OP ED
On Friday, October 1, the local Democratic committee issued a peculiar press release on its website. In common practice, the Mayor and elected trustees submerge their political allegiances and affiliations upon election and are supposed to serve the best interests of all citizens without regard for race, creed, color or political affiliation.
This strange 159-word “release” consists of five sentences so pointedly serving political aims as to be risible. The sentence-by-sentence text of this “release” follows with matching comment about its purpose and underlying attempt to influence community behavior.
RELEASE: On Monday, September 27, 2010, the Mayor proposed and the Village Board agreed unanimously, that further action on bow hunting be postponed until the Conservation Advisory Council (CAC) has completed its report and conducted public information sessions.
COMMENT: Any statement about the Village Board’s intentions should properly emanate from that body on the Village website. Why has the local Democratic committee taken upon itself to make an announcement of a decision by the Village Board under the guise of a public service announcement? The answer to this question is clear: The Democratic committee is anxious to keep attendance at the October 4 meeting low, thus giving the lie to their proclaimed interest in hearing citizens concerns.
RELEASE: The Board discussed the proposal and informally agreed to announce the decision at the regularly scheduled board meeting of October 4. This statement (the release) is being made in advance of that meeting to assure the public that the board would NOT be coming to a final decision on bow hunting on the 4th.
COMMENT: Note the use of the weasel word “informally” to characterize the decision. The sole purpose of this “release” is to discourage participation in the October 4 Village Board meeting by the broad spectrum of angry anti-bow hunting Croton citizens that characterized earlier meetings. The Democratic committee is running scared and anxious to tamp down the broad-spectrum surge of anti-bow hunting sentiment expressed at earlier meetings and in the letters pages of The Gazette. It wants the current bow-hunting fiasco to be forgotten well before the next election.
RELEASE: The purpose of these sessions will be both to allow community discussion as well as to listen to and address any concerns.
COMMENT: If the Village Board is truly interested in citizens’ concerns, the upcoming meeting on October 4 would be an excellent place for them to continue to sample the broad scope of residents’ attitudes and statements.
RELEASE: The Village Board concluded that the CAC has not succeeded in educating the public as they thought they had.
COMMENT: This is a revealing and damning choice of words. The citizens of Croton do not need “educating,” if that is the purpose of any public sessions to be held by the CAC. As used here, ‘educating” sounds suspiciously like brainwashing. What Croton needs is a CAC made up of open-minded citizens with some expertise in conservation—not a group of zealots with their minds already made up and bent on “educating” the rest of us. The fundamental truism is that bow hunting of any kind is inappropriate for a community as small as Croton. That position should be a given in finding a solution.
RELEASE: Through these public education sessions al parties will be able to learn more about the environment impacts from Croton’s deer population and all the options to fix those impacts.
COMMENT: The impact of a migrating deer population in numbers larger than the land can carry stems from various causes and has been felt all over Westchester for many years. A valid solution does not lie within the grasp of individual communities but must be a coordinated countywide effort with a maximum chance of success without animal cruelty. Damage to the environment can easily be repaired once a practicable solution is found. Croton’s presently proposed puny effort would have no genuine effect of the deer population of northwestern Westchester other than to give politicians an opportunity to claim falsely that positive action had been taken.
For Croton Democrats, it’s just one gaffe after another. The latest imbroglio makes me embarrassed to be a Democrat.
Showing posts with label Bow Hunting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bow Hunting. Show all posts
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Friday, October 1, 2010
Animal Cruelty as Public Policy, 5: Conflicting Interests, Bullying and Official Cowardice
OP ED
No one disagrees that overpopulation of deer is a problem everywhere in Westchester or that something should be done about it. The central issue is whether medieval inhumane hunting methods in which animals are cruelly injured and bleed to death is the way to attack the problem in Anno Domini 2010.
The Village Board’s Sept. 20 postponement of consideration of a local deer bow hunting law for a mere two weeks would be laughable if it were not a clear indication that the administration is suddenly aware that they are moving too fast. The public sees no reason for the unseemly haste with which this unpopular legislation is being railroaded through. What has been glaringly lacking is thoroughgoing public discussion of such pressing issues as alternatives, public safety, privacy and risk management, to name but a few.
In Croton, the process of approving new laws is a surreal extravaganza of Marxian proportions—not Karl Marx but the Marx Brothers. Burlesque would be a better word to describe the rampant conflict of interest in the process. Although Fran Allen had pointed out the lack of supporting evidence to the Waterfront Advisory Committee (WAC), three Committee members, including Trustees Olver and Murtaugh, found no inconsistency in the proposed change to Croton’s hunting ban.
After their positive vote and undeterred by the clearly evident conflict of interest, two of the WAC members (Messrs. Olver and Murtaugh) will take off their WAC hats and don new hats as Village Board members. “Imagine that,” they will exclaim. “The WAC sees no conflict between deer hunting and waterfront revitalization. Now let’s pass this law quickly!”
In another classic display of a conflict of interest, at least two members of the Conservation Advisory Committee, which proposed this inhumane and dubious solution to the deer problem, were allowed to speak interminably at Village Board meetings, to spread inconsistencies about deer counts, and lie that neighboring communities embrace a similar law. The Village Board has yet to explain why proponents receive unlimited time at meetings to “educate” the public about the glories of bow hunting deer, while opponents are strictly limited to five minutes.
Fran Allen, who is both a national and a local treasure and who has spent her working life in the service of logic and the scientific method, carefully explained her vote as based on a total lack of scientific evidence to support a decision either way. Not content with having easily won a 3 to 1 vote in the WAC, Trustee Olver, in a Stalinesque ultimatum, then abandoned all decorum and publicly demanded that Fran Allen be removed from the chair she has held these many years. Later he demanded that she resign.
Ignoring an opportunity to apologize to Ms. Allen, Trustee Olver resumed his unrelenting attack on her. Trustee Olver has frequently exhibited an annoying penchant for patronizingly lecturing Crotonites and tediously belaboring the obvious. Apparently, a lifetime spent on the global public purse explaining to villagers in the hinterlands of the Third World how a flush toilet works has distorted his perception of Croton voters’ level of intelligence, making his frequent absences from meetings more welcome than his presences.
Ernest Hemingway once defined courage as “grace under pressure.” During this embarrassing performance by Trustee Olver, the Mayor and other Village Board members, three able-bodied men and a woman, sat stiffly, staring straight ahead, each with the same grim expression on their Great Stone Faces. No one said, “Just a damn minute, Mr. Olver, a public meeting is neither the time nor the place to be attacking Fran Allen for her vote.” In the face of a cowardly, bullying assault on the character and integrity of an unpaid longtime volunteer, it is obvious that courage is a commodity in extremely short supply with Croton’s paid governing body.
It so happens that voters denied Mr. Olver reelection in March of this year, and he was appointed by Mayor Leo Wiegman to finish what's left of Ms. Restuccia’s term. Presumably, he serves at the pleasure of the Mayor. Mr. Olver has given every indication that he wishes to commit political suicide. It’s your move, Mr. Mayor.
No one disagrees that overpopulation of deer is a problem everywhere in Westchester or that something should be done about it. The central issue is whether medieval inhumane hunting methods in which animals are cruelly injured and bleed to death is the way to attack the problem in Anno Domini 2010.
The Village Board’s Sept. 20 postponement of consideration of a local deer bow hunting law for a mere two weeks would be laughable if it were not a clear indication that the administration is suddenly aware that they are moving too fast. The public sees no reason for the unseemly haste with which this unpopular legislation is being railroaded through. What has been glaringly lacking is thoroughgoing public discussion of such pressing issues as alternatives, public safety, privacy and risk management, to name but a few.
In Croton, the process of approving new laws is a surreal extravaganza of Marxian proportions—not Karl Marx but the Marx Brothers. Burlesque would be a better word to describe the rampant conflict of interest in the process. Although Fran Allen had pointed out the lack of supporting evidence to the Waterfront Advisory Committee (WAC), three Committee members, including Trustees Olver and Murtaugh, found no inconsistency in the proposed change to Croton’s hunting ban.
After their positive vote and undeterred by the clearly evident conflict of interest, two of the WAC members (Messrs. Olver and Murtaugh) will take off their WAC hats and don new hats as Village Board members. “Imagine that,” they will exclaim. “The WAC sees no conflict between deer hunting and waterfront revitalization. Now let’s pass this law quickly!”
In another classic display of a conflict of interest, at least two members of the Conservation Advisory Committee, which proposed this inhumane and dubious solution to the deer problem, were allowed to speak interminably at Village Board meetings, to spread inconsistencies about deer counts, and lie that neighboring communities embrace a similar law. The Village Board has yet to explain why proponents receive unlimited time at meetings to “educate” the public about the glories of bow hunting deer, while opponents are strictly limited to five minutes.
Fran Allen, who is both a national and a local treasure and who has spent her working life in the service of logic and the scientific method, carefully explained her vote as based on a total lack of scientific evidence to support a decision either way. Not content with having easily won a 3 to 1 vote in the WAC, Trustee Olver, in a Stalinesque ultimatum, then abandoned all decorum and publicly demanded that Fran Allen be removed from the chair she has held these many years. Later he demanded that she resign.
Ignoring an opportunity to apologize to Ms. Allen, Trustee Olver resumed his unrelenting attack on her. Trustee Olver has frequently exhibited an annoying penchant for patronizingly lecturing Crotonites and tediously belaboring the obvious. Apparently, a lifetime spent on the global public purse explaining to villagers in the hinterlands of the Third World how a flush toilet works has distorted his perception of Croton voters’ level of intelligence, making his frequent absences from meetings more welcome than his presences.
Ernest Hemingway once defined courage as “grace under pressure.” During this embarrassing performance by Trustee Olver, the Mayor and other Village Board members, three able-bodied men and a woman, sat stiffly, staring straight ahead, each with the same grim expression on their Great Stone Faces. No one said, “Just a damn minute, Mr. Olver, a public meeting is neither the time nor the place to be attacking Fran Allen for her vote.” In the face of a cowardly, bullying assault on the character and integrity of an unpaid longtime volunteer, it is obvious that courage is a commodity in extremely short supply with Croton’s paid governing body.
It so happens that voters denied Mr. Olver reelection in March of this year, and he was appointed by Mayor Leo Wiegman to finish what's left of Ms. Restuccia’s term. Presumably, he serves at the pleasure of the Mayor. Mr. Olver has given every indication that he wishes to commit political suicide. It’s your move, Mr. Mayor.
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Animal Cruelty as Public Policy, 4: ‘There Is a Stench of Death About This Village Board’
OP ED
Anyone unable to reach a decision about the Village Board’s planned program to allow indiscriminate bow hunting of deer on public and private lands should consider this one salient fact: If deer were domesticated and slaughtered in licensed slaughterhouses under government supervision, killing them as bow hunters do would be prohibited as cruel and inhumane.
Add that the hunting will be done from tree stands fundamentally dangerous to the hunters. Also add that the public will be using these properties for recreation at the same time, and you have a situation fraught with danger. Literally, this is an accident about to happen.
The only word to describe this policy is madness, sheer madness. My family and I moved to Croton 47 years ago, attracted by its rich history of toleration and compassion. These qualities all seem to be on the brink of being eradicated by fiat.
We are frankly puzzled by this Village Board’s fixation on killing innocent animals by the most cruel and inhumane methods to satisfy the misguided appetites of a small clique of bloodthirsty hunters. The Board’s purpose is to avoid having blood on their hands—but history will prove them wrong.
There is a stench of death about this Village Board when the most important piece of Village business is to rush into killing animals cruelly and painfully as a futile solution to a long-standing, almost universal problem.
Wanton, inhumane killing is not the answer. When will the Village Board learn this simple truth? They have yet to understand that the only important lesson in this life is to learn to live like human beings.
Anyone unable to reach a decision about the Village Board’s planned program to allow indiscriminate bow hunting of deer on public and private lands should consider this one salient fact: If deer were domesticated and slaughtered in licensed slaughterhouses under government supervision, killing them as bow hunters do would be prohibited as cruel and inhumane.
Add that the hunting will be done from tree stands fundamentally dangerous to the hunters. Also add that the public will be using these properties for recreation at the same time, and you have a situation fraught with danger. Literally, this is an accident about to happen.
The only word to describe this policy is madness, sheer madness. My family and I moved to Croton 47 years ago, attracted by its rich history of toleration and compassion. These qualities all seem to be on the brink of being eradicated by fiat.
We are frankly puzzled by this Village Board’s fixation on killing innocent animals by the most cruel and inhumane methods to satisfy the misguided appetites of a small clique of bloodthirsty hunters. The Board’s purpose is to avoid having blood on their hands—but history will prove them wrong.
There is a stench of death about this Village Board when the most important piece of Village business is to rush into killing animals cruelly and painfully as a futile solution to a long-standing, almost universal problem.
Wanton, inhumane killing is not the answer. When will the Village Board learn this simple truth? They have yet to understand that the only important lesson in this life is to learn to live like human beings.
Animal Cruelty as Public Policy, 3: The Truth About Bow Hunting
OP ED
Let’s face facts: Overpopulation of deer is not a local problem but rather a countywide problem that calls for a countywide solution. And bow hunting, which solves nothing, is not an effective tool to control deer population density.
On the contrary, it is a recreational pursuit to satisfy a small clique of bloodthirsty hunters callous to their cruel and inhumane treatment of animals. At least one half the deer wounded by bow hunters are never recovered and die slow, painful, agonizing deaths. Besides, it is a pastime dangerous to both the public as well as the insensitive bow hunters who ply this primitive trade.
The Village of Croton-on-Hudson will hold a public hearing next Tuesday, Sept. 7, on its proposal to allow bow hunting on public lands and private properties in Croton But what is bow hunting really like?
The writer of the following graphic description of bow hunting is no animal bleeding-heart. He is the late Clare Conley, respected editor of Outdoor Life and Field & Stream magazines.
“I was afield with three hunters when we jumped a doe that ran in front of us. One of the men drew his bow and shot. The arrow went through the doe’s neck. We all saw the arrow sticking out of both sides of the doe’s neck as she bounded away.
"The blood trail was easy to find, but we waited the usual hour for her to lie down, stiffen up and eventually die. We followed the scarlet trail for more than an hour expecting to find her dead. We came to several pools of blood with prints of her knees beside them, where she had gone down to hang her head, and bleed in the bright sun. We saw spots where she had stumbled, but still her life blood ran, and still she went on.
“At last we found her. She was dying. She was on her knees and hocks. Her ears, no longer the wonderful, alert warning system to detect any danger, were sagging. Her head was down. Her nose was in her blood. We could hear her breath bubbling in the warm blood.
“Somehow the doe lurched up. Stumbling, bounding, blindly into the brush, she managed to reach the rim of a plateau and disappear. She was nowhere in sight. We fanned out and combed the hillside where we lost her tracks among a maze of other deer tracks. We failed to retrieve her.
“We lost four wounded deer on that one hunting trip, but the doe I saw dying stayed with me. Her heartbroken, dulling eyes haunted me. At odd moments I’d see her, wild and free, then dying in the sun, her breath choking in a pool of blood.
“I resolved never again to shoot any living creature with a bow.”
Residents of Croton and of neighboring communities: Imagine your children playing in your backyard or standing at a bus stop and witnessing such a heartbreaking spectacle as the slow death of a sentient animal. All people of good will are urged to turn out at the public hearing on Sept. 7 to protest this futile and cruel exercise being advocated under the pretext of animal population control.
Let’s face facts: Overpopulation of deer is not a local problem but rather a countywide problem that calls for a countywide solution. And bow hunting, which solves nothing, is not an effective tool to control deer population density.
On the contrary, it is a recreational pursuit to satisfy a small clique of bloodthirsty hunters callous to their cruel and inhumane treatment of animals. At least one half the deer wounded by bow hunters are never recovered and die slow, painful, agonizing deaths. Besides, it is a pastime dangerous to both the public as well as the insensitive bow hunters who ply this primitive trade.
The Village of Croton-on-Hudson will hold a public hearing next Tuesday, Sept. 7, on its proposal to allow bow hunting on public lands and private properties in Croton But what is bow hunting really like?
The writer of the following graphic description of bow hunting is no animal bleeding-heart. He is the late Clare Conley, respected editor of Outdoor Life and Field & Stream magazines.
“I was afield with three hunters when we jumped a doe that ran in front of us. One of the men drew his bow and shot. The arrow went through the doe’s neck. We all saw the arrow sticking out of both sides of the doe’s neck as she bounded away.
"The blood trail was easy to find, but we waited the usual hour for her to lie down, stiffen up and eventually die. We followed the scarlet trail for more than an hour expecting to find her dead. We came to several pools of blood with prints of her knees beside them, where she had gone down to hang her head, and bleed in the bright sun. We saw spots where she had stumbled, but still her life blood ran, and still she went on.
“At last we found her. She was dying. She was on her knees and hocks. Her ears, no longer the wonderful, alert warning system to detect any danger, were sagging. Her head was down. Her nose was in her blood. We could hear her breath bubbling in the warm blood.
“Somehow the doe lurched up. Stumbling, bounding, blindly into the brush, she managed to reach the rim of a plateau and disappear. She was nowhere in sight. We fanned out and combed the hillside where we lost her tracks among a maze of other deer tracks. We failed to retrieve her.
“We lost four wounded deer on that one hunting trip, but the doe I saw dying stayed with me. Her heartbroken, dulling eyes haunted me. At odd moments I’d see her, wild and free, then dying in the sun, her breath choking in a pool of blood.
“I resolved never again to shoot any living creature with a bow.”
Residents of Croton and of neighboring communities: Imagine your children playing in your backyard or standing at a bus stop and witnessing such a heartbreaking spectacle as the slow death of a sentient animal. All people of good will are urged to turn out at the public hearing on Sept. 7 to protest this futile and cruel exercise being advocated under the pretext of animal population control.
Animal Cruelty as Public Policy, 2: Butchers with Bows and Arrows
OP ED
Is Croton now engaged in a bloody war against its animals? It has long been at war with its dogs.
The Village Code prohibits residents from walking a leashed dog in a Croton park. The sole exception to this prohibition is Croton Landing, but only because the Village accepted Federal funds for its development.
Now the Village suddenly wants to unleash a bloody, two-and-a-half-month, all-out campaign against a beautiful and graceful species, the White-Tailed Deer, using extremely cruel and inhumane methods.
Adequate fencing is one solution. We have no problem with deer. Our property is completely protected by fencing.
We understand that the arboretum was incorporated in 1994 as the “Croton Arboretum and Sanctuary, Inc.” In every dictionary, “sanctuary” means “a reserved area in which animals, especially wild animals, are protected from hunting.” Why have Village officials ignored this?
This summer the Village has been overrun by hordes of brown rats. In many ways, these disgusting, disease-carrying animals pose a greater threat to public health than any other animal. Yet the Village has done absolutely nothing about the massive rat infestation, except to hush it up.
Village officials seem anxious to have on their hands the blood of innocent deer killed barbarously and indiscriminately. Our family wants no part of their animal cruelty. We ask them not to do this in our name.
Is Croton now engaged in a bloody war against its animals? It has long been at war with its dogs.
The Village Code prohibits residents from walking a leashed dog in a Croton park. The sole exception to this prohibition is Croton Landing, but only because the Village accepted Federal funds for its development.
Now the Village suddenly wants to unleash a bloody, two-and-a-half-month, all-out campaign against a beautiful and graceful species, the White-Tailed Deer, using extremely cruel and inhumane methods.
Adequate fencing is one solution. We have no problem with deer. Our property is completely protected by fencing.
We understand that the arboretum was incorporated in 1994 as the “Croton Arboretum and Sanctuary, Inc.” In every dictionary, “sanctuary” means “a reserved area in which animals, especially wild animals, are protected from hunting.” Why have Village officials ignored this?
This summer the Village has been overrun by hordes of brown rats. In many ways, these disgusting, disease-carrying animals pose a greater threat to public health than any other animal. Yet the Village has done absolutely nothing about the massive rat infestation, except to hush it up.
Village officials seem anxious to have on their hands the blood of innocent deer killed barbarously and indiscriminately. Our family wants no part of their animal cruelty. We ask them not to do this in our name.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)