assured by the university four months ago that the pelts could be used.

"There were some initial discussions, but she was assured it would be no problem," he said.

"It's just ridiculous. A small minority shouldn't be able to dictate to everyone else when 99.99 per cent of the population thinks it's OK."

"The ironic thing is, the DPI had been going around the district asking farmers to eradicate their rabbits or they would be fined," Mr Herben said.

PETA said it welcomed the council's decision, and that the only decent rabbit control was preventing breeding.

"I think the designer is trying to greenwash the public. There is no such thing as ethically-produced fur," PETA Australia campaigns manager Ashley Fruno said.

"It's common place for rabbits to be poisoned, caught in snares, mauled by dogs, or shot.

"Any designer, student or not, should think twice about using real fur. PETA is always watching."

WeeklyTimes Now

Of Course PETA's Planning to Launch a Porn Site

Adam Clark Estes - Aug 22, 2011 

The attention-hungry activists at PETA want to launch a pornography site that combines "a lot of girl and boy next door content" with pictures of animals being mistreated. Pending their application to the the operators of the .xxx domain, the animal rights organization wants to spread their message as widely as possible and isn't shy about the power of sex appeal. "We try to use absolutely every outlet to stick up for animals," PETA spokesperson Linsay Rijt told The Huffington Post, a site that's also known for manipulating the power of sex appeal. "We live in a 24 hour news cycle world, and we learn the racy things we do are sometimes the most effective way that we can reach particular individuals."
This has been a long time coming. PETA's ad campaigns have been called pornographic since 1991. That year, the organization launched their "I'd rather go naked than wear fur" campaign and drew criticism from women's rights organizations for featuring Pamela Anderson and other naked celebrities, most of them women. PETA knew they had a hit and have spun off the campaign into countless different sexually charged slogans. PETA's also kept a close relationship with Playboy and featured a number of Hugh Hefner's wives and playmates in these ads. "Playboy is helping us put the 'T & A' in PETA," says PETA senior vice president and former Baywatch star Dan Matthews, who's been arrested more than once for protesting naked.

As Matthews and PETA have been arguing for nearly 30 years now, the skin-centric ads do attract attention, and the media's pounced on the porn announcement. "I can imagine that, should this be a subscription-only affair, it will surely attract a considerable and very particular following," said CNET blogger and ad industry veteran Chris Matyszczyk. "Finally, they can skip the "we love animals!" charade and get right down to bringing us the tits they've been all about showcasing this entire time," remarked Erin Gloria Ryan at Jezebel. "Apparently they are planning to juxtapose porn with images of mistreated animals," wrote Carmel Lobello at Death & Taxes. "For any sane person, images of mistreated animals should be an instant boner-killer."

The Atlantic Wire