1. Introduction.
2. Report.
3. Summary.
4. Reminiscence.
1. Introduction.
Annabel Osberg was kind enough to mail a hard copy of a press clipping from California.
She transmitted it with a note reading as follows:
***********
I thought you might be interested in the enclosed article, for it shows the pervasiveness of anti-waterfowl sentiment. This article was published in the Grapevine Press, August 2013 issue. It’s a newspaper local to Rancho Cucamonga, CA.
***********
I am at a loss as to the proper way to handle this clipping. I tried following to their website but access requires a subscription. The topic is such that I would anticipate that the publisher would be very happy to be quoted with a citation. So I am citing, using Anabel’s note to identify the publication and date.
2. Report.
“Rarewell Faithful Mallard Martyr
“For the past few months, we have published updates on the wild Mallard ducks that were making themselves at home in the backyards of several residents, who wrote to us complaining of droppings in swimming pools, stained plaster, and added time and expense for cleaning the pools. One resident wrote that ‘something is going to have to be done real soon about these ducks because I don’t know how much longer the residents in Red Hill can take care of them.’ Could this be a death threat?
“Update: As you can see from the picture, one of the Mallards was found lying on Vineyard Avenue, across from Red Hill Park, dead as a doornail. Surely this duck was not stupid enough to walk in the street, so he wasn’t run over. The ducks fly masterfully. Was he poisoned? We hope you residents are happy now. You got your wish. Farewell feathered friend.”
The report included a respectful photo of the deceased.
3. Summary.
Thank you Annabel.
4. Reminiscence.
The situation reminds me of a meeting which was conducted in a boat club on the banks of the Charles River with the Massachusetts Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in attendance.
I attended with a number of people.
The purpose of the meeting was how to handle the “Canada Goose Problem.”
I was thrown out of the meeting. I disagreed with the purpose of the meeting.
There is no Canada Goose problem on the Charles River in Boston / Cambridge, MA and there is no Mallard Duck problem in Rancho Cucamonga, CA.
The problem in both situations is people who demand that the world have the same state of cleanliness as their living rooms. That attitude strikes me as a very great symptom of sickness in the individuals in question. The individuals in question are the problem.
Those people with such irresponsible demands for the world around us should stay in their living rooms.
A very major additional problem is fake animal “protective” groups which prey on these sick people. These fake animal protective groups get paid to resolve non existent animal “problems” either directly or by soliciting donations for their falsely named groups. These fake groups are very major problems.
