“John Stewart for fracking if it doesn't 'liquify our pets' - New York Post” plus 1 more |
| John Stewart for fracking if it doesn't 'liquify our pets' - New York Post Posted: 8:48 AM, February 15, 2011 ι Abby Wisse Schachter T Boone Pickens recently visited John Stewart at "The Daily Show" to prostelytize for his 'Pickens plan' for energy independence. A major tenent of the plan is getting off OPEC oil and on to natural gas. Pickens wants all trucks to be modified to run on natural gas and says it can be done in seven years. Stewarts was receptive but skeptical, asking more than once about the alleged dangers of a type of natural gas drilling called hydraulic fracturing or fracking. Stewart joked that Pickens' plan must have a catch like the fracking will "liquify our pets" and more seriously he told Pickens that everyone "has seen the scene of fire coming out of the taps" of those whose water has been poisoned by gas drilling. Pickens replied that he had personally "fracked" 3,000 wells and there is no problem with water contamination of any kind. Stewart's response was that if it was a safe practice, he'd be all in for natural gas development. Would the Environmental Protection Agency be enough of a source for Stewart to "prove" that fracking doesn't poison drinking water? In December, the EPA issued an "emergency order" against energy company Range Resources for alegedly having a role in the contamination of two wells in the area of the Barnett Shale, where Range is fracking for natural gas. Range deicded to fight the order and ahead of a hearing by the state regulatory commission, Range did a series of interviews and took depositions regarding the wells and the contamination. At the hearing the EPA and the landowner making claims against Range didn't show up. On January 18th the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Range in federal district court seeking enforcement of the EPA's emergency order. The next day a district judge for the Western District of Texas ruled that Range could depose the EPA regarding the basis for its emergency order. During the deposition the EPA admited "under oath that it had knowledge of natural gas in water wells in the immediate area of the alleged contamination prior to issuing its December 7 Order, and that such gas existed before Range drilled its wells; that EPA did not evaluate the geology of the area,...and EPA admitted that Range may not have caused or contributed to the natural gas in the water well that is the main source of contention." The research conducted by Range and others suggests that the wells were dug too deep and that methane gas was in the water supply because of that. Plus the wells were dug before proper cementing practices and modern casing regulations had been adopted by the state. The EPA's case in federal court is still pending, while the case is also being heard by Texas' regulatory agency the Railroad commission. Given the current evidence, both judges may rul against the EPA and against the claim that Range bears any responsibility for the contaminatio of the two wells in question. If the EPA loses, a precedent may be set, since the case hangs on technical evidence of well contamination. If Range Resources is victorious it could go a long way toward dispelling the now prevalent attitude that any and all hydraulic fracturing is harmful to humans and detrimental to the environment. And hopefully, liberals like John Stewart might just adopt a "drill baby drill" attitude. This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php |
| AP poll looks at declawing, debarking pets - KABC Posted: LOS ANGELES -- Cats scratch and dogs bark. Is declawing or debarking the answer? Nearly 60 percent of American pet owners, including 55 percent of cat owners, say it is OK to have a cat declawed, but only 8 percent approve of having a dog's vocal cords removed, according to an Associated Press-Petside.com poll. Experts say both surgeries are painful and alter the way the animals walk or talk. Declawing a cat "is amputation. If you look at your fingers, declawing would be like amputating the last section of each finger. If you were declawed, you would have 10 little short fingers. It's amputation times 10," said veterinarian Louise Murray, vice president of the Bergh Memorial Animal Hospital in New York City. The hospital is part of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Most vets won't do all four feet, because that is considered extremely inhumane and unsafe for the cat, she said. Mary Sullivan, 84, of Chicago, said she had a cat declawed once because he kept slipping on slick floors in her apartment. "Shortly afterward he died. He was in agony the whole time. It broke my heart that I had it done. I'd never do that again," she said. When she got Roger from Tails of Hope about seven years ago, a condition of the adoption was no declawing. She said they showed her how to cover her furniture if there were a problem, but Roger, who's 14 now, doesn't care about furniture. "It's not cruel to declaw your cats," said Jennifer Soloway, 60, a retired judge in Sacramento. Her cats, including Willie, who just died at 14, and Nemo, who is 15, were both declawed when they were young. "They do not know they've been declawed. They made the same kneading movements. The recovery process was very short. They never showed any sign of pain," she said. Declawing was necessary, she said. "My little daughter had scratches all over her. Everyone in the family had scratches. They destroyed our wallpaper. It was the only solution we could come up with," Soloway said. Murray said it's hard to assess pain in cats. After surgery, they are "walking around on stumps with stitches" and if they dig around in their litter, they can be in a lot of pain. The ASPCA opposes declawing, debarking, defanging, ear cropping and tail docking—any elective surgery done to conform to breed standard or eliminate undesirable behavior—except in extreme circumstances. For example, the health of a cat owner may be at risk if the owner has an immune system disorder or illness that leaves them susceptible to serious infection if scratched. Ninety percent of pet owners oppose removing a dog's vocal cords. Forty-seven percent would favor a law making the procedure illegal, while 44 percent would oppose a law. Last July, Massachusetts became the first state to ban elective devocalization surgeries for cats or dogs. Violations are punishable under the state's animal cruelty laws. Virginia lawmakers are considering a similar measure. Of dog owners who took part in the poll, only 1 percent reported having the procedure done on their pet. There was no difference between dog owners and others who were asked if it was OK -- 89 percent who own dogs said no. Veteran dog trainer and behaviorist Jonathan Klein of Culver City, Calif., would support a state ban on debarking because even though 90 percent sounds like a lot, it still means that for every 900,000 dog owners who oppose it, there are 100,000 who would not, he said. "Devocalization needs to stop, but we have to approach it through education," said Klein, who has trained nearly 7,500 dogs over the past 23 years. Debarking is a quick fix, but a good trainer can achieve the same result by working with a dog to find the cause instead of just looking at symptoms, he said. "Dogs bark for so many reasons that are beneficial to us," Klein said. Without the ability to bark, dogs can no longer communicate with humans or other animals. Many vets refuse to do debarking surgery. "Good for them," Klein said. Sharon Klawender, 70, of Kingston, Mich., does not object to declawing or debarking. Her two female cats, Treebark, going on 18, and Kisha, 4, are both declawed in the front because "we have a lot of wood in our house, so when we moved we didn't want them clawing up the woodwork." Neither cat has had a problem, Klawender said. Her older cat still goes outside and "she can still catch birds, so it hasn't stopped her as far as protection or prowling. She can still hunt." As for her decision to have the cats declawed, "I'm happy with it. It didn't affect the cats at all." Her dog, Grace, an English Lab mix, is 2 and barks very little. She has not had Grace's vocal cords removed, but "our neighbor has 40 dogs and quite a few of them are devocalized because of barking and howling," she said. Klawender would oppose laws against debarking or declawing because she believes those decisions should be left up to the owners. Soloway echoed that sentiment: "There's got to be a limit on how much government interferes." Thirty-two percent of the cat owners polled have had their pets declawed. Just over a third -- 36 percent—of all pet owners said declawing was "not OK," but only 18 percent say they would favor a law making the procedure illegal. Sixty percent would oppose a law. Cat owners are more apt than others to favor a law banning the declawing of cats -- 24 percent favor such a law, 16 percent strongly. Sullivan isn't one of them. She would oppose laws to ban declawing and debarking because there might be times when the surgeries would be needed for medical necessity, she said. Kim Berry, 39, of Columbus, Ohio, wouldn't have a cat because she's seen the damage they can do to furniture, cars and people. She and her husband, Kurt, had to give up Brutus, their Staffordshire terrier, last August when one son went to college and the other joined the Marine Corps. Brutus wasn't getting any attention, so he went to live with a friend. Now they have only three pet piranha fish. They hope to move to a bigger house and there will be another dog, Kim Berry said, and they won't take away his bark. "That's why I would want a dog, for him to bark, to be alert. ... I don't mind him barking because that's his way of communicating. Woof. That's what my kids associate with a dog." The AP-Petside.com Poll was conducted Oct. 13-20, 2010, by GfK Roper Public Affairs and Corporate Communications. It involved landline and cell phone interviews with 1,000 pet owners nationwide. Results for all pet owners have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.0 percentage points. Classifieds | Report A Typo | Send Tip | Get Alerts | See Click Fix (Copyright ©2011 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) Tags: national/worldThis entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Pets - Bing News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 comments:
Post a Comment