RoguePundit

Dogs as Livestock

Kooskia is a small town in the panhandle of Idaho, roughly 50 miles NE of Hell's Canyon.  From there, one can head east on U.S. Highway 12 along the Middle Fork of the Clearwater River, which was designated a National Wild & Scenic River back in 1968.  When one combines civilization and conservation like that, there can be problems.

The Parks bought the property, seven miles upriver from Kooskia, in 1989. They put in the kennel and began breeding champion German shorthair hunting dogs, and they also operate a nonprofit German shorthair rescue operation.

In 1998, Forest Service officials notified the Parks that the kennel violated terms of the easement because it was an unauthorized commercial use.

...

The kennel property is along private land subject to an easement under the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.  While the easement allows for livestock farming, the forest service claimed dogs and commercial kennels didn't qualify and that the business should not be allowed to operate.

The legal battle has been long and contentious, nearly bankrupting the Parks.  U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge had originally ruled for the National Forest Service, but the Parks prevailed upon appeal to the 9th Circuit Court.  It turns out that "livestock" is a rather ambiguous term.  Thus, Judge Lodge had to revise his ruling.

"Under the facts of this case, the court finds that the dogs being used on the easement property for breeding, hunting and boarding are dogs being used for work and/or profit and can be considered livestock under the plain meaning of the term livestock," Lodge wrote.

...

"A family dog that does not work on the farm, is not bred, or is not used to help produce food when a person hunts, is just a family pet and is not livestock," he wrote.

This would seem to open the door to other forms of livestock, such as reindeer, ostriches, and maybe even mink.

Elayne Murphy, a spokeswoman for the Clearwater National Forest, ... said it's too early to determine if the agency will modify its easement language in response to the conclusion that dogs in certain cases can be classified as livestock.

Something tells me that animal rights groups will soon be after the National Forest Service on this topic. 

And He Took Videos

This kid in the following obviously has zoophilia issues.  Wonder if he's ever had sex with his own species.

Brandon Vongthongthrip is being held in jail in lieu of $70,500 bail. He was arraigned this afternoon in Multnomah County Circuit Court under accusations of 23 counts of aggravated animal abuse and sexual assault of an animal.

Authorities were alerted to the alleged abuse by an anonymous call to the Oregon Humane Society on April 24. An employee there called Gresham police, because Vongthongthrip lives in the city with his mother and her fiance.

Detectives discovered "numerous" photos of Vongthongthrip and Rocky, an 8-year-old red nose American Pit Bull, on the Internet, said Sgt. Mike LeDuc.

"This guy had posted pictures of himself with his dog doing some pretty ugly things," LeDuc said.

According to a court affidavit filed Friday, Vongthongthrip told police he had been having sex with the pit bull for the last four to five years and posting videos of it on the Internet. Gresham detectives located the videos and viewed them before arresting Vongthongthrip. On at least one posting last month on an Internet Website, Vongthongthrip solicited advice on other ways of sexually abusing the animal, the affidavit says.

Advice?  The dog is understandably being examined by a vet.

Bitter Antifreeze

Each year, thousands of pets are poisoned (accidentally or otherwise) by drinking the ethylene glycol found in many antifreezes. 

For a medium sized dog, ingestion of about 2 ounces (3-4 tablespoons ) is toxic. For cats, as little as 1/4 of an ounce (1-2 teaspoons) can be lethal.

In the previous decade, Oregon was the first state to require that a small amount of the tremendously bitter compound denatonium benzoate (DB) be added to antifreeze and windshield washer fluid.  DB can also be added to methanol to denature it.  Soon, British Columbia will require DB in antifreeze.

A new regulation mandating the use of the bittering agent denatonium benzoate, will be effective Jan. 1, 2011.

“The sweet taste of antifreeze is a major reason for the accidental—often fatal—ingestion of toxic antifreeze by pets, wildlife and young children,” Environment Minister Barry Penner said in a news release.

“By making it mandatory to add an extremely bitter substance to the product, we will make it less appealing, reducing its likelihood of being consumed in significant quantities.”

However, not all animal groups are on board with such changes.  For instance, the ASPCA is officially neutral on the subject.

Product manufacturers as well as some humane groups are proposing to protect pets and people from antifreeze poisoning by adding a bitter, taste-aversive agent such as denatonium benzoate (Bitrex®) to ethylene glycol-containing automobile antifreeze, and federal legislation has been proposed to this effect. While the ASPCA supports the concept of protecting companion animals from known poisons through taste aversion, there is as yet no published data demonstrating the efficacy of Bitrex, or any other taste-aversive substance, in the dog. In fact, The ASPCA’s Animal Poison Control Center (APCC) regularly receives calls involving dogs who have consumed mouse poison containing denatonium benzoate.

The APCC and dog owners are well aware of the fact that dogs will eat unlikely substances in alarming quantities. The ASPCA is concerned that antifreeze containing a taste-aversive substance that was specifically added to protect dogs would be marketed as “safer,” thus causing pet owners to relax their vigilance with regard to handling and storing this potentially lethal product. In the meantime, the APCC is on the front lines working with Orphan Medical, the company that manufactures Antizol-VetTM, the antidote for antifreeze poisoning, to keep life-saving medical care and advice available.

Some antifreezes are instead based upon propylene glycol.  That compound is safer, but it still has some toxicity.  Also note that used antifreezes can contain additional hazardous substances.

During use, antifreeze can become contaminated with traces of benzene and lead. Used antifreeze should never be disposed of down storm drains or surface waters. It is illegal and dangerous to discharge antifreeze to septic tanks, dry wells or to the outdoors.

Due to its composition, used antifreeze can be considered a hazardous waste. However, if used antifreeze is recycled, it doesn't need to be treated as hazardous waste. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has determined that antifreeze that is recycled and managed in accordance to Best Management Practices (BMPs) generally will not exhibit hazardous waste characteristics and will not need to be handled as hazardous waste.

You may be able to discharge your used antifreeze to a water treatment facility (with prior approval from the facility). However, many water treatment plants prohibit the disposal of antifreeze because of the potential of damaging the system.

By the by, some decorative snow globes also contain a bit of ethylene glycol. 

PETA is Murder

As I've noted before, PETA believes that it's better to kill pets than to have them owned by people.  PETA kills a lot of animals.  I'm sure to its chagrin, PETA has to document its mass murder and provide that information to the state of Virginia--where it's headquartered--each year.  The following summarizes the ugly toll from 1998 through 2008.    

According to public records from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, PETA killed 2,124 pets last year and placed only seven in adoptive homes. Since 1998, a total of 21,339 dogs and cats have died at the hands of PETA workers.

Plus last year, there were 243 "other companion animals" that were euthanized.  

Despite having a $32 million budget, PETA does not operate an adoption shelter. PETA employees make no discernible effort to find homes for the thousands of pets they kill every year. Last year, the Center for Consumer Freedom petitioned Virginia’s State Veterinarian to reclassify PETA as a slaughterhouse.

CCF Research Director David Martosko said: “PETA hasn’t slowed down its hypocritical killing machine one bit, but it keeps browbeating the rest of society with a phony ‘animal rights’ message. What about the rights of the thousands of dogs, cats, puppies, and kittens that die in PETA’s headquarters building?”

As we know from the trial I blogged about at the first link, animals were being picked up by PETA employees at local humane societies and killed in the vehicle before it even left the parking lot.  The corpses are ordinarily stored in a big freezer in the PETA headquarters and periodically cremated by bulk contract.  Ironically, it's PETA's Vice President of Cruelty Investigations--Daphna Nachminovitch--who oversees the slaughter.  Yet in a press release yesterday...

After thousands of votes were tallied, Rusty beat out nine other finalists to be crowned the winner of PETA's first-ever Cutest Mutt Alive contest. Rusty, whose guardian is 35-year-old Wheeling resident Debbie Lamlech, edged out nearly 1,000 other lovable mutts to become a finalist. PETA created the contest to show that all dogs are created equal--and that the kindest thing a person can do for a dog is to adopt a mutt from an animal shelter. (And, as the first family is about to prove, even purebreds can be adopted from animal shelters and breed rescue organizations.)

...

"Rusty proves that adopting a mutt can fill your life with a joy and love that words can't express," says PETA Vice President Daphna Nachminovitch. "All rescued mutts are winners in PETA's book because they were saved by people who love them for who they are."

Murderous hypocrite.

Less Concerned About Human Welfare (Updated)

Almost two weeks ago, a cougar was spotted resting up a tree in an Ashland neighborhood.  Authorities knew that several domesticated animals had disappeared in recent days, adding concern that the cougar was comfortable in town.  The neighborhood wasn't near a wild area that would give the cougar a ready escape route if flushed.  So, the authorities hemmed and hawed, and finally made the decision to shoot it. 

Here's why capturing made no sense...and yes I know that some people disagree with ODFW.  

Even if police had tranquilized the cougar, it would have later been killed by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Vargas said. The agency does not relocate cougars because they have a tendency to return to the places where they were tranquilized and because they are already overpopulated in the state, he said.

Knowing Ashland, it's not surprising that a number of residents are still discussing what could have been done for the cougar...which was found to have two animal collars in its stomach. 

UPDATE:  The Ashland Police Chief now says that there weren't any collars in the cougar's stomach...he was misinformed.  Continuing...

This particular example caught my eye for what wasn't said.    

Speaking Tuesday before the [Ashland] City Council, Sally Mackler, wildlife chair of the Sierra Club's Oregon Chapter, said that because the cougar wasn't acting aggressively, officials should have cleared people from the area and let the animal leave in peace. She added that other states have policies that allow for non-aggressive cougars to be relocated.

"I know public safety is an issue, but I'm just suggesting that there may be other ways to deal with this and even prevent it in the future, using non-lethal solutions," she said, adding that educating Ashland residents about what to do in the event of a cougar sighting would likely reduce the number of dangerous incidents.

I'm not sure why the reporter failed to mention that Sally Mackler is also a long-time animal rights activist in this area and elsewhere.  For instance, she's "active with the Humane USA PAC, Oregon Chapter."  As one might suspect, this PAC is connected to the Humane Society of the U.S., a radical animal rights group.

Humane USA has been formed by leaders of major animal protection organizations, including The Humane Society of the United States, The Fund for Animals, Farm Sanctuary, ASPCA, Doris Day Animal League, Animal Welfare Institute, The Ark Trust, Animal Rights Foundation of Florida, and others. Its board or directors, advisory board, and advisors are top grassroots and national animal protection leaders.

...

Because of their charitable status with the Internal Revenue Service, other animal protection groups--such as The HSUS and Farm Sanctuary--are legally barred from endorsing candidates. Humane USA is the only national animal protection group that is allowed to participate in candidate election campaigns.

Humane USA publishes an annual scorecard of how Senators and Representatives vote on and support initiatives that potentially impact animal welfare.  In 2008, DeFazio was tops in the Oregon delegation, scoring 100+.  Sponsoring pro-animal legislation got him the extra credit.

Learning About Animal Guardians

The city council members in Ukiah CA (the Mendocino County seat) have been learning about animal rights activism.  

The debate began in December after a Ukiah woman suggested changing “owner” to “guardian” during a discussion of other changes in the Animal Control ordinance.

Jan Allegretti, co-author of a book on holistic animal care, said the terminology change would encourage people to hold animals in higher esteem and to treat them better. A majority of the council, believing it would be an innocuous and positive alteration, directed city staff to draft a proposal with the change.

But by the time they revisited the proposal in January, it was clear that “guardian” was a highly charged word that some people associate with radical animal rights groups’ efforts to liberate animals from human constraints.

The only people who don't associate use of the term guardian with animal rights activism are folks who haven't devoted any attention to the subject.  This seemingly innocuous initiative is part of a gradual effort by zealots to prevent people from owning animals, including as pets. 

So the council directed staff to replace guardian with “owner/guardian” in the proposed ordinance.

Again the controversy persisted, despite assurances from City Attorney Dave Rapport that the term guardian — defined as owner in the ordinance — made no legal changes to pet ownership.

Critics of the change remained concerned that using “guardian” instead of “owner” could affect the rights of animal owners, government regulators and even veterinarians.

While animal rights groups occasionally do good things when it comes to the humane treatment of animals, don't forget that their view of humane can be rather warped.  For instance, PETA's leadership openly asserts that it's more humane to euthanize animals than offer them for adoption (previous blogs here and here). 

Daphna Nachminovitch, who's since been promoted to PETA Vice President, testified in 2007 that the organization employs people to collect animals from shelters, immediately euthanize them, and have them cremated...at the time, she supervised it.  PETA pays to cremate over a ton of animals--mostly healthy, adoptable animals--per month, gathered from the region around Norfolk VA.  Nachminovitch asserted this was legal because when PETA signed for the animals, it owned them.  Some guardians...

The Ukiah City Council on Wednesday dumped a controversial proposal to change the term pet “owner” to “owner/guardian” in its Animal Control ordinance.

The proposal “has undermined the council’s credibility,” said Councilwoman Mari Rodin.

The council, on a 4-1 vote, instead adopted a non-binding resolution that simply encourages residents to use the term “caretaker” when referring to pet owners, an effort to promote kindness to animals.

We don't want cultists helping to craft animal welfare laws.

Random Nature #202

Surprising Ancestry:  People have long known that black wolves are much more common in North America than elsewhere.  Now with the help of DNA testing, we know why...a bit of domestication.

The scientists used molecular genetic techniques to analyze DNA sequences from 150 wolves, about half of them black, in Yellowstone National Park, which covers parts of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho. They found that a novel mutated variant of a gene in dogs, known as the K locus, is responsible for black coat color and was transferred to wolves through mating.

The biologists are unsure of when the black coat color was transferred from dogs to wolves, but they believe it was not a recent occurrence; the black coat could not have spread as widely as it has throughout North America in just a few hundred years, they say. They suspect the transfer took place sometime before the arrival of Europeans to North America and involved dogs that were here with Native Americans.

...

"Although genes that evolve under domestication may be transferred to wild species, they generally do not proliferate in the wild because the natural context is so different from that under domestication," Wayne said. "No one would have guessed that the common black coat color in North American wolves came from dogs — there is no precedent for it. Moreover, for whatever reason, the transfer of the black coat-color gene from dogs to wolves and its success in the wild occurred uniquely in North America.

But for instance with camels and horses, it's different...nearly all of what's found in the wild are feral, domesticated animals (previous blogs here and here).  

"Apparently, natural selection has increased the frequency of black coat color dramatically in wolf populations across North America," Wayne said. "It must have adaptive value that we don't yet understand. It could be camouflage, or strengthening the immune system to combat pathogens, or it could reflect a preference to mate with individuals of a different coat color."

...

"We're trying to figure out whether the black coat color provides a fitness or behavioral advantage," she added, noting that Yellowstone National Park has a wealth of observational data that "we can integrate with our genetic data.

Natural selection doesn't come with guarantees. 

Not So Wild:  It's thought that donkeys--sometimes called burros--are domesticated versions of the African wild ass.  Recent research on skeletons from a funerary in Egypt has provided the earliest evidence thus far of that domestication.     

The research team examined the 5,000-year-old Abydos skeletons along with 53 modern donkey and African wild ass skeletons. Analysis showed that the Abydos metacarpals were similar in overall proportions to those of wild ass, but individual measurements varied. Mid-shaft breadths resembled wild ass, but mid-shaft depths and distal breadths were intermediate between wild ass and domestic donkey.

Despite this, all the Abydos skeletons exhibited a range of wear and other pathologies on their bones consistent with load carrying. Morphological similarities to wild ass show that despite their use as beasts of burden, donkeys were still undergoing considerable phenotypic change during the early dynastic period in Egypt. This pattern is consistent with recent studies of other domestic animals that suggest that the process of domestication is slower and more complicated than had been previously thought.

There are only about 570 African wild asses left in the wild.  They live in the Horn of Africa.

More Domesticated Imports:  The Old World is home to all members of the swine family (Suidae).  Our native javelina (the collared peccary, also sometimes called a musk hog) is in a different family and can't interbreed with the various domesticated pigs and boars that have escaped or been released here.  

Feral swine are found in much of the South, plus various parts of the Midwest, West, and New England (map here)...and Hawaii.  For whatever reason, that map doesn't make clear their presence in Oregon.  So here are a couple of maps of where they can be found...the first is from 2004 and the second is from ODF's webpage on them.

The estimate is that there are somewhere betwen 500 and 2000 feral swine in the state, with the majority of them probably on private land.  From an article in the most recent Eugene Weekly:

Most of the swine that have been spotted were found on private land. Given the nature of the pigs — an aggressive, land destroying, livestock-killing, disease-carrying invasive species — one might assume that landowners would welcome whole-hog eradication. 

Not so, says Boatner of the ODFW. He says some landowners make money allowing hunters to stalk the elusive swine on their property. According to the website for Clover Creek Ranch, located near Madras, one of the areas ODFW lists as having a feral pig population, it will run you $800 to trophy hunt a 400 to 800 pound feral hog on the 2,200 acre ranch (and you’d better hope you shoot that hog at dawn because there’s an extra $100 fee for skinning after dark).

...

Despite the thousands that the pig problem could cost Oregonians, the Feral Swine Action Plan hasn’t really been getting any action, says Sytsma. The plan calls for legislation to control the source of the swine, population assessment, eradication and monitoring to prevent the pigs from returning, but all these things cost money, and funding is in short supply.

The one thing that has happened is House Bill 2221, which was recently introduced to Oregon’s Legislature by Gov. Ted Kulongoski on behalf of ODFW. The bill would make the sale or purchase of feral swine hunts illegal, with both fines and the loss of hunting licenses as punishment. It would also make it illegal for landowners to “knowingly” let feral swine roam their lands.

Violation of that "knowingly" part is a Class A misdemeanor.

No-Kill Rangelands

Wild horses don't reproduce like rabbits, but they do pretty well.  

More than 33,000 wild horses and burros roam BLM lands, according to the agency. Herds can double in size every four years because the animals have virtually no known predators.

Lately, the wild horse population has been growing more quickly than normal because an increasing number of people are struggling with the cost of keeping these animals.  This has resulted in more horses being released into the wild and fewer of the wild horses being adopted.  

Many people are under the misimpression that our wild horses are natural in the West.  Not so, and neither are burros.  All of the wild horses here are feral domesticated animals (previous blog here).  The genuine article disappeared from North America about the end of the Ice Age.  Their domesticated replacements are European imports that have been bred for speed, have differently-shaped skulls, etc.  It's kind of like saying that feral mutts are a suitable replacement for wolves.  

Nonetheless, that simply doesn't matter to many folks.  Activists lobbied Congress for years, eventually gaining a ban on the slaughtering of horses, whether from BLM lands or farms.  

The BLM said it removes thousands of wild horses and burros from Western public rangelands each year to ensure that herd sizes don't exceed the land's capacity to support them.

...

The cost to keep wild horses and burros in holding facilities is spiraling out of control, BLM officials said. The agency is looking for alternative management strategies. In fiscal year 2008, holding costs exceeded $27 million.

Priestley said it simply doesn't make sense for the government to continue to feed the unadopted animals. A 1,000-pound horse can eat its weight in hay in a month, he said.

"We have horse feedlots now and are feeding horses just to be feeding horses," he said

Do we really need to be stimulating our economy like this?  

At its recent annual meeting in San Antonio, American Farm Bureau members voted in support of humane euthanasia of wild horses and burros that are not adopted.

...

Farm Bureau members approved another policy in January that supports the right of individuals and non-government organizations to save horses from slaughter provided that they take possession of the animals and assume the responsibility for care and feeding.

"It's fine if (horse advocates) want to save the horses," Priestley said. "Then they can take the horses home and feed them. They can buy the hay for them."

Wouldn't it be nice if the activists put their own money where their mouths were.  One of them is going to do that in a big way--Madeleine Pickens, wife of oilman T. Boone Pickens.  She announced the following back in November, though there was no mention of it in the original article, which was published yesterday. 

She aims to purchase a million or so acres of ranchland to save more than 30,000 wild horses now held in captivity by the Bureau of Land Management.

The agency rounded up those horses in order to keep the remaining wild mustang population, which is spread out over 10 Western states, at about 27,000. The lucky ones get adopted, but the prospect of euthanasia, now performed only under extreme circumstances, was growing more likely because of mounting expenses.

...

The rescue plan calls for transporting 8,000 to 10,000 mustangs by helicopter to the preserve in the first year. Many of the horses would be neutered, and contraceptive controls would help maintain the herd at about 30,000.

Pickens wants to create more than a sanctuary. She envisions a nonprofit eco-destination with RVs, teepees, and environmental education programs supplementing the main event -- the experience of seeing horses in the wild. 

I'm not sure that last part will work...wolf ecotourism has been a dud.  Many people like the concept of wolves and horses in the wild, but few are interested in spending the time and money to go see them.  Nonetheless, it's a very generous offer on her part. 

One thing though...what about a major source of the problem--the continuing reproduction of those feral domesticated horses in the wild?  That remains a BLM problem.  Little wonder the Farm Bureau is still discussing euthanasia.

Caging Animal Rights Terrorists

One of the most brutal animal rights groups is Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC), which focuses its ire on Huntingdon Life Sciences.  HLS provides animal testing services in the UK, Japan, and New Jersey.  For nearly a decade, SHAC supporters have been harassing employees and even major shareholders of HLS, plus about 40 of the companies that have supplied or otherwise worked with HLS. 

Fortunately, a few SHAC members in the UK--including the founders--have lost the ability to be cruel to humans for a few years.

Seven animal rights activists who blackmailed companies linked to an animal testing laboratory have been jailed for between four and 11 years.

...

Winchester Crown Court heard that during a six-year campaign members of Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) falsely claimed managers of the companies were paedophiles.

They also sent hoax bomb parcels and made threatening telephone calls to firms telling them to cut links with HLS.

One of the features of intimidation included sending used sanitary items in the post to the firms and daubing roads outside managers' homes with slogans such as "puppy killer".

The founders claimed their actions were on behalf of the Animal Liberation Front.  It was undercover footage shot by PETA inside HLS that inspired them to found SHAC.    

Sentencing the activists, Mr Justice Butterfield called the campaign "urban terrorism" and a "relentless, sustained and merciless persecution" which had made the victims lives "a living hell".

...

He called the leaders "lifelong, veteran, fanatical animal rights activists" and said: "It was a relentless, sustained campaign designed to strike such fear in the minds of employees that the companies would capitulate.

"I expect you will be seen by some as martyrs for a noble cause but that would be misplaced.

"You are not going to prison for expressing your beliefs, you are going to prison because you have committed a serious criminal offence."

The sentences included indefinite bans on traveling to the various firms they targeted. 

For the apologists that figure animal rights activists aren't terrorists, note that SHAC doesn't just deal in intimidation.  Switching links...

In 2001, Mr Cass [managing director of HLS] was set upon and beaten so badly by three men that he needed hospital treatment.

"I arrived home in the dark, got out of my car, turned around and there were three individuals with what looked like pickaxe handles already raised above their heads," he said.

"I protected myself as best I could but they hit me on the back of the head. They kept raining blows down on me – on my head, back and forearm." Mr Cass said his attackers eventually fled when his partner and neighbour came out of their respective homes.

In another incident a businessman linked to HLS was attacked when he heard intruders outside his home and discovered them setting fire to his barn.

Assailants knocked him to the ground and left him unconscious besides the burning barn, but he regained consciousness before the flames engulfed him.

Supporters of the convicted SHAC members have posted the judge's address on the internet...for reasons which aren't hard to figure.

Fighting Flights

Plane Stupid is a British anti-development group whose focus is opposition to aviation. 

Plane Stupid has no hierarchy or central leadership, but is instead made up of small 'affinity groups' who organise themselves. Inspired by networks like Earth First! and the mid-90s anti-roads protests, our members take direct action against one of the root causes of climate change.

Climate change is amongst the many ills that Plane Stupid sees in modern society.  Thus it selectively embrace primitivism.  The following wasn't one of its flash mob protests. 

Thousands of ordinary families faced airport hell yesterday — as well-heeled youngsters blockaded Stansted’s runway in a demo over climate change.

The protesters—whose Plane Stupid campaign counts sons and daughters of peers among activists—chained themselves together to halt flights.

Amongst the ten reasons that Plane Stupid opposes aviation: "It’s the rich who are really benefiting from the artificially low prices of air travel."  In the UK, peers are titled nobility like dukes, barons, etc.  ELF and ALF have also been well-populated with college students struggling to cope with being born into privilege.

Armed police took five hours to clear them as more than 150 take-offs and landings were delayed or cancelled at the Essex airport—Britain’s third-busiest.

Fuming passengers almost came to blows in the scramble to check in for alternative flights—as gun cops battled to keep order amid chaos.

Last night the campaigners—57 of whom were arrested—were blasted for causing planes to be diverted...putting MORE carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Heck, there are animal rights activists who send mink to their death to protest mink farming, ELF members who burn vehicles to protest the pollution they generate, etc.  Pointing out the hypocrisy in such actions is usually dismissed as attacking the messenger rather than addressing the message.  Besides, Plane Stupid actually thought that its protest would reduce emissions by causing the cancellation of a number of flights.  In its own words...

Monday's action has shown the power of young people determined to turn the climate talk into climate action. We took the decision to disrupt the airport to directly reduce the CO2 impact of Stansted, as a response to the government's consent to its expansion. We did so with heavy hearts, knowing it would disrupt passengers, because we knew the consequences of this action couldn't be worse than the consequences of inaction.

Wrong...Plane Stupid alienated more people than it convinced with this dimwitted action.