On Tuesday, San Francisco's Board of Supervisors passed an
ordinance that requires "humane treatment of all companion dogs." The
requirements are loose. A dog's water must be in non-tipping bowl and
changed every day, food must be palatable and nutritious; and dog houses
must have tops, floors, and at least three sides each. Tethering is
"highly discouraged."
Yet some complained, suggesting the law was frivolous and
that dogs are treated better in San Francisco than homeless people. Today,
Friday, January 14, in his column "Notes & Errata," which appears twice
per week on the San Francisco Gate website (associated with the San
Francisco Chronicle) Mark Morford took on the complainants. His column is
funny, even charming, but packs a punch.
I won't send out the whole column, since it is likely that
hits to the web page are counted, so it is better for Morford if you read
it on line. But I will share a few lines and strongly recommend you read
the whole piece at:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2005/01/14/notes011405.DTL&nl=fix
OR AT http://tinyurl.com/4enp7
He opens with a rant against those who pursue PC language
such as calling people "guardians" rather than "owners" of their companion
animals, and against over-pampering "pets" and treating them as if they
are members of our own species. But then he changes track, writing
"There are issues of pet treatment and animal care that are vital and
urgent and necessary, that speak to our moral fiber and emotional core and
our ability to have compassion and love and a sense of humane decency and
passable kibble."
To the suggestion that animals are being treated better
than people, he responds, "Oh please." He notes that we kill five million
"pets" per year, and writes eloquently of their dependence on us:
"Abused, abandoned, sick, too large too small too loud too
furry too unstable too slobbery, unwanted for a thousand different
reasons, bred for fighting or for aggression and therefore unadoptable
once they've been dumped by their brutal and small-minded owners, or
they're diseased and left tied to trees and malnourished and beaten with
chains. And each one, unlike humans, completely innocent of its domestic
circumstances, and completely powerless to change them."
"Five million. That's about 14,000 animals put to death
every day. Or 600 every hour. Ten animals every minute. Go ahead. Pause
right here. Wait one minute. There you go, 10 more dead pets."
And he broaches larger animal rights issues:
"It's a large and increasingly important issue, floating
over our wildly pet-lovin' culture like a giant question mark: What do our
animals deserve? What are their true rights? What constitutes humane or
decent treatment in the face of a culture that casually kills millions of
unwanted pets every year and openly massacres billions more animals for
food and doesn't blink an eye?
"And what infinitesimal steps, more broadly speaking, can
we as a species take to maybe just slightly lighten the load of massive
destruction we heap upon the animal kingdom in general and pets and/or
food animals specifically?"
I urge you to read the whole amusing but stinging piece
at: http://tinyurl.com/4enp7
And there is a link on that page where you can send
Morford an appreciative note.
I send a huge thank you to Eric Mills and Karen Benzel for
making sure we saw this piece.
Yours and the animals',
Karen Dawn
(DawnWatch is an animal advocacy media watch that looks at
animal issues in the media and facilitates one-click responses to the
relevant media outlets. You can learn more about it, and sign up for
alerts at http://www.DawnWatch.com. To unsubscribe, go to
www.DawnWatch.com/unsubscribe.php. If you forward or reprint DawnWatch
alerts, please do so unedited -- leave DawnWatch in the title and include
this tag line.)
Go on to If I Should Grow
Frail
Return to 16 January 2005 Issue
Return to Newsletters
** Fair Use Notice**
This document may contain copyrighted material, use of which has not been
specifically authorized by the copyright owners. I believe that this
not-for-profit, educational use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the
copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law). If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your
own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner.
