California – Page 3 – Brian.Carnell.Com

Why Activist Alfredo Kubra Gets Butterflies

Knight Ridder recently reported on a protest by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Action for Animals, the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the Humane Society of the United States against California Rodeo Salinas.

The story included only one quote from an activist at the event, one Alfredo Kuba who had this to say of participating in an animal rights protest,

I always get butterflies before I do something like this. Any time you express opinions that are different from the status quo, you have a little bit of fear. You can’t help but be concerned how people might react.

Kuba’s “nervous little activist” routine seems a bit thin given the things he’s said over the years. Kuba has been active in the California animal rights scene for more than a decade, and shows up in dozens of articles on Google and Lexis-Nexis.

What sort of things does Kuba believe that are different from the status quo? In a December 31, 2004 letter to the editor of the Mountain View (California) Voice, Kuba offered his views of hunting,

. . . Hunters are animal terrorists. Hunters make absurd claims of why murdering other beings is their “right” as if animals have no right to exist.

Hunting is a human wrong, just like slavery or the concentration camps. In the slavery era, whites felt they had the right to have slaves and slaves had no rights. In Nazi Germany, white supremacists believed they were the superior race under “God” thus rationalizing the extermination of Jews and other races “inferior” to them.

Hunters likewise rationalize to persecute, stalk, terrorize, maim and murder other living beings under the guise of superiority and difference of species. Hunters invade other species’ homes with the sole purpose of ending their existence.

Hunting is cold-blooded murder. Who made hunters God and gave them the power to decide who lives and who dies? The sickening aspect of hunters is that they find pleasure in the destruction of “God’s creation.”

Kuba despises hunting enough that he forces a vegan diet on his feline companion — and Kuba’s own dietary choices might hint at another explanation for those “butterflies.” In a 2004 AlterNet story on vegan pet diets, Kuba was quoted as saying (emphasis added),

You’re saving animals by not feeding your cat meat. It makes you feel good to feed your kitty something this good. Sometimes I even try some myself when I’m cooking.

Kuba’s not so concerned about the possibility of other cats having meat-oriented snacks. In May 2004, a mountain lion was spotted near Palo Alto, California. The lion was sleeping in a tree about 20 feet above a police car. Police initially planned to tranquilize the animal, but it woke up first, and the decision was made to kill the animal. Police said that since the timing of the incident made killing the animal necessary,

Because of the environment that it was in, school is about to be let out, the only safe thing to do to protect the community was to dispatch the animal. One shot was fired, the animal was felled.

Kuba disagreed, telling CBS5,

I think it’s absolutely atrocious the way the police behaved. Obviously the animal was not posing a threat to anyone. It was in a tree.

Kuba is also an expert on circuses. At a 2003 protest against Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, Kuba told the San Mateo Daily Journal that,

Daily beatings are a part of everyday life for animals in circuses.

Kuba recently started petition to ask KPFA 94.1FM to add an animal rights-themed show to its lineup. The petition reads,

Please sign petition asking KPFA 94.1FM to include an animal rights program on a regular basis. Animal rights is a topic of interest, often demoniced [sic] by the corporate propagandist media and not given a voice. Animals are voiceless and KPFA can provide that much desperately needed voice.

Surely purely by coincidence Kuba would host this new animal rights show on KPFA.

Those must be some strange butterflies.

Sources:

Rodeo draws animal rights protesters. Dennis Taylor, Knight Ridder, July 26, 2005.

Hunters destroy ‘God’s creation’. Alfredo Kuba, Letter to the Editor, Mountain Valley Voice, December 31, 2004.

Mountain lion killed in Palo Alto. Len Ramirez, CBS 5, May 17, 2004.

Circus defends animal treatment. San Mateo Daily Journal, August 28, 2003.

Animal Rights Radio. Petition, 2005.

The Cat That Ate Tofu. Michael Rosen-Molina, Alternet, May 23, 2004.

Activist on Need to Change Impressions, If Not Ideology

When the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus visited Orange County, California, in July the Los Angeles Times ran the typical back-and-forth story with competing quotes from circus employees and animal rights activists.

After quotes from animal rights activist Kristal Parks who told the Times that chaining elephants is “almost like putting a human being in a jail cell,” Orange County People for Animals activist Charlotte Gordon concedes to the Times that the animal rights movement might have an image problem,

[Gordon] . . . concedes the public hasn’t been won over. “We need to change [the impression] that we’re trying to take something away from them. That’s what people are thinking, that we’re trying to take away the fun. We’re just trying to take away the animals.”

In other words, people are absolutely correct in thinking that activists want to take away something important in their lives — namely, traditional interactions with animals.

Activists want to take away circuses with animals. They want to take away animal-based foods. They want to take away animal-based medical research. They want to take away aquariums and zoos and hunting, and many of them even want to take away domestic pets.

The problem for Gordon and her ilk is that people understand exactly what animal rights activists want to take away.

Source:

Ringmaster is needed to monitor this debate. Dana Parsons, Los Angeles Times, July 27, 2005.

SAEN Not So Sane

The Davis Enterprise ran an interesting article about a protest organized by Stop Animal Exploitation Now directed at the California National Primate Research Center at the University of California at Davis.

According to The Davis Enterprise,

Protesters chanted and held signs reading, “Stop your animal torture,” “Animal research is scientific fraud” and “Better ways exist” in front of the primate center west of the main campus, at Hutchison Drive and County Road 98.

“Animals at this laboratory are sick and suffering needlessly,” said Michael Budkie, executive director of SAEN.

But just how accurate are SAEN’s claims about what goes on at the research center? According to the Enterprise (emphasis added),

Aside from ongoing arguments over whether animal research is necessary, SAEN alleges staff negligence leading to stress, suffering and death of test animals at UCD’s center. The group examined necropsy reports for 583 animals that died from May 2002 through April 2003, obtained through freedom of information requests.

Budkie said many of these reports simply list the deceased animal as “found dead in cage” with no clinical history, “which tells me they didn’t even know the animal was sick.”

Capitanio said allegations of staff negligence are “categorically false,” noting that the center has six full-time on-site veterinarians, two veterinary residents, one clinical fellow, 13 animal health technicians, four enrichment coordinators and 85 animal care workers focused on the health and well-being of the animals.

Capitanio said necropsy reports only include a pathologist’s observations during an exam of the deceased animal and SAEN has “drawn a series of inferences based … on a lack of information.”

In one example of alleged neglect, SAEN cited a January 2003 necropsy report of a primate that lost 40 percent of her body weight in 22 days. However, Capitanio said this animal’s quick weight loss can be attributed to giving birth. He said the animal then developed intestinal problems that were unresponsive to treatment, so she was euthanized to end her suffering.

Or consider another complaint that Budkie brought up — apparent discrepancies in the number of primate deaths and total animals reported by the primate center to different agencies. This is a common canard that Budkie recycles regularly,

Capitanio said discrepancies in the number of deaths, as cited by SAEN, is simply a difference between calendar year and fiscal year totals.

“It’s basically a timing window issue,” Capitanio said. “They (animal rights groups) use whatever means they can to try to discredit researchers and in some cases, harass researchers.”

A difference in the number of animals reported to various agencies including the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the National Institutes of Health, he explained, is due to those agencies’ requirements. Only the number of animals involved in studies funded by a particular agency are supposed to be reported to that agency, he said.

Its not his fault — that fiscal/calendar year difference is probably too difficult for Budkie to grasp.

Source:

Protesters picket primate provisions. Sharon Stello, Davis Enterprise, July 18, 2005.

California Lawmakers Wants to Amend Kangaroo Leather Ban

California is the only state that has a ban on importing kangaroos or products made from kangaroos, and California Assemblywoman Nicole Parra wants to amend the law so it only includes endangered kangaroos — nonendangered kangaroos would be legal to import and sell.

The ban is felt largely in high end soccer cleats which are frequently made from kangaroo hide. The sale of such cleat sin California is currently a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail.

Shoe company Adidas has been trying to have the ban overturned for several years without any success.

Parra’s bill would amend the kangaroo ban statute to read,

(b) For purposes of this section, “kangaroo”
means those species of kangaroo that are included under any of the
following:

(1) The federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. Sec.
1531 et. seq.).
(2) The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora.

According to the Associated Press,

[Animal rights group] Viva! International Voice for Animals opposes the bill, saying that Australian hunters cannot differentiate between the types of kangaroos they are killing because they hunt at night.

The full text of the California Assembly Bill 734 can be read here.

Source:

Lawmaker wants to end ban on kangaroo imports. Associated Press, April 17, 2005.

Convicted Eco-terrorist Receives 8 Year Sentence

In April, a judge sentenced William Cottrell, 24, to 8 years in prison and ordered him to pay $3.5 million for his part in a 2003 arson at an automobile dealership.

In November 2004, Cottrell was convicted on 8 of 9 counts related to the arsons. The jury acquitted Cottrell of the most serious charge, use of a destructive device during a crime of violence, that would have carried a 30-year minimum sentence.

Cottrell spray-painted slogans such as “Fat Lazy Americans”, “No Respect for Earth”, and “SUV=Terrorism” but claimed that two accomplices, Tyler Johnson and Michie Oe actually committed the arsons. Johnson and Oe are currently wanted fugitives.

At his trial, Cottrell’s lawyers tried to mount a defense based on Cottrell’s alleged autism, but were prevented from doing so by the trial judge, and an appellate court rejected a request for a new trial on that grounds after Cottrell’s conviction.

Cottrell’s defense tried the same tactic at sentencing, asking for U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner to sentence Cottrell to the five-year mandatory minimum because Cottrell’s autism impaired his ability to understand his actions.

Klausner rejected that line of reasoning saying that Cottrell’s high intelligence indicated he was more, not less likely, to understand the consequences of his actions,

What a talent to have wasted. There’s only one person to blame for that, and I’m sure Mr. Cottrell understands that it’s him.

Since there is no parole for federal prisoners, Cottrell will serve the full eight years minus credit for time already served.

Source:

Calif. student gets 8 years for SUV vandalism. Reuters, April 18, 2005.

California Assembly Bill 1587 – Ban on Killing Animals With Wood Chippers

BILL NUMBER: AB 1587 AMENDED BILL TEXT

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 20, 2005 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 7, 2005

INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Saldana

FEBRUARY 22, 2005

An act to add Section 598e to the Penal Code, relating to crimes.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

AB 1587, as amended, Saldana. Farmed Animal Reform Act. Existing law generally regulates the slaughter of agricultural animals. This bill would provide that , notwithstanding any other provision of law, ~~that~~ it is unlawful to kill or to attempt to kill any cow or bull, calf, horse, mule, sheep, swine, goat, fallow deer, or poultry by burning, burying, grinding, drowning, rapid freezing, or suffocation , as specified . This bill would also provide that these provisions may be enforced by a peace officer, humane officer, or animal control officer. This bill would provide that any person or entity that violates these provisions shall be subject to a civil penalty of $1,000 for each violation, $1,000 for each day that the violation continues, and criminal prosecution. Because this bill would create a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: yes.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 598e is added to the Penal Code, to read: 598e. (a) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it is unlawful for any person to kill or to attempt to kill any cow or bull, calf, horse, mule, sheep, swine, goat, fallow deer, or poultry by any of the following methods: (A) Burning. (B) Burying. (C) Drowning. (D) Grinding. (E) Rapid freezing. (F) Suffocation. (2) To be lawful, any method of slaughter employed shall be generally accepted by the veterinary profession as reliable, appropriate to the species of animal upon which it is employed, and capable of producing loss of consciousness and death as rapidly and painlessly as possible. A suffering or incapacitated animal shall either receive veterinary care or be immediately and humanely killed.

(b) For purposes of this section, the following terms have the following meanings: (1) "Burning" means killing or attempting to kill an animal through the use of fire or other heat source. (2) "Burying" means killing or attempting to kill an animal by covering it with dirt, or other animals or matter, in order to cause death by asphyxiation. (3) "Drowning" means killing or attempting to kill an animal by submerging it in liquid, in order to cause death by asphyxiation. (4) "Grinding" means killing or attempting to kill an animal

~~by maceration or dismemberment.~~ with a machine not intended to be used with or on animals, including, but not limited to, a wood chipper. (5) "Rapid freezing" means killing or attempting to kill an animal by causing immediate hypothermia. (6) "Suffocation" means killing or attempting to kill an animal ~~by restricting its intake of oxygen in order to cause death by asphyxiation.~~ using a plastic bag or by piling other animals or items on top of the animal so that the animal is unable to intake the requisite amount of oxygen necessary to survive. (c) A peace officer, humane officer for the humane society or society for the prevention of cruelty to animals, as defined in Section 14502 of the Corporations Code, or an animal control officer, as defined in Section 830.9 of the Penal Code, may enforce these provisions. (d) Any person or entity that violates this section shall be subject to a civil penalty of one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each violation and one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each day that the violation continues, which shall be payable to the local agency initiating the enforcement of this section to offset any related costs. (e) In addition to the penalties specified in subdivision (d), a person or entity that violates this section shall be subject to the penalty specified in Section 19440 of the Food and Agricultural Code and may be prosecuted by the district attorney of the county, or the city attorney of the city, in which the violation occurred. SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution.