ANIMAL MEDIA ALERTS -- FEBRUARY 2004

BIZARRO ATTACKS FUR AGAIN

Dan Piraro, creator of the Bizarro comic strip, has launched what he calls his "most blatant attack yet" on fur. His pro animal cartoons have generated some complaints, even threats by editors to drop the strip. Dan tells me he thinks letters of appreciation to editors who run the Bizarro strip "will help deflect the heat" -- particularly if there are more letters of appreciation than there are complaints. I share his request with you, hoping that knowing how appreciative he would be will encourage many people to send notes to their papers in support of the cartoon.

Dan Piraro is a General in the anti fur fight. What could send a stronger message that fur is not cool, than a comment like this on the utterly cool Bizarro strip? And the message goes to millions. Bizarro is a syndicated newspaper cartoon that appears in approximately 200 newspapers around the world. In the US, those papers include the San Francisco Chronicle, Los Angeles Times, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Dallas Morning News, Miami Herald, Boston Herald, San Diego Union Tribune, Denver Post, Washington Times, Chicago Tribune, Detroit News, St. Paul Pioneer Press, Las Vegas Sun, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Pittsburgh Post Gazette, Nashville Cit Paper, Houston Chronicle, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. In Canada they include the Vancouver Sun, Toronto Globe and Mail, and the Montreal Gazette.

 I will describe today's (Feb 26) cartoon for those not receiving HTML email:

 A woman dressed in a full length fur coat looks with horror at three little angels who hover next to her. They are  foxes with skinned bodies. They have wings and halos. One of them says to her,

 "Oh, I see. Well as long as you feel 'pretty,' now our souls can rest in peace for eternity."

 If your paper carries the cartoon, please support Dan's efforts, and the animals, by sending a letter to the editor appreciative of the cartoon, saying how you feel about fur (politely) and perhaps adding some anti-fur facts. The argument against fur does not necessarily need any statistics -- a good punchy line or two would be great. For those who want to write more, PETA has two great fact sheets on fur you can look to for pointers.

"Fur Factory Farms: Captive Cruelty" at  http://www.peta.org/mc/facts/fswild3.html and  "Trapping: Pain for Profit" -- http://www.peta.org/mc/facts/fswild2.html  

Shorter letters are more likely to be published. Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. If your paper runs Bizarro and you have any trouble finding the correct address for a letter to the editor, don't hesitate to ask me for help. And I am always happy to look over and edit letters before they are sent - I know some on this list are not yet experienced letter writers, and even a great writer can enjoy a good edit. I will be off line for a few hours today but back on this evening.

If you go to Piraro's website, http://www.bizarro.com/  and click on "Animal Stuff" you are in for a treat. You'll find a short essay, "Why I'm Vegan," another headed, "Are Humans Carnivores?" some great quotes, and lots of animal friendly cartoons that have appeared in papers all over the world! Check it out.

 60 MINUTES II ON DANGER TO GORILLAS

60 Minutes II, on CBS, Wednesday Feb 25, aired a piece headed "The Garden of Eden."

 You can read the story or watch it in three video segments on line at: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/23/60II/main601745.shtml

 Christiane Amanpour is the reporter. She follows biologist Mike Fay, of New York's Wildlife Conservation Society into the jungle to catch up with "naive" gorillas who have never seen a human before.

 The story discusses the danger from loggers and poachers. It includes graphic footage of "bush meat" markets with jungle animal flesh, including that of chimpanzees, for sale.

 It also shows a sanctuary for gorillas who have been rescued from the horror.

 Watch it if you can, on TV or on the web, or read it, and please thank 60 Minutes II for the story.

 CBS news takes feedback at: http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/feedback/fb_news_form.shtml

Choose "60 Minutes II" from the pulldown menu.

 A big thank you to Carrie DiCecca and AR Hogan for making sure we knew about the story.

NPR's MARKETPLACE ON FOIE GRAS

Tuesday February 24, the show "Marketplace" on National Public Radio aired a good piece publicizing the foie gras controversy.

Here is the website blurb about the story,

 "Foie gras is under threat as a culinary indulgence
Business isn't especially good in the foie gras market now. Add to that a campaign to boycott the pricey delicacy and, in at least one state, a legislative move that could land foie gras farmers in hot water. Animal activists say foie gras farms aren’t humane, and some California legislators support a ban on producing foie gras in the state. Even if California doesn't pass a bill banning foie gras production, the craft is still under threat: New York lawmakers are considering a similar measure there.
Reporter: Molly Peterson"

 You can listen to it on line at:

http://www.marketplace.org/shows/2004/02/24_mpp.html

 (Scroll down the page to find the foie gras story.)

 Please thank Marketplace for covering the issue. And feel free to add a comment about foie gras in with your thanks. Marketplace takes comments at:

http://www.marketplace.org/comments/

 Here is a great resource for information on foie gras, including a distressing photo gallery: http://www.gourmetcruelty.com/

UNPRECEDENTED $39,000 VERDICT FOR LOSS OF COMPANION ANIMAL

Great news from California: The Tuesday, February 24, Los Angeles Times reports, "Jury Awards Dog Owner $39,000 in Malpractice Suit." (Part B, page 5). The article is by Jean-Paul Renaud. He writes, "A man who sued his Fountain Valley veterinarian for malpractice has been awarded nearly $39,000 for the death of his dog."

I have learned from prosecuting attorney, Terri Macellero, that  verdict is unprecedented. It is the highest amount ever awarded in the United States for the value of a dog. More importantly, in previous cases, such as in one in which a person was awarded $20,000, the award was not based on the value of the dog, but on the "emotional distress" of the guardian. So what mattered was the suffering of the person (if it could be proven by therapists) or lost work. The animal's worth was considered to be only what he would bring on the open market.

But Macellero tells me that in this case the jury determined that the Labrador-mix, Shane, would have been worth $10 on the open market. Yet, the article tells us, the jury agreed that the dog's vet was liable for the his death and "Jurors ordered the veterinarian to compensate Bluestone $9,000 for the veterinary bills and $30,000 for the dog's 'unique' value to his owner."

There is a priceless quote from the defense attorney who has asked for a new trial and a court order invalidating the jury's verdict:

"The defense finds this to be an interesting verdict. The dog was 3 years old, a mutt -- there was nothing unique about it."

Is the attorney suggesting that a pure-bred Labrador who fit AKC specifications would have been unique? Actually, he would have been -- at least to the dog's guardian. But a pure bred Labrador might have looked to the rest of us like every other pure-bred Labrador -- even though he too would have been unique, like Shane.

Renaud writes, "Noting that placing a high value on the loss of a pet is becoming increasingly common, Terri Macellero, Bluestone's attorney, said that the verdict reflects jurors' willingness to regard pets as far more than property."
That is a core part of the animal rights struggle -- though it concerns all animals, not just "pets."

You can read the whole article on line at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dogsuit24feb24,1,5505072.story

It gives us a great opportunity for letters to the editor on the value of members of other species and their status as property.

The Los Angeles Times takes letters@latimes.com

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

ATKINS PRESS UPDATE

The Atkins controversy continues to make news. A must-read is an article by science writer Michael Fumento, headed "The Atkins Empire Strikes back." (February 19.) I learned from Fumento that I may have given the Atkins camp too much credit last week when I wrote, with regard to an article about "Dr Fatkins":

"The amusing title is a reference to Atkins having weighed 258 pounds at the time of his death. But medical reports suggest that he arrived at the hospital under 200 pounds, so his treatment rather than his diet caused the excessive weight. Whether or not the man was fat is really of minimal interest -- I think most people agree that the Atkins diet can "work" -- you can lose weight on it (though that may have much to do with a lower calorie intake due to severe food restrictions, even though the foods allowed are high fat). The issue is the man's health, since most people don't want to die young leaving a slender beautiful corpse."

We learn from Fumento's article that Atkins was reported at 195 pounds not in admittance records but as part of an echocardiogram report. Fumento then tells us that the head of the echocardiogram laboratory told him the lab does not even have a scale, and that sometimes the weight is just estimated. Further, Fumento writes about the report:

"Conspicuously, the blood pressure numbers were covered. Trager lamely insisted it was to protect Atkins' privacy. Yet much of the media fuss over the M.E. report was its having said Atkins suffered hypertension. Atkins Nutritionals had squealed this was false, but then literally covered it up."

You can read Fumento's article on the Scripps Howard News Service website at: 
http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=FUMENTO-02-19-04
or on Fumento's website at:
http://www.fumento.com/fat/empire.html

The February 23 edition of Newsweek has an article on the issue headed, "Atkins Under Attack" (Health, pg 51).

Dr Neal Barnard, of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine is quoted regarding accusations about violations of privacy:

"It's regrettable when someone's medical history goes public. But they exploited him for years as a poster child for cardiovascular health, and the truth was very different."

The article tells us that PCRM is an animal rights group with ties to PETA, but it closes with:

"Many docs doubt the diet's safety, and though short-term studies appear favorable, there are no long-term studies. Barnard says the data-- plus a few possibly related deaths and his own growing registry of patient complaints --convinced him the diet was dangerous. Some patients want to sue their doctors, and PCRM is 'willing to provide information' to help, he says. The next battleground may be the courtroom."

You can read it on line at:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4271856/

And the February 22 Sunday New York Times looks at the issue in an article, in The Week in Review section, (Section 4, pg 12) headed, "Vegetarians vs. Atkins: Diet Wars are Almost Religious."

Gina Kolata opens with:
"She charges that his group is like the Taliban. He claims that her group's dangerous message has 'spread like a virus across North America, Europe and elsewhere.'

"The issue inspiring such invectives? Not religion, but diets.

"The latest spat is between Veronica Atkins, widow of Robert Atkins, the doctor who promoted a low-carbohydrate diet, heavy on the meats, and the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, a group that advocates vegetarianism."

The article does not really focus on the Atkins debate -- it is a discussion of people's evangelical attitudes towards diet. But it includes some relevant and excellent information:

"The arguments over diet go way back, said Dr. Rudolph L. Leibel, an obesity researcher at Columbia University's College of Physicians and Surgeons. 'They are in fact an echo of the discredited scientific notion of vitalism,' he said of the idea that living things are not governed by the laws of chemistry and physics.

"Although vitalism was disproved 200 years ago, he said, it is behind the fevered search for a magic way of eating that can override the rigid scientific formula: calories in minus calories out govern weight gain and weight loss."

You can read the New York Times article on line at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/22/weekinreview/22kola.html?ex=1078030800&en=2d6ac2d438f0a5e2&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

Last week I wrote,
"Though nobody wants to gloat over anybody's misfortune, the headlines due to the current controversy open up opportunities for letters to the editor in which it is perfectly appropriate to discuss the impact a plant based diet has had on your health and appearance, and perhaps mention that such diets can be better for one's conscience as well, since they are clearly better for the animals and the environment...The story has been in pretty well every paper over the last week and will continue to appear. When you see it again in yours, please take the opportunity to whip off a quick (preferably sympathetic) veg-friendly letter to the editor. If you have any trouble finding the right email address for a letter to the editor, please ask me for help."

Yes, the story does continue to appear, and I urge those who have yet to jot off a veg-friendly letter to consider doing so.

Newsweek takes letters at: letters@newsweek.com
The New York Times takes letters at: letters@nytimes.com

But a letter to your local paper is the most likely to be printed!

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

CBS EARLY SHOW -- 'WHEN PETS DIE'

CBS did something very right today (Feb 18) -- something essentially, though not, at first, obviously, "rights."  The Early Show aired a story headed "When Pets Die," which was extremely sympathetic to people experiencing significant grief at the loss of a non human "family member" (CBS's welcome term)

 You can read or view the piece on line at:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/17/earlyshow/contributors/debbyeturner/main600752.shtml

 One of the fundamental challenges our movement faces is the battle against a legal system that regards non human animals as things. That includes farmed animals, laboratory animals, performing animals, and companion animals. One might still be offered, by the courts, only the monetary value of a wrongly killed companion animal; that might be nothing since many of the most beloved come from shelters. Those laws reflect society's values. When grief over the loss of a non human companion is addressed in the major media, seriously and sympathetically, rather than being seen as silly sentimentality, it helps shift society's view of our relationships with other species. The laws will eventually reflect that shift.

 The Early Show deserves a big thank you for playing a part in the shift. Please thank the show for its sympathetic coverage of the grief over companion animal loss.

 The Early Show takes comments at: earlyshow@CBS.com

CBS EVENING NEWS 'MAN VS NATURE' UPDATE

The CBS Evening News series "Man Vs Nature," looks to be a real mixed bag. The first one entitled "When Bears Drop by for Dinner," was largely animal friendly, making it clear that bears suffer from human stupidity. Sadly, Tuesday night's segment, "Deer, Deer, Everywhere"  showed as much sympathy for wrecked flower beds and as it did for deer. Most unfortunately, after showing a protest against mass deer "culls" the piece included this far-fetched quote from a woman unlucky enough to have hit a doe with her car and shattered her knee (she was presumably not quite as unlucky as the doe): "They don't care about people that are severely injured." 

Funny how wanting to find a solution other than mass slaughter, and even thinking such a solution would be an appropriate way for a humane state to spend tax-payer money gets translated into not caring about people.

You can read and view the deer story on line at:

 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/17/eveningnews/main600759.shtml

Tonight's story (Wednesday, February 18) on Mountain Lions clearly went for balance. The promo looked bad, with the following script:

 "Crossing tracks with Mountain Lions. Her daughter nearly lost her life after a big cat went for her: 'She was just  limp on the ground and it was holding her by the neck' (Mother talking.)

"Are the  lions getting more aggressive? Our special series "Man vs. Nature" continues tonight on the CBS Evening News with Dan Rather."

The piece itself, including footage of a toddler with a bandaged head and face scarred by a mountain lion attack, will no doubt feed some fear of the animals. Yet the script told us, "A bolt of lightening is more likely to kill a person than a mountain lion on the prowl."

 And we saw upsetting footage of mountain lions dead on the side of highways, and shot by hunters, clearly included to engender sympathy for the animals. Interviews with naturalists and conservationists were also sympathetic, the piece ending with a quote telling us that unless the majority of people are willing to share the environment with the lions, in about 50 years there won't be any mountain lions left.

 The mix that CBS Evening News is giving us this week makes sending feedback a little complicated. I would never recommend sending angry letters to a major media outlet. But constructive criticism can be appropriate. Notes appreciative of the focus of the bear story, and to some extent of the mountain lion story (you will be able to read it on line tomorrow) but sorry that the deer story gave the impression that those who don't want deer killed are either unrealistic, or don't care about people, would be appropriate.  If you can find the time to watch the series, or follow it on the CBS website, http://www.cbsnews.com/  , please do. And please find the time to send a quick note to CBS acknowledging the series. I don't think I can overstate the importance of doing our best to get the major television networks on side. And email feedback is taken seriously.

 CBS Evening News takes feedback at evening@cbsnews.com or at: http://www.cbsnews.com/feedback/fb_news_form.shtml, where you will need to choose "CBS Evening News" from the pull-down menu.

CBS EVENING NEWS SERIES ON ANIMAL ISSUES

The week of February 16,, CBS Evening News has a series called "Man vs. Nature."

 The Evening News Website includes the subtitle, "America's Wild Treasures for Sale?"

 It looks like the series is going for balance but has a strong animal friendly slant. You can read or watch last night's piece (Feb 16)  on

line at: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/16/eveningnews/main600519.shtml

 "When Bears Drop by for Dinner" looked at the danger, mostly for the bears, when humans move into bear habitats and engage in practices that make the bears too comfortable around people. The story wasn't perfect from an animal rights perspective, but it was pretty good, ending with this terrific line, "Between the curious and the concerned, it's humans who have caused this showdown, but it's the bears who almost always end up the losers."

 Please thank CBS for the piece. That Network's attention to animal issues is new, and something we would like to encourage. We would very much like CBS and the animal protection movement to be friends.

The Evening News takes comments at: evening@cbsnews.com or at: http://www.cbsnews.com/feedback/fb_news_form.shtml, where you will need to choose "CBS Evening News" from the pull-down menu.

 Tonight's (Feb 17) segment will be on "exploding deer populations."

 Here is the promo:

 "TONIGHT ON THE CBS EVENING NEWS 

"Exploding deer populations are colliding with expanding suburbs and the toll it's taking on animals and taxpayers might surprise you. 

"If you would like more information on any of these stories or the broadcast, please click on the following address and e-mail us:
evening@cbsnews.com "

 Without having seen the segment we can't know whether we will love it. We don't know, for example, if hunting will be mentioned as an acceptable method of population control. Since most of America finds hunting acceptable, I am guessing that it will be mentioned as such, but I am very hopeful that we will also hear voices against it and encouraging other solutions. Watch it if you can -- it will no doubt be available on the CBS website if you miss it: http://www.cbsnews.com/

 Even if it is not 'perfect,' it is important to offer CBS encouragement for looking at animal issues. Apparently 'man vs. nature' segments will air all this week.

 I send a big thank you to Lori Golden, publisher of "Pet Press" ( http://www.thepetpress-la.com/ ) for calling our attention to the series.

 And I send a big thank you to each person who writes a note encouraging animal friendly media and thereby helps move our movement, and the concerns of other species, into the mainstream.

TERRIFIC TV COVERAGE OF COK'S CAMPAIGN AGAINST LABEL SCAM

The DC group Compassion Over Killing has a campaign aimed at exposing the fraud behind the "animal care certified" logo placed on many egg cartons. At the campaign's website, http://www.eggscam.com/, you'll find horrifying photos of the conditions in which some the 'animal care certified' hens live.

On February 16, WPBF-TV, the ABC affiliate in West Palm Beach, aired a terrific story on the campaign. You can read the text version of the story at: http://www.thewpbfchannel.com/news/2850160/detail.html 

Compassion Over Killing hopes to make a video available on the COK website shortly.

The story included COK undercover footage, and hard-hitting lines such as,

"But do you consider this Animal Care Certified: Hens packed in cages so tightly they can't move, most of their feathers gone because of the overcrowding, and their beaks seared off so they won't peck at each other?"

And also this description of what COK found at an "animal care certified" egg farm:

"They found hens with their heads stuck between the bars, unable to reach food or water. One hen allegedly had fallen underneath the cages, left to die a slow and painful death. In fact, the video shows dead chickens littered the cages in various stages of decomposition."

Producer Terri Parker was responsible for the superb story. If you go to her bio on the WPBF website, and click on a link that says "Send an e-mail to Terri here," you are given the email address of assistant news director Steve Boyer: sboyer@hearst.com

The situation is the same for other members of the news team so it seems all comments on the news should go to Boyer. COK, which has done such wonderful work on this campaign, would love the station to get some positive feedback for the story. Please take just a moment to send some.

DR ATKINS HEART DISEASE FINALLY MAKES BIG NEWS

When Dr Atkins died almost a year ago, I noted on DawnWatch that the press virtually ignored the trouble that Atkins had been having with his heart. How nice, after a week away from my computer, to come back and find that his troubles are no longer being ignored. They have been in every paper, on the front page of some, and are discussed in some national magazines.

A few months ago, at a physicians luncheon, a surgeon explained to me that Atkins's heart issues were such that he would not have lived more than a year if he had not "slipped" on the ice and hit his head.  I thought it unlikely that the cause of death had been falsified: Yes, he probably died from a head injury from a fall. But it seemed obvious that either 'slipping' or 'collapsing' on the ice would lead to the same cause of death, but that a slip for a dying man would be strangely convenient, whereas a collapse, due to heart disease, would be devastating for a diet king's heirs and empire. One can easily imagine not just the loss of sales but the potential lawsuits.

I wish Dr Atkins had lived a very long life, towards the end of which, he, like the world's most famous pediatrician, Dr Spock, had come to embrace a vegan diet and recommend it to all. Since sadly, that did not happen, I am relieved for the sake of those that might follow him and for the billions of animals being consumed by his millions of followers, that the myth of his good health has finally been revealed.

The February 23 edition of Time Magazine has covered the story in an article by Joel Stein, (Health, pg 37) headed "Paging Dr. Fatkins?"  The amusing title is a reference to Atkins having weighed 258 pounds at the time of his death. But medical reports suggest that he arrived at the hospital under 200 pounds, so his treatment rather than his diet caused the excessive weight. Whether or not the man was fat is really of minimal interest -- I think most people agree that the Atkins diet can "work" -- you can lose weight on it (though that may have much to do with a lower calorie intake due to severe food restrictions, even though the foods allowed are high fat). The issue is the man's health, since most people don't want to die young leaving a slender beautiful corpse.

Stein writes:
"As for the health of his heart - which is the real question for many who believe that the fat-rich Atkins diet may help shed pounds but could raise cholesterol to dangerous levels - the medical report noted that Atkins had a history of myocardial infarction (translation: heart attack), congestive heart failure and high blood pressure."

The Time Magazine article notes that Atkins's medical records have been distributed by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. The article gives an address for a website PCRM has set up focusing exclusively on the Atkins diet:
http://www.atkinsdietalert.org/  It is packed with information and even has a place where those whose health has been harmed by the diet are asked to register so that such information can be passed along to government and health officials.

You can read "Paging Dr. Fatkins?" on line at: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040223-591316,00.html

The February 23 edition of People Magazine is also carrying the  Atkins story, on page 71, headed, "Did the Atkins Diet Fail Dr. Atkins?;
A report suggests the famed doctor had weight and heart problems when he died."

The Wednesday, February 11 New York Times had a particularly thorough article on the issue you might want to read. You will find it at: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/11/nyregion/11atkins.html. It tells us that Atkins's wife had objected to an autopsy and that Atkins's body was cremated.

Though nobody wants to gloat over anybody's misfortune, the headlines due to the current controversy open up opportunities for letters to the editor in which it is perfectly appropriate to discuss the impact a plant based diet has had on your health and appearance, and perhaps mention that such diets can be better for one's conscience as well, since they are clearly better for the animals and the environment.

Time Magazine takes letters at: letters@time.com
People Magazine takes letters at: editor@people.com

And, as I mentioned, the story has been in pretty well every paper over the last week and will continue to appear. When you see it again in yours, please take the opportunity to whip off a quick (preferably sympathetic) veg-friendly letter to the editor. If you have any trouble finding the right email address for a letter to the editor, please ask me for help.

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

NEW YORK NEWSDAY OP-ED BY DAWN-SINGER ON SLAUGHTER

Peter Singer and I had an op-ed in the Sunday, February 8, edition of New York's paper, "Newsday." (Currents section, pg A 30.) I will take this opportunity to remind people that editors, rather than op-ed writers, choose the titles. Ours is headed, "When Slaughter Makes Sense."  I hope nobody on this list needs to be told that neither Peter Singer nor I find the current mass slaughter of members of other species truly sensible. Since the public finds the current slaughters distasteful, the paper requested a discussion of the ethical issues involved. Our take was that at least there is some reason for the current slaughters -- to prevent epidemics -- but that of course they would not be necessary if people were not eating animals, and that the core atrocity is the unnecessary mass slaughter of animals for human food.

You can read the op-ed on line at:

www.nynewsday.com/news/opinion/nyc-vpdaw083661471feb08,0,5945362.story

or at this link on this website

Whether you agree or disagree with our take in the op-ed, I hope you will take the opportunity to write a veg-friendly letter to Newsday, that looks at our treatment of other species.

Newsday takes letters at: http://cf.newsday.com/newsdayemail/email.cfm

Choose "letter to the editor" from the pull-down menu.

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor. Shorter letters are more likely to be published.

SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE PROFILES THREE VEGAN ACTIVISTS

The Magazine section (pg. 8) of the Sunday, February 8, San Francisco Chronicle includes a delightful story headed, "The Believers: What does it mean to eschew all animal products? Three animal rights ideologues on their moment of conversion."

Joe Garofoli profiles Lisa Franzetta, Lauren Ornelas, and Jeffrey Masson.

Franzetta is the PETA activist most often seen in "street theatre" demonstrations. Garofoli writes, "Franzetta embodies the whimsical stunt side of PETA..."  For example, she might protest the circus by spending the day in a cage, in public, wearing little more than painted tiger stripes.

Lauren Ornelas, who runs Viva USA is credited with, amongst many other achievements, being the person who persuaded John Mackey of Wholefoods to go vegan and to make the commitment to sell only humanely raised animal products at Wholefoods. She protested at his stores, and then engaged him in an email dialogue. The article includes an interesting quote from Mackey:

"Where activists lose me is when they don't want to engage you in a discussion, when they just want to attack you. Once we had a group send 2,500 faxes to us. What did that do? Make us change our fax number?  Make no mistake about this: The animal rights groups did not coerce us into doing this. But they opened our eyes."

When asked about his conversion to veganism, he said "Lauren definitely got the ball rolling on that."

Jeffrey Masson is the best selling author of "When Elephants Weep," and "Dogs Never Lie About Love." His new book, "The Pig Who Sang to the Moon," concentrates on farmed animal emotions. Gorofoli writes, "Masson validated what animal activists have believed for a long time: The only thing that holds people back from treating a pig as they do a dog is lack of exposure to a sow."

The profiles are fairly extensive and fun to read. You will find the article on line at:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/02/08/CMGOR4NLP43.DTL

It presents a great opportunity for pro-veggie letters to the editor, perhaps touching more on animal suffering than the article does.

The San Francisco Chronicle takes letters at: letters@sfchronicle.com

The paper advises, ""Please limit your letters to 200 or fewer words ... shorter letters have a better chance of being selected for publication."

Always include your full name, address, and daytime phone number when sending a letter to the editor.

ALASKAN AERIAL WOLF GUNNING AND TOURISM BOYCOTT

The Alaskan Government has approved a plan allowing the aerial hunting of wolves. In response, various animal protection groups have called for a boycott on tourism to Alaska. Some signs of success made the front page of the Tuesday, February 3, Anchorage Daily News. The story, by Joel Gay, is headed, "Wolf kill boycott nibbles tourism; 30 ANIMALS DEAD: One business reports $30,000 loss from boycott."

Gay opens with:

"Despite finger-numbing cold as low as 55 below in Glennallen, private pilots shot and killed another 16 wolves in the state-sponsored Nelchina basin predator control program last weekend, bringing their total to 30.

"Though the wolf kill cheers hunters who hope to see more moose and caribou in the area as a result of fewer predators, it is painful news to at least some people in the tourism industry.

"Mark Reiser, owner of a Wasilla-based company called Outdoors Alaska, said a major client canceled its reservations last week and is instead going to Costa Rica. Another large group also changed plans, citing the state predator control.

Reiser is quoted: "This program and this national boycott are devastating my business. I'm a very small business, so the $30,000 in gross revenue is fairly significant to me."

The reason given for the wolf hunt is the decline of the moose population. However, Gay writes, "Some opponents of the new wolf control programs have charged that it is sport hunting in disguise and therefore circumventing two statewide votes in which land-and-shoot and aerial hunting were banned."

You can read the whole article on line at:

http://www.adn.com/front/story/4700955p-4652043c.html

It presents a perfect opportunity for letters to the editor supporting the boycott and questioning the way we treat other species. Since a tourism boycott naturally involves people from all over, letters from all over are appropriate.

The paper takes letters on line at:

http://www.adn.com/help/v-letters/

or you can email a letter to letters@adn.com

The paper notes, "Letters may not exceed 225 words, and, as a general rule, shorter letters are better letters....Letters must include the writer's address and a day phone number (for verification, not publication). ...We don't promise publication, but we do publish about half of the letters we receive."

The HSUS website has a detailed page on the hunt. I warn you that it includes a distressing photo of a hunter carrying a gorgeous big dead wolf: http://www.hsus.org/ace/20268

The HSUS site also urges us to contact Governor Murkowski urging him to cancel the aerial hunt. It provide talking points and contact information at: http://www.hsus.org/ace/20042

That contact information is:

Governor Frank Murkowski
P.O. Box 110001
Juneau, AK 99811
907-465-3500
Fax: 907-465-3532
governor@gov.state.ak.us

And Friends of Animals has information on the boycott at: http://www.friendsofanimals.org/wolves/bct.htm