“The cartoon generated a huge amount of filth, intolerable filth.”
– Senator Bill Napoli, sponsor of abortion ban, South Dakota
(Rapid City Journal)

Stephanie McMillan rocks.

Here is what I got for the December issue of The Noise, though it’s not just mine. This is the first time I’ve been able to co-write an article. I wrote this with fellow Noise compatriot, Sara Gamble. If the University simply said, “yeah, we test on animals; what r’ you gonna do about it?” this would have been much easier to write…

The atrocities discovered at Columbia University in 2003 revealed invasive surgeries leading to the death of baboons, other nonhuman primates, and many other animals. Some of the horrors include strokes artificially induced in baboons by removing their left eyeball to access and clamp a critical blood vessel, and monkeys with metal pipes surgically implanted in their skulls for the sole purpose of inducing stress in order to study connections between stress and women’s menstrual cycles. These animals were given nothing but aspirin for the pain, during or after the surgeries.

Some might argue that the torture of these animals is necessary for the progress of medical science, still the investigations revealed experiments that would be unnecessary by anyone’s standards. Experiments on the affects of nicotine (like we need to know nicotine is bad for us), morphine, as well as scores of pharmaceutical drugs (many of which are already on the market) continue to characterize animal research at Columbia.

Though Columbia University, a major research institution, may seem like the obvious poster-child for animal cruelty, the widespread use and abuse of animals in laboratories is dreadfully prevalent. Beyond the white walls and sterile atmosphere of many top research institutions, medical schools, pharmaceutical companies, and commercial facilities that provide test results to industry, the horrors do take place.

Nonhuman primates have been found with their brain exposed, some kept in isolation chambers wearing sensory deprivation devices that were installed at birth to study mental illnesses. Beagles have been found “debarked,” a procedure that basically rips the vocal chords out of dogs so researchers are not, as one website put it, “disturbed by the dog’s cries for attention.” Dogs, cats, rats, and others may have toxic chemicals poured on their skin, their eyes, and any other orifice that will yield quantifiable results that look pretty on research grant applications.

A nine-month investigation of IAMS dog food company revealed experiments involving chunks of muscle surgically removed from the thighs of dogs, and other experiments resulting in kidney failure, obesity, malnutrition, and severe allergic reactions. Proctor & Gamble, who owns IAMS, has been in the spotlight for their malicious tests on animals in the name of household chemicals and cosmetics as well.

Those working on this issue know that this list, unfortunately, goes on and on.

Many groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (P.E.T.A.), Stop Huntington Animal Cruelty (S.H.A.C.) and the Animal Liberation Front (A.L.F.) have brought significant and necessary attention to the way in which animals are treated behind locked doors. Northern Arizona University student and Animal Rights Now! (ARN!) campus president, Melanie Mauller has been a devoted animal rights activist for as long as she can remember and has helped to bring attention to this issue in Flagstaff.

“Growing up, I was always surrounded by all kinds of animals and never really viewed them as any different from myself.” After meeting like-minded folks in high school, and going vegan, she became active—educating people about the mistreatment of animals.

Not even a year old, ARN! has already accomplish a lot. Among other activities, ARN! has hosted a talk by Peter Young, who was recently released from prison after serving time for liberating thousands of mink from fur farms across the Midwest; they are also currently working with Sodexho, who provides campus food, to offer more vegan and vegetarian options, and they are also volunteering with Paw Placement.

Recently ARN! fell under Northern Arizona University’s paranoia radar (that’s NAU PR) when Ms. Mauller and others began asking questions about the University’s treatment of animals in its research labs.

Ever since ARN!’s questions have gained attention, the Biology Annex on Northern Arizona University’s campus has been shrouded in mystery. Even the University paper, The Lumberjack, referred to it as a building that “hardly resembles any of the other buildings; it is windowless apart from one widow on the side, shielded over by blinds” with signs that read “’DO NOT ENTER. THIS IS NOT A HALLWAY.’” Others have commented on the building’s cold cement floors and its locked, unmarked metal doors.

After weeks of persistence, ARN!’s questions were left unanswered. In fact, Ms. Mauller said that animal care supervisor Thomas Greene told her he was “indefinitely busy.” Eventually, Lisa Nelson of NAU Public Affairs responded, apologizing for the delay.

“Please know that any hesitation you may have encountered in getting a response from others is because people have legitimate safety and security concerns for themselves, the facility and the animals based on past acts of violence and vandalism around the country.” Not to discount Ms. Nelson’s concerns, but this is a good time to remind readers that even the most radical of activists, even those who have served prison time, have never harmed a living thing—human or nonhuman.

Ms. Nelson’s sentiments reflecting faculty concern for vandalism, however, hold more water. Laboratories across the country have been spray painted, smashed up, or even burned to the ground in an effort to free the animals and ensure the cruelty will not continue. In the film, Behind The Mask, the illuminating documentary on the Animal Liberation Front, animal rights icon Rod Coronado, who served four years for a series of fur farm raids in the early 90’s, explains the reasoning behind such vandalism. If animals are taken from laboratories, “all a researcher has to do is get on the phone…and order more research animals and they’ll be there within a week. It was because of that that we started employing arson.”

Unsatisfied with the glossy answers she received, which the NAU Public Affairs office called “well worded responses to inquiries,” and a lack of meaningful dialogue with those directly involved in research, Mauller and ARN! decided to hold a demonstration in front of the Biology Annex on November 5th.

Before the demonstration, NAU’s Public Affairs office sent an email out to faculty. “In recent months animal rights activity has increased here at NAU.” The email went on to warn faculty about the upcoming protest and suggested faculty “avoid these protesters if possible” and that police dressed in plain clothes would be keeping an eye on the protest.

Ms. Mauller, who also works at NAU, was forwarded an email that was sent to her boss that referred to her as a “threat to the university” and advised that if her activities continued she should be fired. The email also mentioned that President Haeger shares these views.

Still there are two big differences here that maybe NAU doesn’t see. ARN! wanted straight forward answers to simple questions and Melanie is not Rod Coranado. The demonstration was obviously peaceful and even included several faculty members who share ARN!’s concern for the animals and frustration with the lack of communication from the University on this issue.

Even after the demonstration, the intimidation and threats continued. A few days later Ms. Mauller attended a demonstration against Snowbowl and was approached by a police officer who, without knowing Melanie personally, said, “how are you doing today, Ms. Mauller?” Though the officer approached her in a friendly way, the message was clear: We’re watching you; we know who you are. It was “totally creepy,” said Mauller. “We are not given answers, we are ignored, we are intimidated…all of which would lead most people to become very suspicious of what’s really going on.”

This is how research facilities bring vandalism and threats of sabotage upon themselves. Every single instance where a lab has been raided and vandalized, first people simply asked questions. When questions are left unanswered, and activists are ignored and intimidated, it is quite predictable that they will look to more radical approaches.

So, what exactly is going on with the animals at NAU? Despite not talking to ARN!, research faculty at NAU did address questions from The Noise.

The first issue worth addressing is the difference between animal testing and animal research. At first, one might suspect this to be a cop out. For example, a logger who makes a living by deforesting the world’s remaining old growth isn’t going to admit their actions are “deforestation” at all. In order to sleep at night, they are “developing natural resources.” Still, the trees end up dead no matter what. On the surface, it seems as though a similar rhetorical trick might be at work here. However, this is not the case.

According to a recent editorial to The Lumberjack, signed by seven members of NAU’s research faculty, “There is no “animal testing” at NAU, in the sense of using animals as surrogates for humans in testing the safety or efficacy of different products. There is, however, a wide variety of research that uses animals.”

Although university research is held to more stringent animal care standards than other private firms or for-profit companies, there is an element of ambiguity surrounding the issue because the public cannot see what’s going on inside the Biological Sciences Annex. “There’s an important reason why those doors are locked” according to Lee Drickamer, NAU Interim Vice President for Research and Regents’ Professor, “Nowhere in the country are people allowed into, at universities, the animal quarters or approved facilities and that’s for two reasons: one is to protect your health, and perhaps even more importantly to protect the health of the animals.” According to NAU’s Assistant Director of the Office of Public Affairs, Thomas Bauer, “federal regulations prohibit visitors to the [animal research] facility.”

Animal research at NAU is funded by grant money, mostly from the federal government and institutions like the National Science Foundation. Drickamer estimates that about 100-200 laboratory mice, 100 laboratory rats, six ducks, 12-15 varieties of reptiles and amphibians, a small colony of opossums and several dozen fish are currently in use at the University. Rodents come from companies such as Jackson Laboratories, while other animals are brought in from the wild, or bred on site. Research on these animals includes the study of the development and evolution of the jaw apparatus, the role of uranium as an estrogen blocker and oxygen levels in the respiratory systems and hearts of ducks.

According to Drickamer, much of the animal research at NAU is done for the further conservation and understanding of animals, the rest of it is bio-medical, wherein animals are used as models for understanding the functions of human beings. “The welfare of the animals is our primary concern, because we don’t get good answers, we’re essentially wasting the lives of some of those rats or mice if we’re not doing things properly—caring for them properly, doing all the other parts of the research process properly.”

Part of the tension between animal researchers and animal rights activists lies in this understanding of “welfare.” Wherein researcher’s primary concern for the animals lies in the quality of “answers” received from test results, animal rights activists see animals’ lives as no less important than our own. Indeed, nobody can claim that the life of a lab rat means any less to that rat than our own lives mean to us. The “welfare” of the animals lies in understanding that all animals, whether they are born in the wild or in a laboratory, have a right to an autonomous life. This logic applies to zoos, to factory farms, and any other scenario where nonhuman animals are exploited.

Drickamer went on to say, “If we accept the premise that animals are necessary as testing or research models for doing things related to human health or their own health or to conservation, then there will be animals used in research, but our first goal then is to make sure that they’re healthy.”

The Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) requires that an animal-use protocol be completed and approved before the acquisition of any vertebrate animal for laboratory purposes. Locally, a committee including a community member and non scientists will review these protocols. The Animal Welfare Act, on which this protocol is partially based, covers only warm-blooded, vertebrate animals but excludes laboratory raised mice and rats among other animals, however NAU’s policy extends to all vertebrate animals, warm or cold blooded, born in a laboratory or in the wild. (More information on the regulations and procedures can be found at the University’s research page.

Another, more obvious, point of tension between animal researchers and animal rights activists lies in a difference in perception. Animal rights activists, by and large, do not accept the premise that “animals are necessary as testing or research models.”

On the one hand, researchers will tell you that there is work being done to find alternatives to using animals. Included in the IACUC protocol are provisions to prevent unnecessary animal research— this includes avoiding redundant, excessive, or unduly painful research. ‘The Three R’s of Animal Research’ are followed: 1. Reduce—use the fewest animals necessary to obtain statistical significance. 2. Refine—use less painful or invasive techniques. 3. Replace—replace animals with non-animal systems (computer models, tissue culture, etc.).

Still the clash of perception runs deeper than the content of any protocol. For example, as mentioned above, many of the mice delivered to NAU for research are from Jackson Laboratories; according to their website, they aren’t actually individual mice with individual, autonomous lives at all. Instead they are branded “JAX® Mice.” As long as they are JAX® Mice, they will be treated like JAX® Mice. But of course they are rodents just the same, no different than one you might find scurrying into a hole as you approach in the woods. The difference is this: the one you see in the woods is living the life it was meant to live, while JAX® Mice are bred specifically for the use of humans.

Drickamer echoed the sentiments of many of those who support animal research. “You go to the doctor and you get a prescription for an antibiotic, in an indirect sense, you’re saying that animal research is okay.” Applied to other scenarios, however, major holes in this logic are revealed. For example, if you go to the store and purchase toilet paper, does that mean you think deforestation is okay? If you’re cold and need to buy a jacket, does that mean you’re okay with child labor?

As Mauller explained, we’re privileged enough “not to realize that [our] actions have costs and we live in a society that tells us it’s okay to be naive to those consequences.” This ‘priviledged life’ depends on a profound disconnect between production and consumption, which means that even discovering the social and environmental ramifications of our choices and purchases is often difficult to do, and avoiding products or actions that directly cause harm to other living beings is even more challenging.

In his book, The Culture of Make Believe, author and activist Derrick Jensen wrote, regarding our inescapable and systematic connection with exploitation, “No matter how clear my perception or how pure my intent, as a consumer in a global economy I’m still drawn into situations that as a human I find abhorrent.”

The point is, just because we’re dependent on a system that is based on exploitation doesn’t make us personally accountable for it. Illuminating this exploitation, however, does give us the responsibility to stop it.

I’m working on a larger two-part writing project about how bike punx will save the world.

The other night, I did a free-write on why I love riding my bike, just to prepare. Here it is.

Why do I love riding my bike? That’s a silly question: it’s just fun. That’s why you “ride” a bike while you “drive” a car. But there is much more than that. Being a cyclist is not just an activity, it’s a lifestyle, an ideology. Riding a bike is freedom. You might own your vehicle, but in my book, as long as you’re pumping gas into it, you’re still paying rent. I get by on my own steam; I know all the best short cuts, and I’m never “stuck in traffic.” I feel healthy and strong yet I never have to make a point to exercise.

I don’t have to rely on anyone, any system, or any roads to go where I want. I ride guilt free knowing that my transportation method is not contributing anything negative to my environment. Nor is the fuel necessary to operate my bike one that shapes foreign policy decisions or help to destroy indigenous and nonhuman communities the world over.

The movement of the bike is perfectly engineered to compliment the natural motion of my body. I hate the wind, but I like that I am affected by the weather. This makes me feel more human, more connected to myself and the world around me. I know every bump, curve, and hill from my daily commute as well as I know my bike, which I regard as an extension of my own body.

I don’t need a license to ride. I don’t pay taxes, nor is my bike registered (though technically, it needs to be registered). I don’t need insurance; I deal with my minor injuries and repairs and learn deeply from them.

In truth the world-view of a cyclist is much different than that of a motorist. We think locally. Our perception of time and space is grounded in physical reality. We’re more acutely and intimately affected by the world around us.

Event #1

Myra’s Women’s and Gender Studies 191 class is doing a fund raiser, sponsored in part by Northland Family Help Center.

WHAT: Film Screening of- Hip-Hop: Beyond Beats & Rhymes by Byron Hurt

WHEN: Monday, November 19th at 7pm (doors open at 6:30pm)

WHERE: Gardener Auditorium (First floor of the new Business Building on South Campus Room 101)

The first goal if this event is to raise funds for the new Indigenous Youth
Media Center & Infoshop Bookstore. The class is suggesting a $2 donation;
there will also be a book list in which you can buy a book for the infoshop.

Event #2

WHAT: The PEACE Project is performing!

WHERE: Northern Arizona University Studio Theatre

(College of Arts and Letters- between the parking garage and cline library
on North Campus)

WHEN: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 at 7pm (doors open at 6:30pm)

Let me know if you have any questions.

My tail light recently fell off my bike and shattered on the pavement. Carrying that thing around was just another thing to worry about anyway.

“okay, I’m late; I’ve got my helmet, my head lamp, my lock, gloves, hat, change of shoes…blah blah.” I think these lights are a pretty good partial-solution to the havoc of accessories.

Designed especially for drop bars, these ingenious little lights are easy to install and replace the end plugs in your current handlebar.

-Super bright red LEDs can be seen for up to a mile away
-Flashing or steady modes
-Batteries included

A Benefit for the Indigenous Youth Media Arts Center/Infoshop
and a Celebration of Indigenous Resistance!
Friday, November 23rd
6:30 p.m. $4-7 Donation
At the Youth Media Arts Center/Infoshop
1926 N. 4th St. #7B - Flagstaff, AZ

Last night, I heard a women getting yelled at on her bike by a driver. He said, “get the hell over to the right side before you get hit!” There was a bunch of rocks and broken glass in the bike lane and she was avoiding it. Just a reminder to motorists, according to Arizona state traffic laws for bikes, bicyclists have the right to a full lane under the following unavoidable and frequent circumstances:

28-815. Riding on roadways and bicycle paths; prohibition of motor vehicle traffic on bike paths

A. A person riding a bicycle on a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except under any of the following situations:
1. If overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.
2. If preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
3. If reasonably necessary to avoid conditions, including fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals or surface hazards.
4. If the lane in which the person is operating the bicycle is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.

I have become intimately acquainted with the “freedom complex” many freshmen comp students feel upon hearing the phrase, “write about whatever the hell you want.” I always hated having to pick a paper topic from a list generated by my instructor because there is an obvious difference between freedom and choices. Nonetheless, many of my students thought it would be a good idea if I came up with a list of topic ideas.

I said I would, though reiterated that any list I came up with would be topics I would be interested in reading or writing myself. The following topics would be of interest to me either because I’ve already formed an opinion on the topic (which should be pretty apparent) or they are framed around real questions that I have.

So the list is meant to generate ideas for them. They are, of course, free to choose (or modify) one of my topics. I just hope everyone settles on something they’re passionate about. I encouraged them to generate their own list; here is mine–everything from serious to ridiculous.

50 loaded questions

1. Can uranium be mined on the Navajo reservation while still maintaining and
respecting human rights?
2. Are social networking sites like myspace and facebook further separating
us, both from ourselves and the real world (hmmm, what is the real world anyway?)?
3. Is the “green speak” rhetoric of advertisements for “eco-friendly” products
misleading to consumers?
4. There is a lot of emphasis lately on individual consumption choices (i.e.
take shorter showers, change your light-bulbs to CFL’s, buy a hybrid, recycle…etc). Is it right for individual citizens to take responsibility when agriculture and industry use way more resources than citizens ever could?
5. Should we continue to produce petroleum based plastic bags?
6. Cancer is now the leading cause of death (recently surpassing heart
disease). Is cancer a disease of civilization? (i.e. are the majority of the cancer’s we face today the result of our own actions, such as the toxification of our environment? Or is there some hereditary explosion?)
7. Is the sound quality better on vinyl or digital recordings?
8. Are women exploited in hip hop videos?
9. What kind of man is represented through contemporary advertisements (for
this one, you might focus on one ad campaign: i.e. the Mitchem Man ads, Jim Beam ads, Toyota Tacoma ads…etc.). Is this representation a positive one?
10. Would our country be better off without a two party system?
11. Is representative democracy the best form of democracy?
12. Does the designated hitter rule in baseball allow for coaches to sidestep
difficult decisions?
13. Is animal testing still helpful in progressing science? 14. Should traffic laws be changed to address bicyclists? (an example of the
“pro” side might be: Bicycles should be able to treat stop signs as yield
signs and traffic lights as stop signs.)
15. Should all major roads be equipped with bike lanes?
16. Does globalization exploit third world workers and destroy communities?
17. Is the electricity provided by dams worth the destruction of the river and
the species that rely on free flowing rivers to survive (such as salmon, steelhead, sturgeon…etc)?
18. Should Lake Powell be drained?
19. Is Starbucks as ethical as they promote themselves to be?
20. Should water from the Navajo aquifer be used to carry raw coal
from the Black Mesa mine to the Peabody coal plant? (stoppeabody.org)
21. Is bio-technology a good idea?
22. Has Hot Topic exploited the aesthetics of the punk rock subculture to make money?
23. When public schools are cutting their budget, art and music are
notoriously the first to go. What does that say about what our culture values?
24. Regarding anarchism, Alexander Berkman said, “I must tell you, first of
all, what anarchism is not. It is not bombs, disorder, or chaos. It is not robbery or murder. It is not a war of each against all. It is not a return to barbarianism or to the wild state of man. Anarchism is the very opposite of all that.” If it’s not disorder and chaos, what is it? What is the difference between anarchism, the political philosophy, and anarchism, the stereotype?
25. A recent U.N Report concluded that emissions from the industrial meat
industry (i.e. factory farms…etc.) contribute more to global warming than world wide transportation emissions (from cars, planes…etc.). Why all the emphasis on changing transportation habits and not much on eating habits? (Google: “Vegetarian is the new Prius” for an essay that discusses this).
26. Should police officers be better trained to respectfully handle gender
violence issues?
27. Environmental racism: is it right to place toxic industry near low income
housing or vice versa?
28. What are the benefits of xeriscaping your yard (utilizing native plants
for landscaping, xeriscape.org) verses planting items based simply on aesthetic appeal?
29. Has technology decreased our use of paper? (Many sources I’ve read have
actually said that technology has resulted in increased paper use/wastage). 30. Is it important to support local businesses? Why? How do local businesses enrich small towns like Flagstaff?
31. Are people with tattoos and piercings wrongfully stereotyped in our
culture? Why? Where did this craze come from? How is it treated in other cultures?
32. Does a consumerist culture promote unattainable happiness?
33. Could capitalism function without a lower class? If not (or not in the
same way) how does our society guarantee a steady supply of low income workers?
34. Should American businesses offer a “paternity leave” for new fathers? (NAU
doesn’t even offer maternity leave, btw.)
35. Apple computers v. PC’s, the never-ending debate…
36. Remember when we all knew each other’s phone numbers? Has the rise of
cell-phone culture been a positive change in society or a negative one?
37. I heard that the removal of body hair in our culture is linked to
prostitution—that early prostitutes started shaving their body hair to appear like younger girls. They did this to extend their own profitability as younger girls “sold” better. It would be interesting to read a paper delving into this
issue. Hell, you could also write about why younger girls “sell” better in the
first place.
38. Is “the American Dream” (and you’ll have to define it, and quote others)
compatible with a living planet? Why or why not?
39. Who is the best presidential candidate for 2008? (Careful with this one;
it’s probably a harder paper to write than you think!)
40. Does legalized gambling reinforce a false “something for nothing” mentality that is destructive to our perception of true value?
41. Can coozies? I’m for ‘em!
42. Should the legal driving age be moved up to 65, with the exception of the
handicapped, public transportation, ambulances, and pizza delivery?
43. Are police unnecessary if we build community? (You would obviously have to
define community with quotes..etc).
44. Isn’t Nicholas Cage the worst actor ever? 45. Wouldn’t Flagstaff be a great candidate for wind and solar power?
46. What are anti-oxidants anyway? What foods have them and why are they
important?
47. Do zoo’s allow us to develop relationships with nonhuman animals or do
they reinforce our power over them?
48. Is it hard to start mulching your biodegradable trash?
49. Is the usage of the word “terrorist” today similar to the way in which the
word “communist” was used in our countrys’ past?
50. I have observed a serge in “superhero” films after the 911 tragedy. Could
these films be a response to the attacks some how?

Come out and support Flagstaff’s newest Flagstaff’s newest Indigenous established community space.

Youth Media Arts Center & Infoshop Bookstore Presents:

FILM NIGHT
Every Tuesday in November!
1926 N. 4th St. #7B - Flagstaff, AZ
(In the Pine Grove Shopping Center Near Hunan East)

Nov. 15th - 6:30PM - Film screening: “EL NORTE” and Discussion of Border
Justice. Join us for this report back from the No Borders Camp.

Nov. 20th - 6:00PM - “BEYOND OIL: 8 Shorts

Nov. 27th - 6:00PM - “THE END OF SUBURBIA: Oil Depletion and the Collapse of
The American Dream”
The End of Suburbia explores the American Way of Life and its prospects as the
planet approaches a critical era, as global demand for fossil fuels begins to
outstrip supply. World Oil Peak and the inevitable decline of fossil fuels are
upon us now, some scientists and policy makers argue in this documentary.

I went biking in the woods with a friend of mine yesterday. She took a nasty spill going downhill. She got a slight concussion even with the helmet. It was pretty scary; she was unconscious for a minute, woke up and asked me the same 5 questions over and over again. She wanted to keep going, but I only have one rule when I’m biking: a concussion ends the day.