Saturday, 13 October 2012
I Saw a Jolly Hunter (Charles Causley)
I saw a jolly hunter
With a jolly gun
Walking in the country
In the jolly sun.
In the jolly meadow
Sat a jolly hare.
Saw the jolly hunter.
Took jolly care.
Hunter jolly eager -
Sight of jolly prey.
Forgot gun pointing
Wrong jolly way.
Jolly hunter jolly head
Over heels gone.
Jolly old safety-catch
Not jolly on.
Bang went the jolly gun.
Hunter jolly dead.
Jolly hare got clean away,
Jolly good, I said.
Friday, 12 October 2012
Zoos.
I had to a debate on zoos in college. Here is my side of the debate that I wrote up.
It is incredibly hard to ‘conserve’ a species in an artificial environment, especially as the artificial environment and the animals themselves were originally intended for human entertainment.
The environment is rarely simultaneous to that of the species natural environment and
that most successfully conservation projects occur only in a secluded section of the
original natural habitat, or in countries where the climate is appropriate for the animal.
It is also a fallacy that the majority of British zoos, let alone zoos worldwide, partake in conservation. Only around 5% of around 400 British zoos actually hold species that are endangered. It is estimated that only 3% of this 5% are actually involved in official breeding programmes. Of around 10,000 zoos worldwide, only around 500 or less of these zoos hold endangered species in their collections.
Also, of the estimated 6,000 species that are classified as threatened or endangered
only about 120 are in captive breeding programmes, and only 16 species have ever
been returned to the wild with varying degrees of success.
Do you think that zoos are beneficial to the survival of endangered species?
No, as stated beforehand, there has been little to no success in conservation programmes based in zoos. Also, as conservation is a word that ultimately makes any paying customer think that a zoo is partaking in a selfless act, many zoos may claim to partake in such but actually don’t. Captive-bred animals often lack survival skills, especially those normally learned from a parent - finding food, avoiding predators, etc. Some reintroduction projects have had to be suspended indefinitely. Releases of captive animals also pose a significant disease threat to native populations. In some cases reintroductions have been cancelled after discovering viruses in captive-bred populations that were due to be released in areas where the virus was unknown; in others, native animals have died because of viruses spread by introduced animals. Zoos still take animals from the wild. Throughout the 1990s over 1,000 elephants were taken from the wild and sold to zoos and circuses, and over 70% of elephants in European zoos today were wild-caught. How can zoos help if they are indeed a part of the problem?
Do zoos consider the welfare of the animals during conservation efforts?
As zoos are a predominately Victorian concept which merely consisted of “zoological gardens” in which the public could merely see animals of an exotic nature whilst not being in any danger themselves – the animals interests were not considered then. And as these zoological gardens were built in small areas with little room for expansion (i.e. London zoo) it is impossible for a lot of zoos to even begin to provide the space and enrichment needed to maintain healthy animals, let alone allow them to breed successfully. There have even been studies where the results have shown only 10% of the species studied had enclosure sizes similar to their minimum home range. 22% of all species in the study were kept in zoo enclosures on average 1,000 times smaller than their minimum home range. These include Asian elephant, chimpanzee, and giraffe and Californian sea lion. If we can’t even provide space adequate for the species, how are we expected to successfully maintain a breeding programme where the requirements of the offspring and parents are met fully?
Do you believe that zoos are beneficial to the public or do you think that zoos could operate in a more private manner?
Overall, Zoos do not educate the public. They misinform the public about conservation and, as if that was not enough, they divert funds from actual conservation to waste on imprisoning sentient beings for the entertainment of the public- whilst animals remain endangered and are even driven to extinction. Despite their professed concern for animals, zoos remain more "collections" of interesting "items" than actual havens or simulated habitats. Zoos teach people that it is acceptable to keep animals in captivity, bored, cramped, lonely, and far from their natural homes.
Do you think that helping animals back from the brink of extinction is a good thing or do you think that we humans should allow nature to takes its course?
With regards to animals whom have become endangered to human error (i.e. hunting species to an endangered status), we feel it is necessary for us to bring them back up to a steady population. However, this needs to be done sensibly and requires that all the needs are species are met to as much as possible. This includes not sticking them in a country with an environment and climate that greatly differs to their native environment and climate.
Do you think it is right that some zoos believe that euthanasia is the answer to surplus animals that are not endangered?
No, as euthanasia is not the answer. If you keep an animal in a captive environment you are responsible for any potential offspring that may occur. It is not fair on the offspring to have their lives taken away merely because the human chose to place their ancestors in a confined environment that cannot meet the needs of one member of the species, let alone several. If you are going to keep an animal that has the potential to breed, but you don’t have the space for the offspring or know of any potential homes for any offspring then you should make sure that the animal cannot breed. One small operation (spay/neuter) can protect potential suffering of hundreds to thousands of animals. In the past, British zoos have sold surplus animals to vivisection laboratories and exotic meat farms. Animals are now more likely to be sold into the pet trade, and British zoos buy and sell animals with wildlife dealers around the world. Would those who are really interested in the health and conservation of a species do this?
Do you think that zoos are beneficial to the survival of endangered species?
No, as stated beforehand, there has been little to no success in conservation programmes based in zoos. Also, as conservation is a word that ultimately makes any paying customer think that a zoo is partaking in a selfless act, many zoos may claim to partake in such but actually don’t. Captive-bred animals often lack survival skills, especially those normally learned from a parent - finding food, avoiding predators, etc. Some reintroduction projects have had to be suspended indefinitely. Releases of captive animals also pose a significant disease threat to native populations. In some cases reintroductions have been cancelled after discovering viruses in captive-bred populations that were due to be released in areas where the virus was unknown; in others, native animals have died because of viruses spread by introduced animals. Zoos still take animals from the wild. Throughout the 1990s over 1,000 elephants were taken from the wild and sold to zoos and circuses, and over 70% of elephants in European zoos today were wild-caught. How can zoos help if they are indeed a part of the problem?
Do zoos consider the welfare of the animals during conservation efforts?
As zoos are a predominately Victorian concept which merely consisted of “zoological gardens” in which the public could merely see animals of an exotic nature whilst not being in any danger themselves – the animals interests were not considered then. And as these zoological gardens were built in small areas with little room for expansion (i.e. London zoo) it is impossible for a lot of zoos to even begin to provide the space and enrichment needed to maintain healthy animals, let alone allow them to breed successfully. There have even been studies where the results have shown only 10% of the species studied had enclosure sizes similar to their minimum home range. 22% of all species in the study were kept in zoo enclosures on average 1,000 times smaller than their minimum home range. These include Asian elephant, chimpanzee, and giraffe and Californian sea lion. If we can’t even provide space adequate for the species, how are we expected to successfully maintain a breeding programme where the requirements of the offspring and parents are met fully?
Do you believe that zoos are beneficial to the public or do you think that zoos could operate in a more private manner?
Overall, Zoos do not educate the public. They misinform the public about conservation and, as if that was not enough, they divert funds from actual conservation to waste on imprisoning sentient beings for the entertainment of the public- whilst animals remain endangered and are even driven to extinction. Despite their professed concern for animals, zoos remain more "collections" of interesting "items" than actual havens or simulated habitats. Zoos teach people that it is acceptable to keep animals in captivity, bored, cramped, lonely, and far from their natural homes.
Do you think that helping animals back from the brink of extinction is a good thing or do you think that we humans should allow nature to takes its course?
With regards to animals whom have become endangered to human error (i.e. hunting species to an endangered status), we feel it is necessary for us to bring them back up to a steady population. However, this needs to be done sensibly and requires that all the needs are species are met to as much as possible. This includes not sticking them in a country with an environment and climate that greatly differs to their native environment and climate.
Do you think it is right that some zoos believe that euthanasia is the answer to surplus animals that are not endangered?
No, as euthanasia is not the answer. If you keep an animal in a captive environment you are responsible for any potential offspring that may occur. It is not fair on the offspring to have their lives taken away merely because the human chose to place their ancestors in a confined environment that cannot meet the needs of one member of the species, let alone several. If you are going to keep an animal that has the potential to breed, but you don’t have the space for the offspring or know of any potential homes for any offspring then you should make sure that the animal cannot breed. One small operation (spay/neuter) can protect potential suffering of hundreds to thousands of animals. In the past, British zoos have sold surplus animals to vivisection laboratories and exotic meat farms. Animals are now more likely to be sold into the pet trade, and British zoos buy and sell animals with wildlife dealers around the world. Would those who are really interested in the health and conservation of a species do this?
"Animals are killed in crop harvesting"...
This is a common excuse used by meat eaters to try and make vegans out to be hypocrites, or something like that...however what they fail to realise is:
- Crops harvested for humans are also harvested for animal consumption which humans then eat. - Animals; well the majority of; seem to have a sense of when danger is coming. They are usually the first to scarper when a Tsunami/Earthquake/Tornado is heading their way. Plus I'm sure it's pretty easy to notice a loud vibrating machine coming your way, be you animal or human!
- Many crops; especially fruit and certain vegetables; are harvested by hand. And some farmers still harvest all their crops by hand.
- There are plenty of devices to add to machines/vehicles to ward off wild animals, particularly this device called "Animal Lover" - http://www.kaboodle.com/reviews/the-animal-lover-car-whistle. I personally know someone who has this.
Original posting: http://purelyvegan.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=omnis&action=display&thread=650#ixzz297lERZkT
- Crops harvested for humans are also harvested for animal consumption which humans then eat. - Animals; well the majority of; seem to have a sense of when danger is coming. They are usually the first to scarper when a Tsunami/Earthquake/Tornado is heading their way. Plus I'm sure it's pretty easy to notice a loud vibrating machine coming your way, be you animal or human!
- Many crops; especially fruit and certain vegetables; are harvested by hand. And some farmers still harvest all their crops by hand.
- There are plenty of devices to add to machines/vehicles to ward off wild animals, particularly this device called "Animal Lover" - http://www.kaboodle.com/reviews/the-animal-lover-car-whistle. I personally know someone who has this.
Original posting: http://purelyvegan.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=omnis&action=display&thread=650#ixzz297lERZkT
Wednesday, 21 March 2012
Why I Hate The Army And It's Sympathisers
6 men died in blast in Afghanistan...cue "RIP", "They were brave heroes" etc.
Yet when Azhar Ahmed calls out the gross bias towards British soldier death by the media over those that the British soldiers kill he is vilified and charged by the police.
People who get offended by someone saying the truth plus their own thoughts that soldiers should die for doing atrocious acts need to grow a backbone. Having an opinion is not a criminal offence and if you get upset by it...click the little x button on your browser window.
As for soldiers being heroes. No, they are not and never will be. Pulling the trigger to end the life of ANYONE based on the silly belief that the opposition is a threat to your country. Just because you pull the trigger in another country, in a uniform, doesn't mean you are not guilty of murder.
Sympathising with paid murderers just makes you look foolish and a supporter of war and murder. These men and women do not deserve these elaborated send offs. They deserve a simple funeral service for close family and friends just like everyone else. That is all.
There is nothing heroic or brave about being a hired hitman for the government.
Yet when Azhar Ahmed calls out the gross bias towards British soldier death by the media over those that the British soldiers kill he is vilified and charged by the police.
People who get offended by someone saying the truth plus their own thoughts that soldiers should die for doing atrocious acts need to grow a backbone. Having an opinion is not a criminal offence and if you get upset by it...click the little x button on your browser window.
As for soldiers being heroes. No, they are not and never will be. Pulling the trigger to end the life of ANYONE based on the silly belief that the opposition is a threat to your country. Just because you pull the trigger in another country, in a uniform, doesn't mean you are not guilty of murder.
Sympathising with paid murderers just makes you look foolish and a supporter of war and murder. These men and women do not deserve these elaborated send offs. They deserve a simple funeral service for close family and friends just like everyone else. That is all.
There is nothing heroic or brave about being a hired hitman for the government.
Wednesday, 26 January 2011
The Justice System, Oh How I Loathe Thee
Been watching a documentary on teenage killings due to violence in 2009 in the UK; http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00xz0px/Scenes_from_a_Teenage_Killing/
Usually human death and suffering doesn't phase me as I watch quite a few documentaries on crime, murder, etc and I also watch real life gore vids as death interests me. However this documentary has got me crying, mainly at how sickening humans are and how pathetic the UK justice system is. A lad got 5 years because the court decided he 'accidentally' stabbed someone who was trying to stop a fight. HOW CAN YOU FUCKING ACCIDENTALLY STAB SOMEONE!? It's ridiculous. And another young lad was stabbed because he called another a 'pussy'.
It just disgusts me how vile and putrid humans are...if you're going to go all out and murder someone, have a legitimate reason! Jesus christ. I hate humanity so much.
Usually human death and suffering doesn't phase me as I watch quite a few documentaries on crime, murder, etc and I also watch real life gore vids as death interests me. However this documentary has got me crying, mainly at how sickening humans are and how pathetic the UK justice system is. A lad got 5 years because the court decided he 'accidentally' stabbed someone who was trying to stop a fight. HOW CAN YOU FUCKING ACCIDENTALLY STAB SOMEONE!? It's ridiculous. And another young lad was stabbed because he called another a 'pussy'.
It just disgusts me how vile and putrid humans are...if you're going to go all out and murder someone, have a legitimate reason! Jesus christ. I hate humanity so much.
Wednesday, 19 January 2011
An Updating Post
I'll update this post regularly, so keep watching ;)
How is wishing death on people a death threat? A death threat requires me to threaten someone that I'm going to kill them. Poor tinks. Needs some serious action in the bedroom department. Lack of nooky making her lose gray matter.
Edit #1:
Not as pathetic as someone who claims to have been in a relationship for ten years and still be a virgin. If you are a virgin your man definately has a bit on the side.
Edit #2:
I wonder if arran_m accepts that paedophiles, murders, rapists, thugs, drug users, theives, prostitutes have different views too and doesn't condemn them, because of course that would be hypocritical and we can't have that now, can we?
Edit #3.
Cute, reporting my blog for apparent abuse when there is none. Free speech bitches. Get used to it.
How is wishing death on people a death threat? A death threat requires me to threaten someone that I'm going to kill them. Poor tinks. Needs some serious action in the bedroom department. Lack of nooky making her lose gray matter.
Edit #1:
Not as pathetic as someone who claims to have been in a relationship for ten years and still be a virgin. If you are a virgin your man definately has a bit on the side.
Edit #2:
I wonder if arran_m accepts that paedophiles, murders, rapists, thugs, drug users, theives, prostitutes have different views too and doesn't condemn them, because of course that would be hypocritical and we can't have that now, can we?
Edit #3.
Cute, reporting my blog for apparent abuse when there is none. Free speech bitches. Get used to it.
A person IS NOT a vegan when...
...they spout the following nonsense.
Rabbits, foxes, deer, etc should be culled due to overpopulation.
Animal testing is fine and necessary.
"Im sure you can get youre meat butchered for you,but why not try to learn how to do it yourself?
start with something small like rabbits or birds
fish are easy to catch and gut" - actually recommending someone to kill an animal! wow!
"bit expensive,i usually just use cream cheese when a recipe calls for it" in a thread about an italian cheese...vegan my butt. Vegans don't eat cheese.
Oh, and here's the kicker:
"the vegetarian activists that rob graves and have violent and disruptive demos" is what she says is PETA.
Lmao. This person claims to have been vegan (ethical) since 9 yrs old. And claims 6 years being vegan is 'recent'. Funny, I don't know any ethical vegans who support animal testing or the unnecessary killing of wildlife. Nor have I met a vegan who DOESN'T know who or what PETA is.
Firstly, arran_m (the so called vegan for 9 yrs), PETA is in no way affiliated with grave robbing. The robbing of the grave in the Guinea Pig Farm protesting was done by ARM (Animal Rights Militia). Who are nothing like PETA - especially UK PETA.
PETA don't do 'violent demos'. Try actually looking at video clips and images of their demos. What's so violent about standing around with placcards and wearing chicken costumes?
This person has an extremely warped sense of what veganism is about and what related vegan/vegetarian groups are or do.
You, my dear, are not a vegan. The day you are vegan is the day I become the pope.
Oh, and I need to point out for the umpteenth time. Never been on a PETA demo, especially as PETA aren't big in the UK, nor do I totally support them or totally disagree with them. Stop tarring every veg*n with being a 'member' or supporter of PETA. It makes you look an idiot.
Rabbits, foxes, deer, etc should be culled due to overpopulation.
Animal testing is fine and necessary.
"Im sure you can get youre meat butchered for you,but why not try to learn how to do it yourself?
start with something small like rabbits or birds
fish are easy to catch and gut" - actually recommending someone to kill an animal! wow!
"bit expensive,i usually just use cream cheese when a recipe calls for it" in a thread about an italian cheese...vegan my butt. Vegans don't eat cheese.
Oh, and here's the kicker:
"the vegetarian activists that rob graves and have violent and disruptive demos" is what she says is PETA.
Lmao. This person claims to have been vegan (ethical) since 9 yrs old. And claims 6 years being vegan is 'recent'. Funny, I don't know any ethical vegans who support animal testing or the unnecessary killing of wildlife. Nor have I met a vegan who DOESN'T know who or what PETA is.
Firstly, arran_m (the so called vegan for 9 yrs), PETA is in no way affiliated with grave robbing. The robbing of the grave in the Guinea Pig Farm protesting was done by ARM (Animal Rights Militia). Who are nothing like PETA - especially UK PETA.
PETA don't do 'violent demos'. Try actually looking at video clips and images of their demos. What's so violent about standing around with placcards and wearing chicken costumes?
This person has an extremely warped sense of what veganism is about and what related vegan/vegetarian groups are or do.
You, my dear, are not a vegan. The day you are vegan is the day I become the pope.
Oh, and I need to point out for the umpteenth time. Never been on a PETA demo, especially as PETA aren't big in the UK, nor do I totally support them or totally disagree with them. Stop tarring every veg*n with being a 'member' or supporter of PETA. It makes you look an idiot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
