|
"They don't belong in the city." "They stink up and contaminate the park." "They represent danger." "They need to be removed and replaced."
.
Are the above inflammatory charges against Canada geese or other wildlife in city parks? Are they accusations by government bureaucracy, extermination companies or people who just don't like animals?
.
No and no.
.
Rather, they are charges against Central Park carriage horses. And they are alleged by people portending to champion "Animal Rights" and speak for the horses!
.
But if horses could speak, it is doubtful they would be pleased or agree with the derogatory and false charges against them. Nor, one supposes, would they want to be banished from the life and people they have come to know and the security that keeps them safe from auctions and killer buyers.
.
.
Nevertheless, the push to "rid" New York City of its beloved carriage horses and "replace" them with huge, ugly "E-cars" continues as witness this recent media and AR hype:
.
.
Personally speaking, I want to gag every time I see these hideous monstrosity "cars" and consider they might be added to already overly-congested Central Park as represented by thousands of regular cars, speeding bicycles, pedicabs and seemingly endless marathons.
.
But that they are being touted to replace beautiful, vibrant, majestic and very much living carriage horses is insult that is almost too painful to bear and nearly beyond belief.
.
It was less than a decade ago, when Central Park was home to hundreds of geese and ducks and even a number of mute swans. People were also regularly observed riding horses on the bridal path. And of course, the carriage horses have been a mainstay of Central Park since the park was built in the latter part of the nineteenth century.
.
But, in the wake of the "Miracle on the Hudson" in 2009 (which involved migratory, not "resident" geese), thousands of resident Canada geese have been rounded up from city parks (and even a wildlife "refuge") and either gassed or slaughtered with the excuse that they "may" represent "danger" to airliners. Remaining and surviving geese in city parks (including Central Park) have been endlessly harassed to the point we can now count resident CP geese in single digits.
.
The swans have long since vanished from Central Park (probably due to the year-round goose harassment which also discourages duck numbers). Moreover, there is presently a stated goal by the Department of Environmental Conservation to "eradicate" all wild mute swans in New York State by 2025 under the guise that the swans are "invasive." (There is presently a bill on Governor Cuomo's desk that would protect the swans over the next two years, but he has failed to sign it into law and is unlikely to do so. It seems most of the activity of local animal activists these days is unfortunately directed towards emptying Central Park of its carriage horses; rather than saving the swans or for that matter, any animals.)
.
With the closing of Claremont stables a few years ago, riding horses also disappeared from Central Park, though there are efforts now to restore horseback riding in CP. The problem is that most of the park has since been taken over by thousands of runners and cyclists and so it remains to be seen if the effort for riding horses will prove successful over the long haul.
.
But, out of all the animals that have come and gone from Central Park (or more accurately, been banished or pushed out), the carriage horses steadfastly remain.
.
The question is, for how long?
.
It is hard to understand any campaign that deems to "remove," "replace," "get rid of" or "eradicate" non-threatening wildlife or other animals from city parks and other properties.
.
But, it is even less understandable when pushed by self-described animal lovers or "Animal Rights" advocates.
.
Shouldn't the primary right of any animal be the right to continue living? -- Especially in an environment and situation where the animal is cared for, reasonably safe and protected?
.
It is sometimes said that, "The Road to Hell is Paved by Good Intentions."
.
Some years back, campaigns by well meaning activists resulted in horse slaughterhouses being shut down in this country.
.
That was a good development, yes?
.
Unfortunately, no.
.
Because the reality now is that instead of being killed in this country, horses are trucked hundreds or even thousands of miles to be slaughtered in Mexico or Canada where one can only guess at so-called "Humane Slaughter Laws" or even that they exist at all. Last year alone,142 thousand American horses made this horrifying journey to literal hell.
.
That we now have other self-described, "activists" crusading to "shut down" an industry that saves, rather than condemns the lives of horses, could be said to be another example of good intentions leading straight to hell.
.
How can one believe that adding 220 MORE horses to the huge pool of horses seriously needing homes or rescue is to the benefit of horses overall? Even if placement is found for NYC carriage horses, does that not condemn 220 other horses who might otherwise have benefited from and are in fact, desperate for such placement?
.
One wonders why these questions are not being asked, much less addressed?
.
Instead, the inflammatory animal charges continue unabated and go seemingly unchallenged by most in media and politics:
.
"The horses may cause an accident." ("The geese may fly into a plane.") "The horses are contaminated the park." ("The geese are messing up the parks.") "The horses don't belong in the city." ("The swans don't belong in New York State.")
.
But, how can such arguments (e.g. the same as otherwise adversaries) be coming from Animal Rights advocates? Is the "right" we're championing, the right for animals to be ostracized and eventually dead?
.
One cannot help but question whose side we as AR advocates are actually on. The animals or those who wish to banish animals from any place there are people?
.
Unfortunately, noting the push to "replace" the beautiful carriage horses of Central Park with huge, beastly E-cars, the answer to that question becomes tragically apparent. (Beauty vs. the Beast and seemingly losing.)
.
The paving of the road to hell has already begun despite the otherwise, noble intentions of its creators. -- PCA
.
.
.
************
2 comments:
You ask "...whose side we as AR advocates are actually on. The animals or those people who wish to banish animals from any place there are people." The problem you have is that "AR advocate" is a self description that has no meaning anymore. I certainly don't use it. It's been hijacked by people who apparently can't distinguish a cock fight (bad) from a horseback or carriage ride (nice). Ridiculous. We may be just country hicks where I live but the highest attraction to living here is the wildlife. There is a consequence to living with animals, sure. Outdoor cats don't fare well, or very long here (owls being the dominant threat), and if you're not paying attention maybe a rattlesnake will nail you. We don't eradicate them. From what you report, there are more Canada geese frequenting the little league field down the road here than in all of CP. And, yes, little girls ride horses around all the time. I guess that's a hazard. It's worth it. I suppose each community can design or sterilize itself as it sees fit. Hope they don't move here. Doug from the Gold Country, California.
To Doug from Gold Country" "All that was nice and is no more." Thanks for inspiring possible title for next blog entry. -- Or, (at least here in NYC) it could be the theme for the entire decade.
By the way, one small detail left out of blog: The last swan in Central Park was harassed from Harlem Meer a year ago, last April.
Yes, "All that was nice and is no more."
Post a Comment