Thursday, September 07, 2006


Now, there are many meat eaters, animal haters, cat haters, and so on who believe that killing cats is acceptable behavior. Apparently, though, a judge in Colorado does not believe that drowning felines is okay. According to the Boulder Daliy Camera (Sept. 8, 2006), Delene Madison Hart was sentenced to 45 days in jail, three years of probation, mental-health counseling, animal-
cruelty education and 120 hours of community service, preferably at an animal shelter. Hart was shocked by the sentence, which she will begin serving Monday, the Denver Post reported.

Hart, a 39-year-old mother, instructed 19-year old Kyle Bundy and her minor chuildren to drown their two cats in the family bathtub last year. The young children witnessed the killings. In June, she was convicted of aggravated animal cruelty, a felony.

Bear in mind that police stations across the country are filled with cases of animal cruelty, and thousands more of these incidents are not reported every year. Animal cruelty is a hidden epidemic. But it is NOT animal rights people who are drowning cats or shooting stray dogs or abusing dogs and cats. Nor are animal rights people torturing pets while children are forced to watch as their animals are killed, maimed or mutilated. Animal rights people would not create or tolerate such a sick and hostile environment.

So, don't let these psycho animal haters and animal killers get their perverted thrills. Prevent these atrocities if you can and have the courage and decency to report these incidents when they occur. Animal cruelty and child abuse is a hidden epidemic. Do your part to stop this pathological behavior.

Our jails, prisons, mental hospitals and entire penal system are not filled with vegetarians or animal rights activists. I'd like to see a single legitimate study showing that vegetarians have a higher percentage of wife-beating alcoholics than the general meat-eating public. Am I to believe that most pimps, drug users, drug dealers, prostitutes, killer cops and cop killers are vegetarians? Where are the studies proving that people eating a high animal-protein diet are living longer, healthier lives than strict vegetarians?

Sunday, August 27, 2006


Remember long ago when politicians were considered to be fairly intelligent and reasonably sane individuals? Forget sanity! Forget intellect! That sexcist, racist blowhard Crazy Ted is considering running for governor of Michigan. According to Field & Stream magazine (Dec. 2005/ Jan. 2006), Ted Nugent is considering running for governor of Michigan in 2010.

Crazy Ted's imbecilic rantings resemble that of a street-ranting psycho, the type of person who yells at passerbys, and who gets enraged when they ignore him. But the self-styled "sportsmen" and "sportswomen" seem proud of their Crazy Ted because while he may not appear well balanced or intelligent, he at least speaks his animal-hating, sexist, racist drivel that propels his disturbed mind.

Ted tries to appear thoughtful and even articulate, but he always shoots himself in the foot because he is too mentally unstable to hide his contempt for anyone who disagrees with him. We expect rock stars - even aging ones - to be a bit eccentric, if not downright nuts. But we expect more from our elected officials because these people have real power to effect people's lives.

Ted Nugent has been called many things, but intellectual is not one of them. He is a proud erectile achiever, though, claiming to get a "full predator spiritual erection" from "pursing bears, lions, coons, housecats, escaped chimps, small children, scared women, and everything else that can be chased and /or hunted." Congratulations to Ted and his peers for making hunting a bizarre sexual experience. The reader may research Ted's infamous statement on the Web by searching "Ted Nugent full predator spiritual erection." Crazy Ted is so bewildered that he believes getting an erection is a spiritual experience.

For Nugent to say that antihunting and anti-gun lobbies have unlimited funding is a total fallacy and a sick one to promote at that. There is no lobby more wealthy and without bottom in their
pockets than Crazy Ted's NRA.

One of Ted's many problems is that he tries to be an everyman, an average joe, while he is actually quite isolated by his self-congratulatory wealth. He is able to stock his many private acres with "game animals" which he brags about killing and mutilating. He plants trees that won't be beneficial for a hundred years while ridiculing those who sacrifice their homes to
save old growth trees.

In the Field & Stream article (Dec. 2005/Jan.2006), Nugent states that he wants no minimum hunting age. That's right, little 4 - year - olds should run wild with their weaponry, blasting every creature in sight as Nugent does.


And here is Crazy Ted's basic message: "We need more racists in public office, and more animal - killing toddlers, because that is what our world wants and needs. Yes, folks, I've got the courage to stand up to women and antihunters because I'm too unstable to stay home and mind my own business. I am brave enough to insult the Hare Krishnas and Heidi Prescott of the Fund for Animals . . . and I have my guns and lawyers to protect me.

I want to preach my message of animal cruelty: 'Kill It & Grill It.' You see, I can't even relate to a common housecat without wanting to kill it, because when you're really into killing and maiming animals, almost any critter is fair game. I cannot tell you the fun I get, the 'high' I get from killing all sorts of wild and domestic animals, and I want to pass on this valuable belief system to the youngsters of America.

People such as myself are addicted to killing innocent animals to make up for a lack of personal power and control. But that's okay with us so-called 'sportsmen' because we pretend to be controlling deer herds, but in reality the herds spin out of control. We thoroughly enjoy killing and crippling animals. In fact, it is so much fun to crucify these poor critters that I want to spread my 'Crazy Ted's Gospel of Sadism' to every man, woman and child. You see, we live in a cruel world, and God knows that I have done my part to create needless and mindless suffering to God's creatures. That's why God created animals - for bloodthirsty bigots and animal haters to exterminate! Don't you people see that is what God wants? Wake up and smell the blood - it's delicious!"


Crazy Ted's enemies are those who want humane treatment of animals and who recoil from the sick-minded misery that Ted inflicts on defenseless animals. Crazy Old Ted's contempt for animals spills over into contempt for minorities, people of different cultures, women, and anyone else who disagrees with his pathological worldview. Crazy Ted does not realize that most people are not pathological animal killers, and most people in the United States are willing to tolerate other religions and cultures.

By making stupid, inflammatory, and racist /sexist remarks, Crazy Old Ted has become a nationally renowned eccentric redneck. He is not valued for his intellect but for his ability to make idiotic comments while he offends people - who number in the millions - who disagree with him. And being an offensive loudmouth is an easy way to get not only attention, but to enlist a small army of inarticulate follwers.

Crazy Old Ted stated: "George W's record is good. He did an amazing job in Texas with improving the air, soil and water quality." Crazy Ted may be sober but he's still high on something. In reality, Texas and California have the worst air quality in the nation while having among the highest per capita income. George W's election was funded by oil magnates and his state is driven by the oil business.

His condemnation of Ralph Nader is evidence of his ego. Nader was one of the few people who spoke out against the SUV phenomenon back when he worked for Carter, a hugely underestimated domestic leader. Nader and company substantiated their claims that SUV's were mechanically and physically prone to roll overs, were gas guzzlers, and were solely the conception of Detroit who tried to use the law that exempted pick-up trucks from emission standards. Can't build a station wagon without paying extra tariffs? Fine, we'll use the frame of a pick-up truck and build something far more wasteful than a station wagon, far more unsafe and ecologically unsound to avoid those taxes and emissions regulations.

Crzay Old Ted tries to sound intellectual but shoots himself in the foot: "We need to demand that industry lives up to the laws we've already got in place. It's not about being on the left or the right, but about confronting corruption in the industry and government." For one thing, the laws we have in place don't answer to the planet's or this nations real needs, so enforcing them is blind ignorance. Finally, Crazy Ted is as far right as they come so how can he talk about bipartisanship for the good of the truth? Crazy Old Ted talks a lot but what he actually does tells the true story.


Crazy Ted has apirations to become the future governor of Michigan. But, before you approve of this sexist, racist, animal-hating hothead, read the news items below.

"My being there (South Africa) isn't going to affect any political structure. Besides, apartheid isn't that cut-and-dry. All men are not created equal." - Detroit Free Press Magazine , July 15, 1990

(About Haiti) "We should put razor wire around our borders and give the finger to any piece of shit who wants to come here." - Westword Newspaper, Denver, Colorado, July 27, 1994

"[Ted Nugent's] conversations are peppered with the word nigger. He refers to his upcoming tour of Japan the Jap Whack Tour." - Detroit Free Press Magazine, July 15, 1990

"...Yeah, we want to go to Saudi Arabia, man, and see if we can't get a four iron and knock people's laundry off the top of their heads. Wear laundry on your head and die, is the basic theme of the Damn Yankees ... (The Damn Yankees was Ted's band in the '90s)" - WRIF-FM, Detroit, Ted Nugent as guest D.J., September 25, 1990

"... And in my mind, I'm going why can't I just shoot this guy in the spine right now; shoot him in the spine, explain the facts of life to him... [Ted referring to an encounter with a Hare Krishna]" - WRIF-FM, Detroit, Ted Nugent as guest D.J., September 28, 1990

"... Yeah they love me (in Japan) - they're still assholes. These people they don't know what life is. I don't have a following, they need me; they don't like me, they need me ... Foreigners are assholes; foreigners are scum; I don't like 'em; I don't want 'em in this country; I don't want 'em selling me doughnuts; I don't want 'em pumping my gas; I don't want 'em downwind of my life- OK? So anyhow - and I'm dead serious ... " - WRIF-FM, Detroit, Ted Nugent as guest D.J.,
November 19, 1992


"Anybody that doesn't think it is better to blow someones brains out than to be raped, deserves to be raped! If you don't think your life is worth it then please go out there, don't wear any underpants and get RAPED!! Cuz you deserve it ..." - WRIF-FM, Detroit, Ted Nugent as guest D.J., September 23, 1991

"When other guys were getting high, I would grab a couple babes, go squirrel hunting and see just how mini mini-skirts could get." - Detroit Free Press Magazine , July 15, 1990

"... I met a couple of guys in line yesterday and they say write something to my girlfriend, she won't let me go hunting. I wrote her something, I wrote Drop dead bitch. What good is she, trade her in, get a Dalmatian, who needs her, the wench." - WRIF-FM, Detroit, Ted Nugent as guest D.J., September 25, 1991

About Hillary Clinton: "You probably can't use the term 'toxic cunt' in your magazine, but that's what she is. Her very existence insults the spirit of individualism in this country. This bitch is nothing but a two-bit whore for Fidel Castro." - Westword Newspaper , Denver, Colorado, July 27, 1994

And if you're a woman who feels that his lyrics to ditties such as the immortal "Wang Dang Sweet Poontang" are sexist, Nugent says, "Fuck you and go to a Garth Brooks show. Kiss my dog's dead, diseased, rotting ass. If you don't have a sense of humor, you're not allowed in Ted's world. I don't objectify women. I'd like to think that I'm optimizing their hardware." - Westword Newspaper, Denver, Colorado, July 27, 1994

Ted Nugent has forked over $75,000 - paying the price for shooting off his mouth. Interviewed in late '92 on WRIF-FM ... he referred to Heidi Prescott (of The Fund for Animals) as a 'worthless whore' and a 'shallow slut' and suggested 'Who needs to club a seal, when you could club Heidi" - Detroit Free Press , April 5, 1995

Friday, July 21, 2006


Meat eaters, animal killers and animal haters have much to smile about because they have - knowingly or unknowingly - ruined this planet. Look at the entire Middle East Holocaust and notice that none of this warfare was instigated or perpetuated by vegetarians or animal rights people.

Notice the high rates of heart disease, cancer and other serious degenerative diseases that are at epidemic proportions. And then notice how the meat eaters and animal haters laugh at the vegans and vegetarians who are intent on saving animal lives and who promote a sane and nutritious way to live. Notice how the meat eaters cannot seem to get enough of the junk food that causes so much misery in our society, and how these same people trivialize a sane vegan or vegetarian lifestyle - a lifestyle bent on minimizing animal suffering.

Where is it written that meat eaters are more ethical than vegetarians, vegans or animal rights activists? Look around and you'll see that our wars were not started by vegetarians. Was the Vietnam War - which killed, wounded and crippled hundreds of thousands of people - started and perpetuated by vegans? George Bush and Dick Cheney tossed this country into the Iraqi furnace; they definitely are not vegetarians. In fact, Old Dick is an avid duck hunter.

Our jails, prisons, mental hospitals and entire penal system are not filled with vegetarians or animal rights activists. I'd like to see a single legitimate study showing that vegetarians have a higher percentage of wife-beating alcoholics than the general meat-eating public. Am I to believe that most pimps, drug users, drug dealers, prostitutes, killer cops and cop killers are vegetarians? Where are the studies proving that people eating a high animal-protein diet are living longer, healthier lives than strict vegetarians? I'll ask the more thoughtful reader this question: Of all the alcoholics, wife beaters, child abusers and drug addicts you may have known, how many of these people - and there are millions of them - were vegetarians or animal rights people? Probably none.

Osama Bin Laden and his merry band of head hunters are not vegans or vegetarians, and neither is George Bush or Dick Cheney. Perhaps if Old Dick had spent less time duck hunting and more time studying Middle Eastern policies, the U.S. wouldn't be embroiled in that vile Iraqi mess. The list of atrocities committed by meat eaters and people who are not animal rights activists is endless.

What I perceive is this: flesh-eaters exploiting other flesh eaters out of good-old-fashioned American greed. Look at the edipemics of heart disease, cancer and strokes, and you'll link them to double-bacon cheeseburgers, double - layer pizzas with extra toppings, fried chicken, etc. Vegans are NOT promoting this madness. Nor do vegetarians or animal rights people sell cigaretttes to lung cancer patients or whiskey to alcoholics. There is no evidence that animal rights people or vegetarians are heavily into drugs, alcohol, gambling, prostitution, wife beating, child abuse, street gangs, or police brutality.

Furthermore, numerous studies have determined that animal abusers can and will abuse children. Why aren't newspaper writers harping against people who abuse animals and children? Could it be that PETA - which is probably 70 percent female - is an easy target for newspaper writers who lack the courage and convictions to tackle bigger game.

People are foolish enough - or deluded enough - to put their faith in that crazy Atkins diet. They actually believe that eating liberally of meat, dairy, cheese, eggs and butter has no health consequences! What a convenient fantasy. Robert Atkins himself had suffered a heart attack while eating one of his artery-clogging, fat-laden breakfasts on April 25, 2002. But he and his cardiologist said it was not diet related! He was also clinically obese at the time of death. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that massive quantities of satured fat and cholesterol will eventually wreak revenge on the human body.

Read my essay on this blog titled "Vegetarians Have Less Disease," and you'll learn about the health benefits of eating a strict vegetarian and/or vegan diet. You'll learn that the vast majority of diseases can be reversed (cured) with a strict low-fat vegan diet. You will not aquire this knowledge from watching McDonald's or KFC commercials.

According to Kevin Trudeau's book "Natural Cures They Don't Want You to Know About," the so-called "war on cancer" is a fraud. The book states: "Consider that modern Western medicine has "searched" for the "cause" and "cure" for cancer and other degenerative diseases for well over 100 years and has failed miserably even though:

1.) The mission was entrusted to the "best" researchers in the medical, academic and industrial sectors.

2.) They have private and government contracts with huge amounts of money.

3.) They falsify reasearch procedures, lie about results and cover for each other.

Dr. Linus Pauling, PhD., twice Nobel laureate, called the war on cancer largely a failure.

The natural purpose and driving force of the pharmaceutical industry is to increase their sales of pharmaceutical drugs that treat ongoing diseases, and to find new diseases or rename old diseases to market their existing drugs.

The eradication of any disease inevitably destroys a multi-billion dollar market for prescription drugs as a source of revenue. Therefore, deadly toxic chemical drugs are developed to treat symptoms but not cure anything."

It's been known for at least a hundred years that a natural raw foods diet, colonics, fasting, vitamins and minerals can be used to cure the vast majority of diseases. Pharmaceutical companies and the food industry control the media, and they absolutely do not want natural cures for any disease made known to the public.

Each year, on the average, two to three people are killed in every state by hunters and approximatey 1,000 people are wounded. In 1988, 177 people were killed and 1,719 were injured by hunters. And don't forget the 150 MILLION animals (or more) that are shot at, killed and wounded annually in the United States.

A solitary hunter was indicted for starting California's largest wildlfire - called the Cedar Fire - which killed 15 people, destroyed 2,200 homes and charred 273,000 acres! And the hunting industry tells us how safe and careful hunters are! We are told by newspapers and our state wildlife agencies how wonderful hunting is, and that we must recruit children as young as eight years old to keep up this stupid tradition.

It's interesting that butchering animals and eating them is considered more rational than protecting them. It seems the masses are more driven by money and the pleasure principle than concern for their fellow creatures. It may be more "normal" to die from heart disease than it is to be a vegan, but I'll choose the latter.

As a society we do not need a single slaughterhouse. Not a single one! Nor do we need fur coats or rodeos or even one lonely rancher. All this unnecessary oppression of animals is optional. It exists for two main reasons: animals are killed for profit and they're killed for pleasure.

Animal abuse is a paradox because it is both ubiquitous and hidden at the same time. We all live within miles of a windowless, depressing slaughterhouse. People fish near our homes, animals are hunted within miles of our residence. But all this is hidden from public view, except for fishing. Domestic dogs are chained in junkyards and low-rent neighborhoods. Yet, all of this mass abuse is totally uneccessary! Society appears sane and humane. Ah, but look closer, behind closed doors, in houses or apartments, in parks at night, and you'll find children and animals being abused. And this abuse is a hidden epidemic.

That insolent icon of American success - or should I say decadence - the hamburger, is fast becoming a symbol of global destruction and environmental degradation. Ancient, noble and majestic rainforests are being plundered, gutted and charred to create yet more grazing land. Vast areas of the Amazon rain forest resemble Iraqi towns after a U.S. invasion. About FIFTY PERCENT of the earth's land surface is being used to graze livestock. Millions of bovines are causing world-wide deforestation and desertification merely to satisfy overfed Americans and Europeans with cheeseburgers and steaks.

In the United states alone, ranchers can legally access 260 million acres of public lands, most of which have been ruined by over 120 years of grazing. Ranching has the distasteful distinction of ruining more wildlife habitat and native vegetation than any other land use. It seems that wherever animals are abused - whether it be for sport or profit - nature is abused.

Here's a quote from the book "Waste of the West," written by Lynn Jacobs: "The ranching establishment's assault on the environment, therefore, includes campaigns against a huge number and variety of animals. Most of the score or so native large mammal species in the West have been decimated by ranching, both intentionally through slaughtering efforts and indirectly through the harmful effects of livestock grazing and ranching developments. Indeed, most larger and a great many smaller animal species are in some way assailed as enemies. The mass carnage carried outfor the sake of privately owned livestock continues today throughout the grazed 70% of the West, including public lands . . ."

Ranchers live in a world of self-imposed violence against animals. American ranchers continually shoot, trap, poison or persecute the following wild animals: coyotes, prairie dogs, mountain lions, bobcats, golden eagles, bighorn sheep, bison, wild horses, burros, jackrabbits and even ravens. Most are killed simply for sport. And don't forget roping, dragging, branding and castrating helpless calves. It appears that animal cruelty is a preferred lifestyle for some people.

It is neccessary for society to trivialize animal suffering for it to continue its oppression of animals. And where is it mandated that society be driven by conscience? More precisely, it is driven by the pleasure principle, sex, greed and aggression which explains the untold crimes committed against humans and animals. The driving force in society is greed and satisfaction of the senses; the slightest dietary self-sacrifice is considered too radical for most people.

Friday, June 30, 2006


Forget what your meat-eating friends and relatives tell you about diseases! Read about how to cure, reverse or alleviate most major diseases using a low-fat vegan diet: visit a fascinating website titled "VEGAN HEALTH" at

Here's an excerpt from that website: Frank and I speak from years of experience enjoying excellent health as a direct result from “going vegan.” Before learning and changing our eating habits, we suffered for years from health problems that we had no idea stemmed from the animal products we were eating. And our doctors never asked us about our diets! They and we never made the connection that our health problems were the direct result of the animal products we were consuming!

For example, for years I not only suffered with Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS), but also with the urinary bladder condition known as Interstitial Cystitis (IC). If any of my readers have had these conditions, you know the misery they cause. You read and hear about “searching for cures” and they hint about “autoimmune disease” as a cause. Why is it so difficult to admit that taking into our bodies foreign proteins from animal products may cause this “autoimmune disease,” and that an easy way to find out is to try going vegan for a period of time?

Frank went vegan (no animal products) in 1987. A year later, after a stubborn sore throat would not respond to my doctor’s prescribed medications, Frank convinced me to drop dairy products (I had stopped eating all other animal products). As I’ve mentioned before in a Blog, if we had it to do over again, all dairy products would be the first to go!

The stubbornness of people clinging to harmful notions and avoiding the obvious is unbelievable! It seems as though many people would rather spend lots of money unnecessarily and keep suffering so that they can feel accepted by their peers, rather than to think and act in their own best interest, which also happens to coincide with the best interest of their fellow creatures. To me, this hard-hearted attitude is proof that there is indeed a Satan – the deceiver and father of lies, as the Bible says. Satan and his demons must be laughing up a storm at the stupidity of human beings!

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that our becoming born again believers in the Lord Jesus Christ happened before our change in eating habits. We thank God that, through His Holy Spirit, He gave us the compassion and empathy to feel for His other creatures. In turn, our health improved, and we received many other blessings.

Be sure to visit Dr. Joel Fuhrman's website at


For years people have suspected that foods are an important factor in the development of rheumatoid arthritis. Many notice an improvement in their condition when they avoid dairy products, citrus fruits, tomatoes, eggplant and certain other foods.

Initially, the evidence was anecdotal. A woman from the Midwest once suffered from painful arthritis. Today she is a picture of health, thin and athletic, and her arthritis is totally gone. It seemed that dairy products were to blame for her arthritis, for when she eliminated them from her diet, the arthritis disappeared completely.

A 1989 survey of over one thousand arthritis patients revealed that the foods most commonly believed to worsen the condition were red meat, sugar, fats, salt, caffeine, and nightshade plants
(e.g., tomatoes, eggplant). Once the offending food is eliminated completely, improvement usually comes within a few weeks. Dairy foods are one of the principle offenders, and the
problem is the dairy protein, rather than the fat, so skim milk products are as much a problem as whole milk.

An increasing volume of research shows that certain dietary changes do in fact help. For example, polyunsaturated oils and omega-3 supplements have a mild beneficial effect, and researchers have found that vegan diets are beneficial. One 2002 study looked at the influence of a very low-fat vegan diet on subjects with moderate-to-severe RA. After only four weeks on the diet, almost all measures of RA symptoms decreased significantly. The Journal of Rheumatology published a study that found a gluten-free vegan diet improved the signs and symptoms of RA. An uncooked vegan diet, rich in antioxidants and fiber was shown in another study to decrease joint stiffness and pain in patients with RA. Some research studies have looked at fasting followed by a vegetarian or vegan diet. A review of multiple research studies concluded that this dietary treatment might be useful in the treatment of RA.

Vegan diets dramatically reduce the overall amount of fat in the diet, and alter the composition of fats. This in turn can affect the immune processes that influence arthritis. The omega-3 fatty acids in vegetables may be a key factor, along with the near absence of saturated fat. The fact that patients also lose weight on a vegan diet contributes to the improvement.

In addition, vegetables are rich in antioxidants, which can neutralize free radicals. Oxygen free radicals attack many parts of the body and contribute to heart disease and cancer, and intensify the aging processes generally, including of the joints.

Iron acts as a catalyst, encouraging the production of these dangerous molecules. Vitamins C and E, which are plentiful in a diet made of vegetables and grains, help neutralize free radicals. Meats supply an overload of iron, no vitamin C, and very little vitamin E, whereas vegetables contain more controlled amounts of iron, and generous quantities of antioxidant vitamins.

As well as being helpful in preventing arthritis, antioxidants may also have a role in reducing its symptoms. Some arthritis treatments, including non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, work at least in part by neutralizing free radicals. For the most part, however, vitamins and other antioxidants will be of more use in preventing damage before it occurs, rather than in treating an inflamed joint.

A diet drawn from fruits, vegetables, grains, and beans therefore appears to be helpful in preventing and, in some cases, ameliorating arthritis.

The Four-Week Anti-Arthritis Diet (adapted from Foods That Fight Pain, by Neal Barnard, M.D.) For four weeks, include generous amounts of foods from the pain-safe list in your routine.
At the same time, scrupulously avoid the major triggers. It is important to avoid these foods completely, as even a small amount can cause symptoms.

You may well experience benefits earlier than four weeks, but for some people it can take this long for chronically inflamed joints to cool down.

Pain-safe foods virtually never contribute to arthritis or other painful conditions. Pain-safe foods include:

Brown rice

Cooked or dried fruits: cherries, cranberries, pears, prunes (but not citrus fruits, bananas, peaches or tomatoes)

Cooked green, yellow, and orange vegetables: artichokes, asparagus, broccoli, chard, collards, lettuce, spinach, string beans, summer or winter squash, sweet potatoes, tapioca, and taro (poi)

Water: plain water or carbonated forms, such as Perrier, are fine. Other beverages, even herbal teas, can be triggers.

Condiments: small amounts of salt, maple syrup, and vanilla extract are usually well-tolerated.

After four weeks, if your symptoms have improved or disappeared, the next step is to nail down which one or more of the trigger foods has been causing your problem. Simply reintroduce the foods you have eliminated back into your diet one at a time, every two days.

Have a generous amount of each newly reintroduced food, and see whether your joints flare up again. If so, eliminate the food that seems to have caused the problem, and let your joints cool down again. Then continue to reintroduce the other foods. Wait at least two weeks before trying a problem food a second time. Many people have more than one food trigger.

It is not recommended to bring meats, dairy products, or eggs back into your diet. Not only are they major triggers, but they also encourage hormone imbalances that may contribute to joint pain, and also lead to many other health problems.

Avoid Major Arthritis Triggers:

1. Dairy products*
2. Corn
3. Meats**
4. Wheat, oats, rye
5. Eggs
6. Citrus fruits
7. Potatoes
8. Tomatoes
9. Nuts
10. Coffee

*All dairy products should be avoided: skim or whole cow�s milk, goat�s milk, cheese, yogurt, etc.

**All meats should be avoided: beef, pork, chicken, turkey, fish, etc.


You may savor the following excerpts from Howard Lyman's book "Mad Cowboy."

" There is, simply, a never-ending stream of good news about vegetarian food. In the words of Natalie Angier of the New York Times, "The truth is that the more researchers understand about the ingredients found in fruits, vegetables, beans, and herbs, the more impressed they are with the power of those compounds to retard the bodily breakdown that results in cancer and other chronic diseases.

But you never hear any good news about meat. You never switch on the news to learn that a medical study at Harvard has revealed that roast beef boosts the immune system, or that fried chicken helps prevent arthritis, or that ham is good for the prostate. There's not a single encouraging news tidbit about veal, say, aiding the gonads. Nothing positive ever turns up even about the highly-regarded turkey escalopes fontina. There's simply never anything health - enhancing that any researcher can uncover about flesh foods. Meanwhile, a torrent of revelations confirms the benefits of plant foods.

Some who are ignorant of the facts may tell you that you can't get enough protein on a vegetarian diet - but as we know, most Americans suffer from an unhealthy excess of protein. You will have absolutely no problem getting sufficient protein on a balanced vegetarian diet. Other naysayers may warn you that you're likely to become anemic. In fact, most vegetarians have very healthy hemoglobin levels; only those who eat a diet of junk foods and dairy products may run into problems.

Some sceptics may bring up the cloudier matter of vitamin B12. It's a fact that only animal foods contain substantial amounts of this vitamin (writer of this blog notes: tempeh contains B12, so does dulse seaweed and Brewer's yeast). The human need for vitamin B12 is miniscule - about 2 micrograms per day, and our bodies store this vitamin for a period of years. To be conservative, I recommend supplemental B12 found in many cereals , soy milks, and other packaged foods that are enriched with B12. Nutritonal yeast and textured vegetable protein are also good sources. Finally, all multivitamins -including vegetarian formulas - contain more B12 than you will ever need.

Never mind the statistics about heart attacks and cancer, never mind that vegetarians live longer than meat eaters, never mind the obesity rate that is the common result of an animal-based diet, never mind all the environmental reasons for a diet that is plant-based.

Study after study has linked the consumption of animal products to heart disease. When I say to you the consumption of meat, fish, poultry, and dairy products is the primary cause of atherosclerosis in nonsmokers, I am not just giving you my opinion; I am reporting a medical fact that has been established with as much scientific unanimity and consistency as the fact that smoking cigarettes dramatically increases the risk of lung cancer, emphysema, and heart disease.

As the noted preventative health care expert Dr. Jjulian Whitaker points out, 'Death from heart disease is as unnecessary as dying of drug abuse, yet it is taken as a normal thing.'

What would happen to all the jobs in the meat industry if the entire nation went vegetarian? They would be lost of course. Gone would be all the jobs in slaughterhouses - the most dangerous jobs in America as well as all the other foul jobs in meat processing, not to mention all the minmum-wage jobs flipping burgers.They would be replaced by even more jobs - safer, cleaner, more satisfying, and probably better-paying jobs - in the production and selling of organic, healthy, plant-based products. The savings in medical costs attributable to meat consumption, estimated at $28 to $61 billion annually, would be plowed back into the economy and boost its productivity enormously." - from "Mad Cowboy" by Howard Lyman

Wednesday, June 28, 2006


According to Eastern philosophy, humans amass great amounts of negative karma from abusing animals and/or people. Since we can sense, but not see karma, it is assumed that karma is either a myth or a trivial matter - nothing to be concerned about. But the great Hindu saints and Buddhist bodhisattvas inform us that our karma, which we create all by ourselves, is the reason we continue to suffer and reincarnate. We knowingly or unknowingly create our own good - or bad - karma with every single thought, word and deed.

Karma as the Webster Dictionary puts it:

1.) in Buddhism and Hinduism, the totality of a person's actions in one of the successive states of his existence, thought of as determining his fate in the next.

2.) loosely, fate; destiny.

Here's how I define karma:

For every action there is an equal or opposite reaction. Karma travels with you; it never goes away and it always keeps perfect score, and your karma has been with you since your soul was created (how ever many lives that is). It is like a guide keeping you in line and making sure you get everything you deserve, good or bad. In other words when you harm others you are harming your self; when you are good to others you get good things in return.

Much of what Western societies believe about animals can be traced back to the ancient Greeks, Romans and various interpretations of the Bible. About the time Buddha reached full enlightenment, ancient Greek philosophers believed that Greek men were superior to all other humans and animals. In Eastern cultures, animals are given much more consideration than Western societies give them, although animal cruelty has always been a universal scourge. Animal cruelty exists for two main reasons: it provides income and/or it provides pleasure.

To a Buddhist or Hindu, it makes perfect sense not to kill animals. In Western societies, animal cruelty is considered an unavoidable fact of life, and in some instances, cruelty to animals is a preferred lifestyle. Yet, virtually all of this mass exploitation is unecessary. Not a single slaughterhouse, fur coat, hunting season or rodeo do we need. This entire man-made cornucopia of massive butchering, suffering and subsequent bad karma is totally unnecessary.

Unlike the Judeo-Christian tradition, Buddhism affirms the unity of all living beings, all equally posses the Buddha-nature, and all have the potential to become Buddhas, that is, to become fully and perfectly enlightened. Among the sentient, there are no second-class citizens. According to Buddhist teaching, human beings do not have a privileged, special place above and beyond that of the rest of life. The world is not a creation specifically for the benefit and pleasure of human beings. Furthermore, in some circumstances in accordance with their karma, humans can be reborn as animals and animals can be reborn as humans.

In Buddhism the most fundamental guideline for conduct is ahimsa: the prohibition against the bringing of harm and/or death to any living being. Why should one refrain from killing? It is because all beings have lives; they love their lives and do not wish to die. Even one of the smallest creatures, the mosquito, when it approaches to bite you, will fly away if you make the slightest motion. Why does it fly away? Because it fears death. It figures that if it drinks your blood, you will take its life. . . . We should nurture compassionate thought.Since we wish to live, we should not kill any other living being. Furthermore, the karma of killing is understood as the root of all suffering and the fundamental cause of sickness and war, and the forces of killing are explicitly identified with the demonic. The highest and most universal ideal of Buddhism is to work unceasingly for permanent end to the suffering of all living beings, not just humans.

Speaking of Buddhists, one of the world's most respected spiritual leaders - the 14th Dalai Lama - has repeatedly spoken in favor of vegetarianism, and he also favors animal rights causes. A few years ago, the author of this blog mailed a letter to the Dalai Lama (to his Dharamsala, India address), and his personal secretary replied that His Holiness was very much in favor of vegetarianism. The information below was obtained from PETA's KFC website and other websites concerning the Dalai Lama.

In his appeal, His Holiness writes, “On behalf of my friends at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), I am writing to ask that KFC abandon its plan to open restaurants in Tibet, because your corporation’s support for cruelty and mass slaughter violate Tibetan values … I have been particularly concerned with the sufferings of chickens for many years. It was the death of a chicken that finally strengthened my resolve to become vegetarian. … These days, when I see a row of plucked chickens hanging in a meat shop it hurts. I find it unacceptable that violence is the basis of some of our food habits. … It is therefore quite natural for me to support those who are currently protesting against the introduction of industrial food practices into Tibet that will perpetuate the suffering of huge numbers of chickens."

" In the mid 1960s, the Dalai Lama was impressed by ethically vegetarian Indian monks and adopted a vegetarian diet for about a year and a half. While he has eaten meat in moderation ever since, the Dalai Lama has repeatedly acknowledged that a vegetarian diet is a worthy expression of compassion and contributes to the cessation of the suffering of all living beings. However, he eats meat only on alternate days (six months a year). He is a semi- vegetarian, though he wishes to be a full one. By making an example of cutting his meat consumption in half, he is trying to gently influence his followers.

This Thanksgiving, staff of the Fund for Animals are thanking the Dalai Lama, spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism, for recent statements in support of animal rights. In an audience with representatives of The Fund for Animals earlier this month, the Dalai Lama commended the animal rights movement for working to end the suffering of animals, and urged everyone to consider a vegetarian diet. Speaking with The Fund for Animals' national director, Heidi Prescott, and program coordinator, Norm Phelps, the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize recipient said, "People think of animals as if they were vegetables, and that isn't right. We have to change the way people think about animals. I encourage the Tibetan people and all people to move toward a vegetarian diet that doesn't cause suffering."

His Holiness also condemned the abuse and killing of animals for entertainment purposes, such as the practice of hunting wild animals for sport. The Dalai Lama invited the Fund for Animals to work with his government in exile in India to help encourage people to become vegetarian and to protect animals from suffering.

Tibetan Buddhist master, Chagdud Rinpoche, stated: "Saving and protecting life creates tremendous virtue. All beings are equal in that they all seek happiness, don't want to suffer and value their lives as we do."

Eastern philosophy is a vast and extremely profound subject. Eastern religions have been a source of fascination, guidance, and enlightenment for thousands of years. To this day, India , Nepal, Bhutan and Tibet continue to produce most of the world's great enlightened masters. Understanding karma is critical to understanding Eastern philosophy. - By Scott Palczak

Sunday, April 02, 2006


Animal rights people are not necessarily atheists. We consider animal rights to be a philosphy - and a preferred lifestyle - but not a religion.We know that people across the planet ferociously guard their often conflicting beliefs about morality and self-imposed notions of the Almighty. To emphasize certain points, I'll be fairly heavy-handed in my critique of Christian thinking. Bear in mind that religious discussions are endlessly futile, and few people are converted through logic alone.

Most, but not all, Christians believe that humans have a right to kill animals they intend to eat. Really? This seems to be another case of God said we can take what we want - so let's kill it and grill it! But how do Christians KNOW that humans have a right to kill and eat animals? Are they on a higher plane of consciousness where God is blissfully smiling down on all this remorseless animal killing? Are they in communion with God, and therefore know how pleased the Creator is to have his creatures butchered and eaten? Perhaps Christians "sense" that it is okay to eat meat, shoot animals, skin chickens alive - but what if they are simply wrong?

Exactly what Jesus ate for lunch and dinner we do not know, but we do know for certain that he was not a trapper, hunter, or rodeo cowboy. There's also no mention of him branding and castrating livestock. Interestingly, the New Testament contains references to people eating fish, but Jesus Christ himself ate fish only twice. Their is absolutely no mention of Jesus Christ being a butcher or eating red meat. Because people ate fish in the New Testament, we cannot logically surmise that Jesus was a hunter or rancher. Such notions of Jesus being an animal abuser are impossible to support using scriptural writings. Simply contorting Jesus to fit personal ideas of morality is not true worship, and it leads to innacurate impressions of what Jesus taught.

For instance, we cannot assume that because our football team is winning, that Jesus is on our side. Jesus Christ couldn't care less about football, and he'd prefer that people did not bash each other's heads for sport. Nor can we surmise that because animals abound, then it's God's will that we kill them. Unless we have obtained a very high level of consciousness - call it Christ consciousnes, kingdom of heaven or whatever - we simply cannot be certain of God's will.

Where is it written that Christians must or should eat meat? Where is it written that Jesus was a hunter or champion bull rider? Where is it written that killing and butchering animals is the road to heaven? I can just as easily portray Jesus as a peaceful man who did not abuse animals, and I'd be far more accurate based on written accounts of his life.A careful study of the lives of Christian saints reveals that none of them indulged in animal killing or animal abuse. Many, many saints were fond of animals.

Indeed, untold millions of sentient beings have suffered immensely over the centuries because of ungodly people inflicting pain, misery, injustice and death in the name of their Almighty. Historically, people have rationalized their ungodly behavior. They will use any rationale - religion or philosophy - as an excuse to conquer, exploit, subjugate, discriminate, or inflict pain.

Eastern and Western saints tell us that Jesus was a very highly evolved being, that he was in fact an incarnation of God. Some contemporary Christians claim to have a relationship with Jesus. But how can mere mortals even begin to fathom Jesus Christ's extremely high level of consciousness? Wouldn't it be more wise to assume that Jesus Christ was very decent toward animals, as Saint Francis was? Saint Francis was a great proponent of animals, and one of the most highly revered saints in Western history. I consider Saint Francis to have been a much greater being than the average person who simply finds the idea of killing animals convenient or necessary. Saint Francis was trying to teach people valuable lessons about animals and the natural world we share with these creatures.

Much of what Western societies believe about animals can be traced back to the ancient Greeks, Romans and various interpretations of the Bible. About the time Buddha reached full enlightenment, ancient Greek philosophers believed that Greek men were superior to all other humans and animals. In Eastern cultures, animals are given much more consideration than Western societies give them, although animal cruelty has always been a universal scourge. Animal cruelty exists for two main reasons: it provides income and/or it provides pleasure.

To a Buddhist or Hindu, it makes perfect sense not to kill animals. In more anthropocentric Western societies, animal cruelty is considered an unavoidable fact of life, and in some instances, cruelty to animals is a preferred lifestyle. Yet, virtually all of this mass exploitation is unecessary. Not a single slaughterhouse, fur coat, hunting season or rodeo do we need.

Unlike the Judeo-Christian tradition, Buddhism affirms the unity of all living beings, all equally posses the Buddha-nature, and all have the potential to become Buddhas, that is, to become fully and perfectly enlightened. Among the sentient, there are no second-class citizens. According to Buddhist teaching, human beings do not have a privileged, special place above and beyond that of the rest of life. The world is not a creation specifically for the benefit and pleasure of human beings. Furthermore, in some circumstances according with their karma, humans can be reborn as humans and animals can be reborn as humans.

Eastern religiouns provide extremely complex views of karma and different levels of consciousness that cannot be found in Western writngs. However, a saint is saint regardless of where they are from, and no one can be a saint who harms any sentient beings. Mother Theresa was not known for her hunting, fishing or trapping abilities, but she was known as a great humanitarian.

To a growing number of Christians there exists no means of reconciling the institutionalised violence of the meat industry, and its inherent disrespect for life, with divine will. Far from being a substitute religion or a modern day heresy, vegetarianism is increasingly advocated on Biblical grounds. To many, it is not merely an objection to the conduct of the world, but a physical statement of faith.

The King James Bible states: "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy." It also states "thou shalt not kill; and whoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgement." ( Mathew 5:4, 5:21)

The early Hebrews who penned Genesis were not vegetarians, although they accepted this as being God's original aspiration for mankind. Genesis 1:29 tells us: "And God said Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yeilding seed; to you it shall be for meat." Genesis 9:4 states: "But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat." Leviticus 3:17 states: "It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings that ye eat neither fat nor blood." Ecclesiastes 3:19 states, "Man hath no preeminence over the beast."

My concern is that we do not know exactly Jesus Christ's ideas of the animal world. But we do know what he was not, and he was not an animal abuser. The fact that some people in the New Testament were fed with fish does not logically justify factory farming or massive hunting seasons. Ultimately, people believe what they want to believe. - By Scott Palczak

Friday, March 10, 2006


As we all know, pudgy Old Dick shot his hunting comrade during a fit of mindless recklessness. Cheney admits to having one beer before the so-called "hunt," but he could have been half drunk - all we have is his word (for what little it's worth) that he was not drunk. Hunters commonly drink beer during hunting trips, probably because it adds to the thrill - the fun - of killing innocent animals.

Secret Service agents guarding Vice President Dick Cheney when he shot Texas lawyer Harry Whittington on a hunting outing said Cheney was "clearly inebriated" at the time of the shooting. Agents observed several members of the hunting party, including the Vice President, consuming alcohol before and during the hunting expedition, the report notes, and Cheney exhibited "visible signs" of impairment, including slurred speech and erratic actions.

Hunters like to think of their sport as relatively safe and virtually all hunters imagine themselves to be expert marksmen. Even crazy Old Dick was considered - or at least he considered himself - to be an experienced marksman.

Despite what newspapers and hunters tell us, hunting is a potentially dangerous sport! Every year, about 100 people are killed by hunters in the U.S., and approximately 1,000 people are wounded. Hunters can and will shoot too close to houses, roads, hikers and campers. According to the International Hunter Education Association, in 1995, 1130 non-fatal hunting accidents occured, and 112 people were killed. In 1996, 957 humans were wounded and 91 humans were killed by hunters. Ted Nugent claims to kill every domestic cat that he sees, and you may read about his animal-killing insanity on my Antihunting Resource Site.

Pet owners who live near hunting areas may find their beloved pets dead or missing. Hunters typically hate predators - especially coyotes - but they also hate any number of animals based on arbitrary notions of what constitutes a "good" animal as opposed to a "bad" animal. This type of thinking opens up a whole can of worms. Stray cats and dogs - because they're feral - are perceived as fair game to some people. We'll never know how many domesticated animals have been shot by hunters; there is no record keeping on this matter.

Sport hunters want nonhunters to believe that hunting is a serious sport for dedicated conservationists. They would have us believe that hunters don't enjoy getting drunk and killing animals, that they don't trespass and harass people, that all of their depravity is part of a serious conservation effort. And wildlife agencies are more than happy to present "outdoorsmen" as dedicated souls who kill only out of sheer necessity. Now, I'm not stating that slaughtering BILLIONS of animals for cheap junk food is okay, or that rodoes, ranching, and vivisection is just fine, either. Sport hunting is just one aspect of institutionalized human-caused suffering on this planet of misery.

From an ethical standpoint, hunting is very unimpressive. The hunting community is mainly composed of grown men (and some women) with nothing more intelligent to do than kill little birds and animals because it provides fun and excitement for people who need to feel potent. No matter how abysmally cruel or wasteful hunting is, it will always be defended by the hunting community.

Hunters fancy themselves as part of a natural cycle. Of course they are part of the cycle that kills and destroys, not the part that gives life or protects. The hunter only wants to be the hunting part of the cycle; even when stalking those relatively few species of animal capable of utilizing a human as prey, the sportsman is careful to overwhelmingly stack the deck in his favor through access to various forms of trickery augmented by heavy firepower.

But no less important to the sportsman than his high-tech killing toys is his (or her, but more often it's men who are sport hunters) unquestioned faith in a complex, shimmering, and fragile fabrication of myth, half-truths, self-delusion, and denials. In these essays we'll explore a few (not all) of those myths. Much of the followng writings are derived from Barry MacKay's essays which are posted on my Antihunting Resource Site.


Most folks are not sport hunters, but do not particularly oppose the practice, although those who do seem to be a growing majority in the U.S. Within their ranks are those who actively oppose sport hunting, characterized by the hook-and-bullet fraternity as the dreaded "antis." They are called "antis" because they are "anti-hunting." The phrase is favored by sport hunters because it is negative. The ranks of sport hunters, themselves, are in

The majority of Americans are not sport hunters, and so have no personal experience with which to counter the myth. Among that not-so-small minority - the true "antis" who are actively opposed to sport hunting - few have much (or any) personal experience with hunting. However, in their desire to rescue animals from the suffering and death needlessly imposed by sport hunters, the antis have a powerful weapon: Fact.

The simple fact is that sport hunting is cruel- bloody cruel! It can't be otherwise. It is important to note that animal cruelty is a gigantic nonisssue within the hunting community, because animal cruelty is the very essense of hunting itself. There are absolutely no laws preventing people from committing horrible acts of cruelty against wild animals. Futhermore, these vicious acts are done away from public view, because while the public may tolerate killing wild animals, most people do not care to witness it.

Studies on wounding rates clearly show the suffering imposed by bow hunters; black-powder hunters; varmint hunters; waterfowl hunters; big game trophy hunters and so on. Virtually anyone who has had experience with hunters and hunting can refer to compelling personal anecdotes relating to the brutality of sport hunting. The cruelty of hunting is exposed in any wildlife rehabilitation center within reach of a hunting area.

The problem is this: Each hunter you meet will deny responsibility for being the source of such horrible suffering. I have, more than once, sat with hunters in a blind, heard them say things like "Got a piece of him ..." or "Stung that one …" or "Bet he felt that..." as ducks wavered, but did not fall, when struck by shotgun pellets. And I have had those same hunters, later in the day, claim with apparent sincerity that hunting was NOT cruel and that they, themselves, were "good" hunters who took care not to wound birds.


Sport hunters often become utterly absorbed by such details and will endlessly debate the merits of this or that combination of powder, shot size, barrel length, and choke. However, in the end the shotgun's nickname, "scattergun," holds true. A stream of pellets is blown out of a barrel at high speed, spreads and loses velocity (energy) as it travels down range, and hits the target. If there are large gaps in the pattern, there is an increased likelihood of wounding.

Shot sizes are numbered, with the smaller number designating the larger pellet. Number two shot might be used for geese or hares, number four or six for ducks, number seven and a half or nine for doves, snipe, cottontails, or quail.

The diameter of the barrel, called the gauge, dictates how much shot and powder can be used, as does chamber length. When a target is moving the spread of pellets should be wide enough to include the target (thus the aim need not be deadly accurate) but dense enough to produce a kill. Shotgun shell manufacturers recommend six pellets of sufficient size and velocity as the number that, upon hitting a moving duck, should bring it down. However, the amount of damage done obviously depends on where those pellets hit. A single pellet penetrating the brain may bring instant death.

I was once brought a merganser who had escaped hunters, and she eventually tired and came to earth with no more obvious an injury that a shattered leg (which prevented her from again becoming airborne - mergansers must run along the surface of the water to take flight.) However, when the duck was X-rayed she had, in fact, six pellets in her body. She was still alive, still suffering. Whoever shot her presumably did not know or care what happened to her, but presumably would vigorously defend the "sport" of waterfowl shooting. Incidentally, mergansers, are often not eaten. It may be illegal to waste game, but the law is unenforceable.

Waterfowl killers are notoriously wasteful. The October 2005 issue of Field & Stream highlighted the documented fact that ducks and geese are excessively wounded and crippled by waterfowl hunters. Even some hunters admit to the wastefulness of duck hunting, but their concern has little or no effect on waterfowl killers who are driven by their need to kill innocent birds.

Getting back to shotguns: It's important to realize the nature of shotguns to appreciate their inescapable cruelty. If the target is too close, the pattern has not spread out enough to make it easy to hit. If hit by most of the shot, a bird or other animal will die quickly, full of lead. A bird that is too close may be blown into pieces. If too far away from the gun the spread of the shot pattern may be wide enough to make hitting the bird an easy matter, but too few pellets may hit to bring the bird down, or with too little velocity to penetrate a vital organ. The bird is wounded, but may get away, to die or to recover. The angle at which pellets strike the bird will also be a factor in how deep they penetrate.

Shotguns are meant for moving targets. You don't "aim" a shotgun so much as point it. The fact that the "target" (waterfowl, upland game birds, hares, rabbits and God knows what else) is moving contributes to the "sport." The expression "a sitting duck," meaning a person who is extremely vulnerable, derives from the "unsporting" act of shooting a duck sitting on the water. No skill is required to hit a sitting duck. (No hunter would admit to shooting a sitting duck, of course, but you have to wonder why so many decoys have pellet holes in them.)

But precisely because the target is moving and because of the numerous variables contributing to the shot pattern, wounding is inevitable. Rates of wounding have been estimated in different ways. Spend any time watching waterfowl hunters at their sport and you will hear many shots for every duck or goose that is dropped to the water and retrieved.

The nature of shotgun patterns dictates that between a kill and a clean miss there are variants were a few pellets strike the target and wounding occurs. Some hunters are "sky busters" who fire at birds out of range, hoping that a stray pellet will do enough damage to drop a bird.

The proof of high wounding rates exists, in part, in the percentage of wild-caught waterfowl who, when X-rayed, are found to be carrying shotgun pellets in their bodies. These are the "lucky" ones who survived the wounding. Many have the pellets encapsulated just beneath the skin, where tissue has grown around them. We can hope that such birds suffered little. Those who were somewhat more severely wounded tend to die in the marsh or woods, unseen.

Years ago I used to search marshes and shorelines on Sundays, when hunting was suspended for a day, to pick up the dead and dying birds. I can't translate their numbers into an exact statistic, but I do know from such personal experience that many birds are wounded by the practice of waterfowl hunting. And I know from many conversations with hunters that each one generally prefers to think that he, at least, is not responsible for such suffering. (And although I emphasize suffering, it does not mean that I'm indifferent to the act of killing even when death is instantaneous.)

In the prairies one study determined a wounding rate of waterfowl of over 30%, but I defy you to find a single waterfowl hunter who will admit that three out of ten birds he shoots are wounded. Someone is responsible for all those wounded birds - millions each year - but it's a responsibility the myth-believing hunter will rarely acknowledge.


Wildlife commissions in Western states are controlled by ranching, hunting, trapping and outfitter representatives. Each state's governor appoints a disproportionate number of hunters and pro-hunting representatives and a much smaller percentage of pro-wildlife advocates to its dubious "wildlife commission."

In eleven Western states, mountain lion hunters use packs of trained hounds fitted with radio telemetry equipment. To track these cats, a trophy hunter releases a pack of dogs fitted with radio transmitters. The hunter monitors the chase on a handheld directional antenna. When the dogs eventually tree a lion, the hunter picks up a stationary signal on his or her antenna, walks to the site and shoots the harassed, treed animal. And they call this hunting!

Ah, but wait, it gets worse. For the "sportsman's" personal amusement - sanctioned by wildlife agencies - mountain lions sometimes fight the dogs, resulting in bloody battles. More commonly, the dogs may find and tear apart lion cubs and according to my research, hounds become lost or injured while fighting and tracking lions. This is blatant animal cruelty at its finest with no ecological or ethical justification.

Research at Utah State University indicates that in some areas, cub mortality from maulings and orphaning is as significant as adult harvest. Mountain lion hunting amounts to little more than depraved cruelty and crass, commercialized hunting.

In Alaska a judge halted the state's "wolf control program" on Jan 17, 2006. This program has been on - and - off again since the early 1990s. The idea of the hunt is to kill wolves who are preying on hunters' favorite big game species. In reality, the wolves pose no threat to Alaskan ungulate populations. "Wolf control" is about giving a few twisted macho men a chance to blow away a wolf ... from an airplane. How sporting!

Hunters and ranchers want a hunting season on grizzly bears in the Yellowstone area where the bears have barely rebounded to a paultry 600 in number - Yellowstone is not exactly teeming with grizzlies.

Deliberate mismanagement of big game species is commonplace in the United States. Consider that white-tailed deer are nearly ubiquitous in the Eastern states. However, the mere presence of deer in a suburban area, munching on flowers and sapplings does not justify calling SWAT teams of hunters or game wardens to "solve" the perceived problem, if a problem even exists. Remember that hunters and game wardens are responsible for massive mismanagement of deer from Michigan to Pennsylvania to Alabama.