Home Bill Lynn Research Teaching Downloads Ethics Ethos Muse Wolves Contact

Posts RSS Comments RSS 189 Posts and 51 Comments till now

Archive for April, 2008

SeaWorld Dolphin Dies While Doing Trick (by Kris Stewart)

seaworld logoA 30-year-old dolphin died on Saturday at Sea World’s Discovery Cove after colliding with another dolphin while performing aerial tricks.With visitors watching, two dolphins apparently slammed into one another in mid-air and one of them, Sharky, was killed in the process. SeaWorld spokespeople called it an “unfortunate, random incident.”

Random? Baffling, maybe. I have never heard of dolphins colliding with one another under any circumstances-much less mid-air. To say such a thing is “random” is to imply that it could happen anytime; that it is part of some probability distribution-one of many events in which all outcomes are equally likely. But Sharky was in the process of performing a presumably human-crafted aerial maneuver in a concrete pool for the pleasure of human onlookers.I suppose under these circumstances crashing into your acrobatic colleague isn’t something to be too shocked about, but I can’t help but think about the tremendous athleticism, awareness, grace, intelligence, and agility of free-ranging dolphins in the open sea.I just can’t imagine something like this ever happening there.

Unfortunate? Are they kidding? Unfortunate is locking your keys in your car. Unfortunate is mistakenly hitting the send button before you actually finished typing that email. Or perhaps I’m being to loose with the word. Unfortunate is waking up with a big pimple on your wedding day. Anyway, you get my point. The violent death of a sentient, sapient creature who was kept by humans, for the pleasure of humans, and perished whiled performing tricks for those who were charged with providing his care and safety is nothing less than a tragedy.

Maybe I’m writing this too soon. Like an email dashed off in the heat of disgust, perhaps I’m pushing the send button too soon on this. But I got the news and thought it important that I share it. If I’m not as articulate as I might have been after a cooling off period, that is unfortunate. But Sharky’s death is so much more than that.

Am I making too much of words? I don’t think so. Words are powerful things. "Random and unfortunate" is what you call a paper cut or a big zit. It happens. It’s too bad. It is not this. In my view, SeaWorld screams a callouse disrespect for Sharky, the other animals under its care, and all dolphins with its words as well as its behavior.

Sharky’s death was, at the least, baffling and tragic.

For the CNN story, go to http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/28/dolphin.death/index.html

Monkey in the middle (by Matthew Shaer)

lisa-simon-200.pngJust in case you missed it, this article on one of our columnist — Lisa Brown — recently appeared in the Boston Globe.

cheers, Bill

~

Monkey in the middle
A love of animals and a desire to understand them is something that hits home for Lisa Brown

By Matthew Shaer, Globe Correspondent | April 19, 2008

Simon is standing in the kitchen sink of his Brighton apartment, taking a bath. It’s a ritual he seems to cherish, more than the evening screenings of “The Daily Show” and “Top Chef,” more than petting Yoshi the cat, more than his fledging career in sketching.

First, one furry paw. Then his head, tipped toward the flood of warm tap water. Soon, Simon, an 8-pound Capuchin monkey, is hunched under the faucet, his arms crossed across his chest, a fat grin spilling across his cheeks.

“He’s a pretty handsome monkey - maybe the George Clooney of monkeys,” suggests his guardian Lisa Brown, hefting Simon out of the sink.

“He has a bit of a belly, though,” says Adam Dardeck, Brown’s husband. From the folds of a big, white towel, Simon extends his stomach obligingly, and smiles again, before catching a visitor staring. It is not, it should be said, an insubstantial belly. He turns away, coquettishly.

In the wild, Capuchin monkeys - a lithe, fast, fiercely intelligent breed - are lovers, not fighters. The rain forest of South and Central America, their native habitat, is a wild, violent place; they survive on plants, bugs, and shellfish, opened with the judicious crack of a stone. Bed is a pronged bough, far from the reach of dangerous predators. A “bath” is a slapdash grooming, at the hands of a friend or a relative.

But Simon has never set foot in the jungle. He was born in captivity and has spent much of his life with Helping Hands, a national nonprofit organization based in Boston. Eventually he will be sent to assist a patient suffering from spinal cord disease or a similarly degenerative muscle disorder.

For now, he is serving an apprenticeship at the center of a decidedly untraditional family: one man, one woman, one cat, one monkey, one small apartment. And the occasional foray into the big, cold world outside.

“So many friends have told me, ‘Oh, I’ve always wanted a monkey,’ ” Brown says. “They think of Marcel, for instance.” Marcel, the pet from the television show “Friends,” fetched beer and doughnuts on command.

“I’ve worked around monkeys long enough to know that’s not how it works,” she says. “Monkeys are a hell of a lot of smarter than the dogs and cats in our lives. Having Simon here requires training, and patience - he needs real stimulation.”

Simon’s eagerness to learn makes him a natural fit for Helping Hands, which trains Capuchin monkeys to be live-in companions to people with impaired mobility. Capuchins are “natural tool users,” says Megan Talbert, the organization’s chief operating officer, so they can quickly adapt to a handful of chores, from operating a television, to scratching an itch, to flipping the pages of a book.

“Most of all,” Talbert says, “the number one gift is companionship - the bond they form with humans. It’s real love.”

Family dynamics

Brown, 31, met Simon in the winter of 2002. She’d volunteered at Helping Hands for 10 months, and then, when a position opened up, she transitioned into full-time work. Co-workers remember that Simon and Lisa instantly developed a strong bond, so much so that when Simon went out on an early placement, Lisa became visibly distressed.

“Lisa’s relationship with Simon is very interesting to me,” says Jennifer Novak, a former employee at Helping Hands. “Monkeys don’t decipher the difference between cats, for instance, or dogs. Everyone’s in their troop, and they rank them how they’re going to rank. Lisa’s the same way with animals. She shares that dynamic. Her and Simon? They were simpatico.”

As it turned out, Simon’s initial placement wasn’t a perfect fit, and he was sent back to the Helping Hands center, where Brown was waiting. “It was as if no time had passed,” Novak says. “Simon leapt right into Lisa’s arms. And they just stared at each other - they were just perfectly and totally happy.”

In 2006, Brown began work on a one-year master’s program in animals and public policy at Tufts University. When she left Helping Hands that year, she brought Simon to the Brighton apartment she shares with Dardeck and Yoshi.

The application process at Helping Hands is intense, and it includes background checks and extended training. But for Brown and Dardeck there were more serious obstacles. For one, they would have to find room for an animal that, in Brown’s assessment, is “not like having a cat and maybe not as much work as having a child, but somewhere between that.”

And where would Dardeck, 31, fit into the intense relationship between Brown and Simon? Capuchins are used to ranking large groups of peers into a specific hierarchy, by order of power and respect. There is a king of the heap, and then there is everyone else.

“Of course, I had some reservations,” Dardeck says with a laugh. “It was unclear where I’d fit into the pecking order.” But the day Dardeck agreed to give it a try, Brown says, she was no longer nervous. It was a gift - “there was no greater expression of love, that I can think of,” she explains. A year and a half later, friends say, it is hard to separate Dardeck and Brown and Simon from the small, tightly-knit family they have formed.

“It’s a deeply personal relationship,” says William S. Lynn, the program director for the master’s program in animals and public policy at Tufts. Lynn met Brown when she interviewed for the program, and the two have remained close. “When you see Lisa with Simon, you recognize all the signs of a loving parent from her. And all the signs of a happy sibling from him.”

Soul mates

With Lynn’s help, Brown has spent the past few months transcribing the messy particulars of life with Simon - from cognitive development to diaper training to the place of the monkey in modern culture - into writing, both as a columnist for Ethos, an animal ethics blog (practicalethics.net/blog), and for her own popular project, animalinventory.net.

At Animal Inventory, Brown looks at the larger picture: How do humans understand animal-kind? How do we portray creatures in art, in the movies, in music, and in the press? The blog is busy and bustling, but colored by what Lynn calls “deep moral sensibility.”

“She recognizes there’s a person in those eyes,” he says. “Lisa has arrived at a very complex understanding of the variety of ways we interact with animals, and she expresses it beautifully.”

Brown says she did a good deal of research into other animal-related blogs and found only “bits and pieces of what I’m trying to do with Animal Inventory. Some people have a focus on natural, for instance, or popular culture. I’d like to connect it all.

“That animal on TV is not an abstract thing,” she says. “It’s a symbol, or it’s an accessory, or a representation of something ‘other.’ I’m searching for a kind of perspective, and Simon is a source of inspiration.”

He is also a force unto himself - a pint-size, frizzy-furred tempest of personality. As a visitor watched, Simon created a wild post-impressionistic portrait, pausing occasionally to punctuate a pencil stroke with a low, happy grunt. He likes Jon Stewart, it turns out, and hates violence. (Once, Dardeck says, a “Daily Show” episode turned mock-rough, and Simon rushed to the television, slapping at the screen with both paws.) He loves zippers and shoelaces, which he painstakingly unties.

Sometimes, when he’s feeling affectionate, he’ll pick through Dardeck’s hair, or slip into a sleepy reverie in Brown arms, his belly pointed skyward.

“For a long time, I’ve been trying to formulate a blog entry about soul mates,” Brown says. “No one ever really talks about the possibility that we can develop that connection with animals - a connection where two beings understand each other in a way no one else can.”

She pauses, then adds, “I can have a checklist. I can say, ‘Simon is cuddly. I like that.’ Or, ‘He’s inquisitive, and I like that.’ But it’s not the sort of thing you verbalize. It’s the sort of thing you just know is there. Simon and I have found another way to communicate.”

Source: www.boston.com/lifestyle/articles/2008/04/19/monkey_in_the_middle/

Obama’s ‘Bitter’ Remark (by Karin Lauria)

The other day, Dan Schnur had an op-ed in the New York Times on Barack Obama’s suggestion that working-class voters in Pennsylvania “cling” to religion, guns, and xenophobia to cope with bitterness over their economic conditions.

His basic argument is that the Democratic party is “continually vexed” by people who vote according to their values, even to the detriment of their economic interests. According to Schnur, Obama’s recent gaffe in Pennsylvania demonstrates that he doesn’t get it either.

Usually, I disagree with Schnur, but in this case, I think he’s right about one thing. Democratic candidates are not particularly good at understanding the relationship between values and actions.

Democrats, and in general liberal and progressive groups, tend to respond to issues. They adopt causes, which is very important. But they generally avoid investing in long-term programs focused on making sweeping shifts in individual and social values. Conservatives, on the other hand, have been putting money into think tanks for the last 40 years to do just that (the Heritage Foundation is a good example). Their patience has paid off.

I think many liberals and progressives also tend to make a sort of ’scientistic’ (not to be confused with scientific) mistake. That is, they believe that if most people were to view the ‘facts’ on the ground—the so-called practical matters—from a purely objective perspective (presumably their perspective), they would no longer be ‘distracted’ by things like religious values. Meanwhile, the values implied in their own views go largely unexamined.

Furthermore, what is practical is often narrowly construed. Thus many people (not just liberals and progressives) overlook the practical nature of values. How can values be practical? Because our values say something about what we believe it means to live a good life. And, when our values are aligned with our actions, it feels satisfying. We feel whole. Living by one’s values is so important to people that it can override some very pressing material concerns. This is true not just for the wealthy, but also for people who struggle to pay the bills.

With respect to religion in particular, I’ve spent the last three years in seminary studying a wide range of theological viewpoints. No doubt there is a coping component to religion. But many people err in assuming that that’s all religion is about, and in turn, belittle religious experience. For many people, religion is not merely or even primarily functional. It is redemptive. The feeling that one is recovering one’s spirit to become a whole human being is a powerful motivator, particularly when it so often feels like life chips away at our souls.

All that said, I doubt Obama intended to demean religious faith, and I think that the press has generally over-reacted to his comments. But unfortunately they did come across as a little condescending and maybe a bit too progressive in the sense described above.

For more on the shortage of liberal think tanks, see:

Democratic Think Tank Taking Shape (CommonDreams.org)
Rich Liberals Vow to Fund Think Tanks (Washington Post)
The Rockridge Era Ends (Rockridge Institute)

Photo: Barack Obama Shaking Hands, copyright Trilobite | Dreamstime.com

Culling Coyotes Not the Solution (by Camilla Fox)

coyote-200.jpgCoyotes have become a convenient scapegoat for Maine’s “deer problem.” After all, it’s much easier to point the finger at the big, bad coyote than question current forest management practices that adversely affect the size of the deer herd. Wholesale removal of forest cover by corporate landowners such as Plum Creek, combined with naturally occurring heavy snowstorms, leaves thousands of deer without food and shelter.

Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife biologists report that many deer have died of starvation. As scavengers, coyotes clean up the remains of road- and winter-killed deer, offering a natural ecological service that keeps the roadsides and woods clean. Unfortunately, coyotes’ efficient, natural-born behavior gives extremists a chance to characterize coyotes as bloodthirsty deer killers.

Bob Grandchamp, in his Op-Ed “Deer herds the victim of a foreign predator” (BDN, April 9), suggests that the state enact a coyote bounty to “clean out this killer … hellbent on exterminating and consuming our native population of deer.” Mr. Grandchamp’s emotional, human-centered view of wild animals and their relationship to each other and the natural environment is shortsighted and unscientific. Even the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services, the primary coyote-killing agency, admits that coyote bounties don’t work and are counterproductive.

DIF&W doesn’t offer a bounty but does allow coyotes to be shot, trapped, baited, and hounded year-round in unlimited numbers. Now the DIF&W-sponsored Deer Task Force is advocating for denning, the killing of coyote pups in their dens, and neck snaring, a method that DIF&W acknowledges is inherently indiscriminate that can cause extreme pain and suffering. Not only are such practices ethically repugnant, they don’t work.

Under heavy pressure, coyotes will mate at an earlier age and have larger litters of healthier pups, who will be more likely to survive to breeding age. Beating down the coyote population over the long term would require killing 75 percent of the population every year. Two centuries of persistent persecution has done little to reduce coyote populations or conflicts and has likely selected for a more successful, opportunistic, resilient and adaptable species that some scientists refer to as the supercoyote.

As a top carnivore, coyotes play an undeniably vital role in their ecological communities. They competitively exclude or directly kill foxes, raccoons, skunks and feral cats — smaller predators that affect the number and diversity of ground-nesting birds. They also serve humans by eating rodents in huge numbers and even help keep Canada goose populations down in urban landscapes. Unlike humans, coyotes cull the sick, diseased and weak, thus strengthening the prey gene pool. Human hunters, on the other hand, desire the largest buck with the biggest rack, removing, if at all possible, the strongest and most robust individuals from the gene pool.

Killing coyotes in large numbers can set off ecological chain reactions with profound implications. Yet, even while research continues to highlight the important and complex role coyotes and other top carnivores play in maintaining ecological health and species diversity, many state agencies and extremist sportsmen’s groups continue to promote a view of predators that is stuck in the big-bad-wolf era. In fact, coyotes immigrated into Maine as a direct result of the same anti-predator hysteria — coyotes have successfully filled the niche left open when the wolf was systematically eliminated.

Animals living in the wild operate under their own set of rules governed by the cycles of weather and food availability. Populations fluctuate; predators eat their prey. Unlike deer that, unless culled by predators, generally breed until they exhaust resources and starve, coyotes control their own numbers.

Wild animals shouldn’t be cared for or protected during bad weather or short food years, like cattle and sheep. Imposing human values and emotions on wild animals leads to irrational and misdirected policies. Coyotes are not bad, and deer are not good. They are what they are, and they play important roles in each others’ lives.

We must move beyond the mind-set that views coyotes as evil or unnatural, as Mr. Grandchamp proposes, and recognize that they have much to offer us, not only by keeping ecosystems healthy, but by providing inspiring examples of ingenuity and adaptability in an ever-changing world.

Camilla H. Fox grew up in Maine, holds a master’s degree in wildlife ecology, policy and conservation, and is the co-author of “Coyotes in Our Midst: Learning to Live with an Adaptable & Resilient Carnivore.”

Thursday, April 17, 2008 - Bangor Daily News, http://bangornews.com.

The Dream Reborn? (by Steve Chase)

logo.gifThis April 4th is the 40th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King. I was just 12 when it happened, but I remember vividly the heartbreaking day when King was shot down in Memphis while supporting striking garbage workers standing up for their right to form a union.

I’m sure many TV news programs will mention the anniversary of King’s death on the 4th, and some will even play a short sound bite from King’s famous 1963 “I Have A Dream” speech. A few stations might even play a clip from the last night of his life, when King gave his speech about going up to the mountain top and seeing the Promised Land of an America finally and firmly dedicated to peace, economic justice, racial equality, and a real grassroots democracy.

Personally, I’m grateful for any attention paid to King and the meaning of his activism for us today. One of my favorite stories of people honoring King is from about twenty years ago. Back in the 1980s, a local coalition of churches, civic groups, and small business leaders organized a community organizing campaign in Seattle to get the city council to rename a street after King. At the time, the street they chose to rename, which was called the Empire Way, ran right through one of the city’s predominantly black neighborhoods.

After a few months of grassroots lobbying, they won their campaign and got the city council to agree to the name change. After the council’s vote, the organizers invited community members to a large Baptist church for a victory celebration. That night Vincent Harding, a long-time associate of King’s, spoke to the gathered community. He urged everyone there to fully embrace the deeper symbolism of what they had just accomplished. As he said to them, “You have now changed the road you travel from the Empire Way to Martin’s way.”

Isn’t that exactly the challenge we still face today—changing the road we travel from the Empire Way to Martin’s Way? As more and more people are coming to realize, we need to get active again in what King called “the long and bitter—but beautiful struggle” to move away from an empire of lies, militarism, illegal wars of aggression, torture, uncontrolled corporate greed, growing inequality, and the trampling of the Bill of Rights. We need to get active in the effort to create the “Beloved Community” that King so often invoked as his deepest, long-range vision.

There are many signs that this shift is beginning to happen. One important indicator of renewed movement is the innovative new coalition of religious, labor, environmental, student, and civil rights groups called Green For All. The coalition is hosting a national conference called “The Dream Reborn” in Memphis on the weekend of April 4-6. The conference is a very direct example of expanding King’s vision of the Beloved Community to include the interests of “We the People” and the planet. As Green For All’s conference invitation says:

It’s official: in Memphis from April 4-6, Green For All is bringing together the practitioners, activists, and communities at the center of the emerging green-collar economy. Join us on the 40th Anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s assassination. This historic event will celebrate his extraordinary life and present positive solutions from today’s generation of visionary leaders. A bullet killed the dreamer, but not the dream. Together, we will create ecological solutions to heal the earth while bringing jobs, justice, wealth and health to all our communities.

Green For All’s mission statement goes on to say:

Green For All has a simple but ambitious mission: to help build a green economy strong enough to lift people out of poverty. By advocating for a national commitment to job training, employment and entrepreneurial opportunities in the emerging green economy–especially for people from disadvantaged communities–we fight both poverty and pollution at the same time. We are committed to securing one billion dollars by 2012 to create “green pathways out of poverty” for people in the United States, by greatly expanding federal government and private sector commitments to “green-collar” jobs.

Now, isn’t that a great way to honor King’s memory? I would go to Memphis, but I’m hosting an activist training session that weekend on Diversity and Coalition-Building right here in Keene, New Hampshire. We can’t all go to big national conferences, but we can all contribute to the movement for a Beloved Community wherever we live.

Steve Chase is the Director of Antioch University New England’s Environmental Advocacy and Organizing Program and is the editor of the EAOP’s “Well-Trained Activist” blog.

Talk to the Animals (by Karin Lauria)

SheepessayI talk to my dogs frequently and unabashedly. Once, an electrician working on my house overheard me talking with my two labs in the back yard. Later he said to me “Wow, I talk to my dogs, but not like you do!”

I wondered, why not? I’m convinced that these “conversations,” have resulted in my dogs being much more perceptive of me (and I of them) than they otherwise would have been.  

I was equally curious when I found out recently that some novice sheep shearers are themselves sheepish about comforting nervous animals while shearing them. With a shortage of shearers in the American west, a growing number of folks, from ex marines to psychiatrists, are taking up the profession as a way to a more natural and sustainable way of life.

Many are sensitive as well to the emotions of the sheep. Good thing. For despite their reputation as virtual automatons who would follow their flock off a cliff, ethological studies have shown that sheep are actually reasonably intelligent. They have, for example, sophisticated memories and respond emotionally to familiar faces.

And yet some shearers in training are a bit shy about talking to sheep. Here’s an excerpt from a New York Times article on the subject:  

For some students, empathy was an issue, if mostly unspoken. Are the sheep stressed?…

Meagan Rathjen, 22, a ranch hand at a sheep spread near Missoula — she came west from small-town Iowa, interested in helping support sustainable agriculture — nicked her first sheep. It was nothing too serious, but enough to draw a small trickle of blood, which looked stark and red against the yearling’s white skin.

So quietly that almost no one else could hear, Ms. Rathjen bent down over the half-shorn animal, and apologized.

Why so quiet? I suspect it may have something to do with a fear that, despite the evidence of sheep intelligence and their obvious expression of certain feelings, such behavior may be criticized as inappropriately emotional. Like my electrician thinking I was a bit eccentric for speaking so enthusiastically to my dogs, it may seem slightly nutty to apologize to a frightened sheep.

A completely reasonable response suppressed. This may be partly due to a cultural suspicion of empathy for animals, handed down through scientific and religious traditions that view them as instinctual, instrumental, and soul-less.

 Sources:
Work as Every Bit Wild as It Is Wooly,” New York Times.  
The ‘intelligent’ side of sheep,” BBC News.
Study Shows Sheep Have Keen Memory for Faces,” Scientific American.
So who’s being wooly minded now?: Other animals could learn something from an intelligent flock,” New Scientist.